# fluiddruid what the hell round two **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 12, 2006, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693 "2006-01-12T18:33:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/81 "2006-01-23T22:21:45Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > What really confuses me in all these debates is that some people can state with absolute certainty that a particular word or phrase _cannot_ be offensive, when evidence to the contrary, i.e., persons reporting offense, abounds. Did you note the posts I pointed out, and how they refute your claim that _fucking_ _gringo hypocrisy_ was the bone of contention? Where did I say that the word “gringo” cannot be offensive? I’ve said repeatedly that it can be offensive in certain contexts. If I were walking down the street in Tijuana, and some kids started pointing fingers at me and shouting “Gringo!” while lauging it would be offensive. So your rule is that if anyone, anywhere, feels that a particular word is offensive, it should automatically be declared as “hate speech,” and prohibited from use on the board? That seems to be your position. > [@](#): > > **fluiddruid** closed the thread because posters were offended, your Panamanian experiences notwithstanding. You can’t have it both ways. If _gringo_ is not offensive by itself how does it attach offense to the phrase _fucking gringo hypocrisy_? Is the phrase \*fucking American hypocrisy \* offensive? If so, wouldn’t you agree that the word “American” is offensive? ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/82 "2006-01-23T22:28:10Z")
> [@](#): > > **Giraffe** said: > What more do you want? We are not going to label the use of the epithets “white trash” or “gringo” as hate speech. Period. Do I take this to mean that there is no possibility ever that any word or phrase used to insult white people specifically because they are white will ever be termed hate speech on the forums here? Are you really saying that if the target of the speech is white people, purely because they are white, that you will not deem an epithet to be hate speech? ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/83 "2006-01-23T22:39:51Z")
> [@catsix](#): > > Do I take this to mean that there is no possibility ever that any word or phrase used to insult white people specifically because they are white will ever be termed hate speech on the forums here? > > Are you really saying that if the target of the speech is white people, purely because they are white, that you will not deem an epithet to be hate speech? No, neither of those statements are correct. Hate speech mostly depends on the context and the intent. It is possible for someone to be warned for hate speech against white people. However, while there are a handful of words that we have a hard time imagining being used as epithets in non-hate speech context, gringo and white trash are not examples of such words. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/84 "2006-01-23T22:50:31Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > No, neither of those statements are correct. Hate speech mostly depends on the context and the intent. It is possible for someone to be warned for hate speech against white people. However, while there are a handful of words that we have a hard time imagining being used as epithets in non-hate speech context, gringo and white trash are not examples of such words. Ouch, headache. Could you repost that last bit without the triple negative? ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/85 "2006-01-23T22:54:43Z")
> [@Revenant Threshold](#): > > Ouch, headache. Could you repost that last bit without the triple negative? I don’t think so. If I hadn’t avoided saying what we don’t do, I couldn’t have given examples of what is not forbidden but only of what is not allowed. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/86 "2006-01-23T23:04:18Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > I don’t think so. If I hadn’t avoided saying what we don’t do, I couldn’t have given examples of what is not forbidden but only of what is not allowed. Damn you, sir. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/87 "2006-01-23T23:19:15Z")
To sum up: When anyone else uses xenophobic or racist insults, it’s wrong. When CBEscapee does–particularly those directed at those north of Mexico–it’s not a problem whatsoever. Coupled with that, when that same poster deigns to fabricate a story on what he “really meant” and/or “really said”–although it’s right there in the postings–it’s also not a problem. I’ll make a note of that. ---
**Author:** ![CBEscapee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b19c9b/32.png) [@CBEscapee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CBEscapee)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/88 "2006-01-23T23:28:55Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > To sum up: When anyone else uses xenophobic or racist insults, it’s wrong. When CBEscapee does–particularly those directed at those north of Mexico–it’s not a problem whatsoever. Coupled with that, when that same poster deigns to fabricate a story on what he “really meant” and/or “really said”–although it’s right there in the postings–it’s also not a problem. > > I’ll make a note of that. When another poster called the French “fucking stupid fuck French” no one around here seemed to mind. There wouldn’t be any hypocrites around these parts would there monty? ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/89 "2006-01-23T23:44:59Z")
> [@CBEscapee](#): > > Hmmmm. Hypocrisy anyone? Hmmmm. Stupidity anyone? Let’s see, are you posting on an American or a French message board? Are people more likely to devote their emotional energy to slanders directed at themselves, or at others? Further, you’re displaying a marked ignorance of a word us hypocritical racist gringos like to call “context.” In one, the actions of the French government/society were being Pitted for not stopping the riots. You’re also ignoring the fact that it was pointed out very quickly that it was an issue of the French governmental response primarily. The claim was being made that the french _response_ was stupid. You’ll also notice that in that thread nobody went out of their way to goad and bait their opponents with deliberately offensive terms designed to slander the character of almost everybody responding. In your abortion of a thread, a bigot (you) was claiming that hypocrisy was a quality inherent in Americans and doing so in order to piss people off. Moreoever, you’re showing your characteristic dishonesty. [ > [@](#): > > It goes without saying that the OP is fucking insulting. > > Anyway, people have already explained what’s going on. As to why the French authorities haven’t done anything, perhaps they think that a gung-ho sweep the streets option would only make it worse? > > At some point, the riots are going to run out of steam. Meantime, I hope Chirac et al realise that all that La Belle France nonsense isn’t making immigrants feel any more welcome. > > (Although in some ways, there’s nothing more traditional and patriotic than riots in Paris - perhaps someone should make a musical out of it.) > > Anyway, it’s not only the French who’ve had problems with rioting: > > [http://www.bbc.co.uk/caribbean/news...irmingham.shtml](http://www.bbc.co.uk/caribbean/news...irmingham.shtml) ]([http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6763754&postcount=58](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6763754&postcount=58)) ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/90 "2006-01-23T23:53:32Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Where did I say that the word “gringo” cannot be offensive? Right here, Sparky. > [@](#): > > Your mistake is to think that “gringo” as a word is offensive as all. It seems to me if that if a thing cannot be a particular thing “at all,” then it cannot be that thing. Yes? > [@](#): > > So your rule is that if anyone, anywhere, feels that a particular word is offensive, it should automatically be declared as “hate speech,” and prohibited from use on the board? That seems to be your position. Absolutely not. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I simply want goose sauce as well as gander sauce. > [@](#): > > Is the phrase fucking American hypocrisy offensive? If so, wouldn’t you agree that the word “American” is offensive? Truthfully, I am not sure that I would. However, in the context of this thread, the point is moot, and I will concede it to you. I am questioning why a moderating decision was made to close the referenced thread simply because people were offended, when the threshold is much higher in other, similar cases. > [@Giraffe](#): > > What more do you want? We are not going to label the use of the epithets “white trash” or “gringo” as hate speech. Period. I’m sure you can keep digging up posts by various moderators that give slightly different answers to prove some inconsistency in our message, but it’s not going to change that fact. I want to know why in some cases simply registering offense is sufficient to close a thread, why the behavior in that thread bordered on “warning” status, when in other, similar threads every thing is hunky dunky. (Obscure movie reference) > [@](#): > > Besides, do you really want us to ban every word in the Pit that offends more than X people? Nope. What I really want is to do away with the hate speech rule altogether, and invoke the “jerk” rule whenever it is necessary to curtail speech. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/91 "2006-01-23T23:53:35Z")
Oh, and: > [@CBEscapee](#): > > When another poster called the French “fucking stupid fuck French” no one around here seemed to mind. To claim hypocrisy implies equivelancy. That means that you _were_ saying that Americans should be classifiedd by a negative descriptor. So, were you lying and baiting people then then, or are you lying and baiting people now? ---
**Author:** ![CBEscapee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b19c9b/32.png) [@CBEscapee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CBEscapee)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2006, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/92 "2006-01-23T23:56:38Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Hmmmm. Stupidity anyone? > > Let’s see, are you posting on an American or a French message board? Are people more likely to devote their emotional energy to slanders directed at themselves, or at others? > > Further, you’re displaying a marked ignorance of a word us hypocritical racist gringos like to call “context.” In one, the actions of the French government/society were being Pitted for not stopping the riots. You’re also ignoring the fact that it was pointed out very quickly that it was an issue of the French governmental response primarily. The claim was being made that the french _response_ was stupid. > > You’ll also notice that in that thread nobody went out of their way to goad and bait their opponents with deliberately offensive terms designed to slander the character of almost everybody responding. > > In your abortion of a thread, a bigot (you) was claiming that hypocrisy was a quality inherent in Americans and doing so in order to piss people off. > > Moreoever, you’re showing your characteristic dishonesty. > > [url=http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6763754&postcount=58] Whatever you say, hypocrite. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2006, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/93 "2006-01-24T00:00:40Z")
> [@CBEscapee](#): > > Whatever you say, hypocrite. Devestating factual rebuttal, as always. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2006, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/94 "2006-01-24T00:00:57Z")
