I sincerely appreciate the effort to clarify things.
Honestly, though, Rule #2, though vague, was headed in the right direction. It was trying to restrict a certain quality of posting, negative posting which was neither rhetorically sound nor entertaining. I suggested my own re-write in a thread which sank like a stone.
This list is fine. I think most of us have sufficient vocabulary to avoid using five or ten words, most of which aren’t words I use anyway. I don’t, however, think that banning a few words or even categories of words will have the desired effect.
Seeing attempts at constructive interaction from TPTB has gone a long way toward mollifying me, though. (Not that my tranquility or lack thereof is of any particular consequence…)
You know, I had a sneaking suspicion this is how it would work out.
Post some ridiculous fucking rules that you know no one* could possibly take seriously.
Let the outrage run for a few days, occasionally fanning the flames** by ignoring the rational responses and only stepping in to “respond” to the low hanging fruit.
Propose an alleged compromise “to sort out the kinks” of the new rules, thereby getting more of the usual suspects of fawning toadies to your side.
Implement the rules you wanted in the first place, now with less fuss and a claim to having taken the moral high ground.
So, given how this is working out for him, I guess thinking that Ed was an ignorant fuckstick was grossly unfair. He’s not been ignorant at all.
Except the most die-hard of ass-kissers, of course.
** You know, trolling your own boards.
I get the feeling this is too late to do any good, but prohibiting certain words used certain ways just won’t get the results you want. I don’t like name calling or casual obscenities. Skepticism about a Bad Words List emphatically is NOT an endorsement of either.
It’s the lip of a very slippery slope, and I’m afraid things will just get more out of control.
Look, the real goal is to cut down on stupid nastiness, casual and pointed, right? You want to cut down on vicious personal flaming, obscenities strewn about pointlessly and mods catching abuse just for doing their jobs. So the point is just a general clean-up.
Given the brand–Cecil, in all his pithy glory–there’s a limit to how far the place can be sanitized. Cece doesn’t clutter his columns with mindless obscenities either so the ‘Cecil can do it but we can’t’ argument doesn’t fly. The current rerun of greatest hits on the front page is a worthwhile reminder of the freewheeling range of interests that attract posters in the first place though.
I don’t think even the most outspoken critic of the new Pit rules want the SDMB to resemble the mind-numbing swamp so common with other sites. One glimpse at IMDb and YouTube is enough to make a thinking person grab for brain bleach.
A codified set of forbidden words is guaranteed to spawn yet more rules and usage nitpicking and unholy hassle for you guys.
Even ignoring the post at the top of this page telling people to contribute to this discussion in a civil manner, your insults are not appropriate in ATMB. Do not do this again.
Can I tell someone they need to rinse the sand out of their vagina? How about pulling the bug out of their ass? If I offer to help, does that make it sexual and off limits?
I see many posters asking about “foo” or perhaps “bar” or how about “zing”? But wouldn’t “zang” be okay, because of this’n’such?
My question was spurred by the post immediately above mine. I’m just curious if there will come a point that you (staff) will grow tired of answering our specific questions about language use, and begin taking Official Mod Action about it. (I’m not saying that it’s been done, merely asking if it may happen.)
Sorry, I actually thought we were in the thread you started a few minutes ago. :smack:
It’s a little ridiculous to run through a whole list of examples, but if we’re going to revise the rule, hopefully the end product will be clear without examples being necessary.
I can’t believe we’ve come to this. It’s really quite absurd.
Seriously, Ed, take a step back and look at this. You’re trying to come up with a list of words which adults are not allowed to use on this message board. Does that not strike you as nuts? Whatever these new rules are, the fact that they’ve come to this should tell you that this is really, truly the wrong direction.
Do a U-turn quick. Go back, make a few simple, straightforward rules - and then leave it alone. But continuing down this path won’t do you or anyone else any good.
