# Proposed language restrictions in the Pit **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [March 1, 2009, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910 "2009-03-01T20:44:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Baldwin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baldwin/32/7264_2.png) [@Baldwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baldwin)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/101 "2009-03-02T13:22:36Z")
> [@SkipMagic](#): > > (Emphasis, mine.) > > Knock it off with the insults. They’re not allowed in ATMB, and they don’t help the conversation. Not an insult, a typo. Maybe a Freudian slip. If I choose to insult Ed Zotti he will assuredly know about it. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/102 "2009-03-02T14:18:48Z")
[Someone gets it.](http://www.ktla.com/landing_topstories/?LA-To-Proclaim-No-Cussing-Week-=1&blockID=187735&feedID=1198)😉 ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/103 "2009-03-02T14:21:04Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > [Someone gets it.](http://www.ktla.com/landing_topstories/?LA-To-Proclaim-No-Cussing-Week-=1&blockID=187735&feedID=1198)😉 No, he doesn’t get it, either. ---
**Author:** ![HongKongFooey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c4cdca/32.png) [@HongKongFooey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HongKongFooey)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/104 "2009-03-02T14:42:14Z")
Let’s all try and guess how popular this kid is. From the link: > [@](#): > > The county isn’t the first to try to put the lid on swearing. Hatch’s hometown of South Pasadena declared itself a cuss-free zone for a week last March, and two years ago a high school in Canada threatened to suspend repeat cussers. Doesn’t sound like a trend that’s sweeping the nation does it? ---
**Author:** ![emmaliminal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7bcc69/32.png) [@emmaliminal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emmaliminal)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/105 "2009-03-02T14:48:02Z")
> [@SkipMagic](#): > > … So, if you want to throw in an objection, that’s fine, but leave the one-liner snide comments behind and explain why you’re disagreeing with what’s being proposed. If you’re not willing to contribute something concrete to this discussion, then this isn’t the thread for you. Honestly, **SkipMagic** , there _isn’t_ a thread for posters who disagree with the proposal to engage in discussion, except with each other. [Many](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10873037#post10873037), [many](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10874751#post10874751), [many](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10878683#post10878683), [many](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10881135#post10881135), [many](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10874762#post10874762), [many](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10879406#post10879406), [many](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10881949#post10881949) non-snide explanations of why we’re disagreeing have been completely ignored by those with whom we wish to debate. ---
**Author:** ![Powers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Powers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Powers)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/106 "2009-03-02T15:01:26Z")
Uh, so what I’m seeing here is that the intelligent, learned posters of the SDMB are practically revolting, not because they aren’t allowed to verbally abuse their fellow participants, but rather because they’re only allowed to do so if they avoid using the most extreme words possible. If “So-and-so is the world’s foremost argument for the annihilation of the planet” isn’t sufficient insult for you, if you feel stifled and constrained just because you can’t call someone a fucker – whatever that means – then I would suggest that it’s possible the board might actually be better off without you. Powers &8^] ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/107 "2009-03-02T15:09:29Z")
> [@Powers](#): > > If “So-and-so is the world’s foremost argument for the annihilation of the planet” isn’t sufficient insult for you, if you feel stifled and constrained just because you can’t call someone a fucker – whatever that means – then I would suggest that it’s possible the board might actually be better off without you. I am interested in your thoughts and would like to subscribe to your newsletter. ---
**Author:** ![HongKongFooey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c4cdca/32.png) [@HongKongFooey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HongKongFooey)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/108 "2009-03-02T15:11:01Z")
> [@Powers](#): > > Uh, so what I’m seeing here is that the intelligent, learned posters of the SDMB are practically revolting, not because they aren’t allowed to verbally abuse their fellow participants, but rather because they’re only allowed to do so if they avoid using the most extreme words possible. So far it hasn’t been at all clear what terms can be used. Swear words are allowed this time but not that time. Words with a sexual connotation are a sticking point. I can’t call someone a cuntlapper apparently but can I call them a knob-polisher, is it OK if it makes a mod laugh? I don’t know and the thread for clearing up the confusion has only added to it, for me at least. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/109 "2009-03-02T15:14:55Z")