> [@CBEscapee](#): > > Whatever you say, hypocrite. Now don’t tell me that didn’t sting, **Finn**. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2006, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/95 "2006-01-24T00:04:56Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > I am questioning why a moderating decision was made to close the referenced thread simply because people were offended, when the threshold is much higher in other, similar cases. > > I want to know why in some cases simply registering offense is sufficient to close a thread, why the behavior in that thread bordered on “warning” status, when in other, similar threads every thing is hunky dunky. The thread wasn’t closed because people were offended, the thread was closed because the question of whether **CB** ’s actions in that thread constituted hate speech was raised and we didn’t want the thread to continue until we had reached some sort of decision on that issue. By the time we did, it didn’t seem worthwhile to reopen the thread, full of accusations of hate speech and general dickishness. You’re welcome to start a new thread to discuss the issue if you want. > [@](#): > > Nope. What I really want is to do away with the hate speech rule altogether, and invoke the “jerk” rule whenever it is necessary to curtail speech. Fair enough. We’re not going to. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2006, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/96 "2006-01-24T00:20:49Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > The thread wasn’t closed because people were offended, the thread was closed because the question of whether **CB** ’s actions in that thread constituted hate speech was raised and we didn’t want the thread to continue until we had reached some sort of decision on that issue. By the time we did, it didn’t seem worthwhile to reopen the thread, full of accusations of hate speech and general dickishness. You’re welcome to start a new thread to discuss the issue if you want. Actually, according to **fluiddruid** , it was not reopened because it had generated multiple warnings. Oddly enough, they seem to have been disappeared, as I cannot find any there now. > [@fluiddruid](#): > > Generally, I would not re-open such a thread, and I do not see a reason to do so in this case either. I am willing to discuss the matter if someone has something that they feel is vital to contribute, but generally it is not uncommon for threads to remain closed after it has generated a warning, and in particular multiple warnings. Frankly, I feel that there was a lot of jerkish behavior in that thread and I think that it is likely that more warnings would be forthcoming were the thread reopened – hence why, as I repeat now, that I think that thread had gone far enough. In fact, her only appearance in that thread was to close it. No other moderaters showed up at all. Ya’ll need to get your stories straight. > [@Giraffe](#): > > Fair enough. We’re not going to. Wow. I’ve always found you to be fair, even-minded, and often quite witty. This, however, smacks a bit of jack-booting. Not gonna happen? Glad to know our input is important. ---
**Author:** ![Gringo\_Miami](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f17d59/32.png) [@Gringo\_Miami](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gringo_Miami)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2006, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/97 "2006-01-24T00:21:51Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > Right here, Sparky. > What I really want is to do away with the hate speech rule altogether, and invoke the “jerk” rule whenever it is necessary to curtail speech. Do we need to program this into an automated feature? This way, you can look at a thread…and see whether it says “Jerk On” or … This suggestion is respectfully submitted in keeping with the general demeanor of this particular debate\*\* \*\* I just couldn’t resist. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2006, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/98 "2006-01-24T00:24:06Z")
Question: were I to open a discussion on what qualifies as hate speech, should that be placed in the Pit or ATMB? ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2006, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/99 "2006-01-24T00:59:16Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > Wow. I’ve always found you to be fair, even-minded, and often quite witty. This, however, smacks a bit of jack-booting. Not gonna happen? Glad to know our input is important. I’m only nice to lull you guys into complacency, giving me the element of surprise when I inevitably break out the jackboots. I’ve read everything you’ve written, but you’ve yet to provide a compelling reason why the hate speech rule as currently applied is in any way inhibiting your ability to post freely and needs to be abolished. Until someone comes up with a compelling reason to change the rules based on non-theoretical concerns, things will likely stay as they are. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2006, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693/100 "2006-01-24T01:09:35Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Question: were I to open a discussion on what qualifies as hate speech, should that be placed in the Pit or ATMB? Either place is probably OK. Since epithets of any kind are only allowed in the Pit, it’s really a Pit-specific question, but Pit-specific questions have been discussed in ATMB before. We’re not likely to go through a list of examples and rule on whether or not they’re hate speech, though, so we can argue about which racial groups are protected the most/least by the rule and how unfair that is. Context and intent matter, so each ruling is dependent on both the situation and the perceived motivation of the poster, something not well-described by theoretical examples. Of course, if you’re asking because you honestly want to post something you’re concerned will be hate speech, the best thing to do is probably email a mod. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-what-the-hell-round-two/339693.md?page=6)