Don’t all members have to be adults? Should it not be, therefore, up to adults to exercise discretion about which threads and/or sections of the board that they read? To try, as people often say when discussing “offensive” TV shows or radio programming or articles in books/magazines, etc. to think before clicking a link, and making diligent, thoughtful use of the red X/Cmd+W/Ctrl+W/whatever if the content is not to your liking?
I agree that posters shouldn’t threaten other posters, but I wonder what happens when the new “sanitized” insults become too prevalent. What happens when posters are being told to go to the devil, in the numerous ways one can do so, with an alarming frequency? How long will it be, now that the idea that certain words and phrases can be banned wholesale, before the rule in the Pit will become no insults at all, which makes it… the same as every other section of the board?
I’m concerned about precedent. I’m concerned also about people being too clever for their own good and working out the most creative ways possible to be as egregiously insulting as they can within the letter of these rules, while tossing the spirit of them (or at least what can be presumed of the spirit) out the window.
And I’ve got to say, I’m also pretty concerned that the only mod/admin response in this thread has been censorial in nature, not conversant. I’m not sure what the point of the thread is if there isn’t any dialogue happening. It would go a long way, I think, to helping people understand and accept mod decisions in good will if people’s honest questions were being answered.
Regardless of the topic of discussion, moderating ATMB is one of my duties, so I want to make sure the conversation can continue without degrading into a catalog of insults, hijacks or other show-stoppers. Moderation will help grease the wheels to keep the thread moving (and make it less hostile so more people will be inclined to participate).
That said, for this specific topic, I’m not a Pit mod, won’t enforce those rules, and don’t want to say anything that might appear to contradict Ed or otherwise confuse the issue, so I’m keeping my particpation to a minimum. Also, Ed’s doing his best to answer the numerous questions thrown his way, so he’ll get back to the thread as soon as he can.
There’s no slippery slope here. Calling somebody nigger in the Pit has been grounds for an insta-ban for years, while calling somebody cracker has not.
In the future, telling somebody to go fuck themselves will be grounds for a banning, while telling somebody that their time would be better spent masturbating will not.
While I’m not thrilled about the rather large grey area between “abuse” and “cunt/fuck”, I still can’t believe that there are so many people whining about how they have to talk like grown-ups all of a sudden. That’s not directed at you, just at the legion of people who are apparently attempting to push all threads not related to board censorship off the front pages of ATMB and the Pit.
I shall follow these rules, or try to, and see how things go, but I want to register my displeasure at both the change and how it has been implemented. The sad thing is that I have been here for five years now, and, like many people, have by and large posted by those standards anyway. So what’s the problem? Just this: I have no objection at all to being civil, but I strongly dislike being suddenly told that I have to be civil and this is exactly how civil I must be or else. I’m an adult, or so my drivers license says, and I’d appreciate being treated as one.
Yes, I know no-one’s listening, and that saddens me too.
What a stupid, condescending thing to say. Grown-ups talk in a variety of ways, which sometimes include calling somebody a cuntlapper. (Actually I never used that word before Ed turned me on to it.)
I haven’t memorized Ed’s list, because I’ll be ignoring it.
Ed, thanks for your reconsideration on prick, asshole, and especially bitch. That last one has been used on prime time television since MAS*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.”
For example, the definitions for “fuck off” are as follows:
to shirk one’s duties
to go away
to waste time
When I use it, the meaning I intend is the second definition – only with a little more glare in my eyes.
I hope you will reconsider “fuck off” and treat it like “what the fuck?”
Thanks.
Spoken like a true retired door-to-door vacuum cleaner salesman.
Will it really kill you to call someone a halfwit instead of a fuckwit? If you really, really need the thrill of using a naughty word, can’t you get by with “shithead”? What’s wrong with calling someone a cave-dwelling moron who couldn’t count to 10 if someone spotted him 1 through 9?
I think this rule is unnecessary and bound to create headaches for the moderators. But it’s impact on everyday life for members will be minimal.