> [@Powers](#): > > If “So-and-so is the world’s foremost argument for the annihilation of the planet” isn’t sufficient insult for you, if you feel stifled and constrained just because you can’t call someone a fucker – whatever that means – then I would suggest that it’s possible the board might actually be better off without you. Please post more often. Seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/110 "2009-03-02T15:55:33Z")
If I could ask a serious question here, for a moment (and I think this may have already been asked), why are the restrictions only in regards to other members. It seems like, under these rules, I can’t say “fuck you” to **Poster X** , but I start a thread, saying to, for instance, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi or House Minority Leader John Boehner (depending on my politiical preference) “fuck you”. While I concede that it’s more likely that **Poster X** will read the thread and get his feelings hurt han either Mrs. Pelosi or Mr. Boehner, it seems that if the term is objectionable, than it’s objectionable, whether it’s addressed to another poster or not. Or am I missing something here? ---
**Author:** ![TVeblen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/4bbf92/32.png) [@TVeblen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVeblen)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/111 "2009-03-02T15:59:23Z")
[QUOTE=Ed Zotti] You’ll have to excuse me, Veb, but I’m not following the logic here. You don’t want the SDMB to be a swamp, but you apparently also think we shouldn’t impose new rules, or at least not this rule. What then would you propose? [/QUOTE] Posters have already given you a few zillion options, many of them quite workable _if applied fairly and consistently_. Basic common sense would be a good start. Put down a rule that posts consisting primarily of cursing or unnecessary obscenities may garner a warning and repeated offenses may result in suspension or banning. Base the rule on the fairly sound premise that uncontrolled verbal vomit not only puts off other customers; it’s also mind-numbingly boring. Then when the rare Tourette’s case spews off, apply it. Or don’t. This ugly brouhaha isn’t because The Pit morphed into a den of potty-mouthed slime. A couple of your staff made questionable calls in The Pit, then took umbrage when called on them. The problem isn’t The Pit; it’s your lack of level-headed oversight. It can be done without public reprimands or humiliation. You could have just stepped in, taken whatever corrective action needed then firmly declared the discussions _closed_. Instead you listened ONLY to the aggrieved parties closest to you and decided the solution was to sanitize the location to the point it couldn’t happen that way again. I’m done with this. Do whatever you want. It’s your business, your board and your responsibility. Choose who you’ll listen to and why. Good luck. ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/112 "2009-03-02T16:02:28Z")
> [@Powers](#): > > Uh, so what I’m seeing here is that the intelligent, learned posters of the SDMB are practically revolting, not because they aren’t allowed to verbally abuse their fellow participants, but rather because they’re only allowed to do so if they avoid using the most extreme words possible. > > If “So-and-so is the world’s foremost argument for the annihilation of the planet” isn’t sufficient insult for you, if you feel stifled and constrained just because you can’t call someone a fucker – whatever that means – then I would suggest that it’s possible the board might actually be better off without you. > Powers &8^] Well, you could say what you said, wordy as it is. Of course, everything you said boils down to a very short sentence, which is ‘Fuck off if you don’t like it here.’ Some of us adults prefer the direct to the verbose, and as adults, don’t need a self-employed parent figure to decide for us how we should express our thoughts. ---
**Author:** ![Corner\_Case](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/corner_case/32/234_2.png) [@Corner\_Case](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corner_Case)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/113 "2009-03-02T16:45:36Z")
How about “No sentences involving genitalia”? Don’t like it? Audit you, buddy! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Doctor\_Who](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Doctor\_Who](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doctor_Who)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/114 "2009-03-02T17:40:50Z")
Quick response to **Martini Enfield** : I hoped I didn’t need to front load my rule suggestions with my credentials, but here they are: I am not in favor of any change to the Pit whatsoever. None. I hate this, and I completely understand all the outrage and frustration. I have always enjoyed the Pit as a wild and wooly addition to the boards…somewhere where you need to be a quick and nimble poster to avoid being exposed as a complete idiot. But…change is coming. Whether we like it (a few of us) or don’t (most of us). This “Proposed language restrictions” thread is the closest we’ve come to actual discussions with Ed. I would like everyone - even the people who think the Pit is absolutely fine and any language restrictions are absolutely horrible - to try and come up with something they can live with. That’s what I tried to do. I don’t particularly _love_ any of my proposed rules. I don’t like making the mods “untouchable.” I don’t like having the mods running around fielding emails about whether a post is too “dirty.” And I don’t like saying any word - ANY WORD - is strictly verboten. But I can live with those. Something is going to happen. You and I could sit down and bitch about the way the Pit is changing for three hours and not disagree once. Won’t change the fact that something is going to happen. I’m just trying to help draft the inevitable rules to minimize their daily impact. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/115 "2009-03-02T17:54:06Z")
> [@Corner\_Case](#): > > How about “No sentences involving genitalia”? > Don’t like it? > Audit you, buddy! 😃 Guess I’ll be quoting **Freudian Slit** as “unattributed” from now on. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Ed\_Zotti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/fbc32d/32.png) [@Ed\_Zotti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ed_Zotti)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/116 "2009-03-02T18:17:09Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > **Ed** , thanks for your reconsideration on _prick, asshole,_ and especially _bitch_. That last one has been used on prime time television since M_A_S\*H was producing new episodes in the early Eighties. > > I would ask that you reconsider _fuck off_ for the following reason. According to Random House, the meanings of “fuck off,” “fuck up,” and “give a fuck” are not sexual. In that way they are **not like** “go fuck yourself.” I hear what you’re saying, but it’s too complicated to administer - we’d have to differentiate between “fuck off” (OK) and “fuck you” (not OK) and “get fucked” (who knows?) and on down the line. It’s no great imposition not to ask people to direct variants of fuck at other posters. ---
**Author:** ![Ed\_Zotti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/fbc32d/32.png) [@Ed\_Zotti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ed_Zotti)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/117 "2009-03-02T18:20:26Z")
> [@Seeker\_of\_Truth\_and\_Beauty](#): > > It seems very likely that the Dope (or CL or Ed) has been threatened with a lawsuit by a poster who had been called names. > > It’s certainly recorded history here that the SDMB and staff have a deep aversion to the remotest possibility of a lawsuit (I can certainly find examples if y’all need me to) and that’s the only logical reason I can see to not call other Dopers names yet still be able to call non-Dopers names. > > Ed: how far off am I? We’ve never had any such threat that I ever heard about and I wasn’t told to do this by the higher-ups. We just had people spewing on fairly rare occasions and I didn’t like it. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/118 "2009-03-02T18:27:54Z")
Everyone loves free speech until it’s directed at them. ---
**Author:** ![Ed\_Zotti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/fbc32d/32.png) [@Ed\_Zotti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ed_Zotti)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/119 "2009-03-02T18:40:26Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > If I could ask a serious question here, for a moment (and I think this may have already been asked), why are the restrictions only in regards to other members. It seems like, under these rules, I can’t say “fuck you” to **Poster X** , but I start a thread, saying to, for instance, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi or House Minority Leader John Boehner (depending on my politiical preference) “fuck you”. While I concede that it’s more likely that **Poster X** will read the thread and get his feelings hurt han either Mrs. Pelosi or Mr. Boehner, it seems that if the term is objectionable, than it’s objectionable, whether it’s addressed to another poster or not. Or am I missing something here? We’re trying to establish a (very) basic level of civility. If you go into a bar and sit next to a guy and he says, “[Some famous person] can go fuck himself,” you might think he’s obnoxious but so what. If he looks at you and says, “Go fuck yourself,” them’s fightin’ words. Simple as that. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910/120 "2009-03-02T18:48:30Z")
Does that mean you’ll be enforcing a two-drink minimum? 'Cause that would be awesome. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-language-restrictions-in-the-pit/487910.md?page=7)