yes, that is true. like anti-semite, like several other terms that do not attract any attention from the two gd mods.
it is the written board policy, so they get to decide. If it is only a fake policy for show, perhaps for a board that has the pretences to fighting ignorance it should be changed…
I am not for banning anything. but the weird forms of political corretness about some terms and not others, and the inconsistent and the incoherent logics… that is another thing.
I think the issue with the particular poster in question is how he crouches his arguments. If he came out and said that [people A] are inferior than that would be modded as hate speech. But he tries to use arguments that lead to that conclusion without actually saying it. Im at a loss as to how to deal with this particular approach outside of using the evidence to knock him down.
I said nothing about “modding racists”.
I said modding hate speech.
The board rules explicitly prohibit hate speech.
What specifically is hate speech outside of the obvious? This is a shades of gray issue and you realize that there is nothing the mods/admins can do that wont piss off lots of people.
Because ‘racist’ is chalked full of negative baggage and has been used as an insult for quite a long time, while xenophobe and xenophobic haven’t been. My WAG is that if you called someone a xenophobe in GD and assuming the mods saw it or it got reported you’d still get a warning or at least told to cool down, while if you said their post was xenophobic it would probably slip by. Calling someone a racist directly is an insult, whether it’s true (to you) or not…while saying that many things they are writing have racist patterns might slip under the radar, though you’d probably be told to cool down (maybe not a warning offense if you stopped there though).
As another poster up thread noted, if you want to call someone a racist directly, that’s what the Pit is for. This should be an easy concept to grasp and my guess is if you Pitted CP for being a racist you would probably get a lot of replies to that thread. You’ve been here long enough to know this, so you knew you were skating close to the thin ice by saying something like that outside of GD…and you got called. C’est la vie.
wow, imagine how shocked I am the you would employ semantics to defend yourself!
IW did not get called on anything… he is not the OP.
That one is easily answered. The people who get to determine what is racist on this board are the moderators. How else would it work?
Only the weak are afraid of words.
Speaking your mind is the only way to know how people really feel.
Only the mentally facile resort to the baiting terms of derision: bigot, racist, etc.
Because they are speaking emotionally due to an inability to articulate a rational rebuttal.
It’s probably a good idea not to refer to anyone as [anything] in GD. I bet calling someone a biped might collect a warning under certain circumstances, even though the majority of us are probably bipeds.
First of all, those are not necessarily terms of derision as Marley23 has pointed out. In fact, it’s only recently that the GD mods have decided that the term is always to be considered an insult.
Secondly, to defend the decision to give a poster a warning for using the term “racist” by beginning a lost with the phrase “only the weak fear words” is comically hypocritical and shows little self-awareness.
Good point.
Yeah, but I read somewhere that only the weak are afraid of words. Wish I could remember where, but I recall it was a good point.
I’m not the OP.
I generally don’t engage in such arguments because I don’t find the question as to whether or not black people are mentally inferior to be worth discussing.
You could substitute the term “Holocaust Denier”, “truther”, or “birther” just as easily yet those terms aren’t considered verboten.
Ask the mods. The rules are clear. “Hate speech… will not be tolerated.” My guess would be, to use your phrase “the obvious.”
Generally speaking it goes beyond mere racism to calls for violence against said groups due to their ethnic, religious, or national origin. Also, generally speaking, at least one mod has freely admitting that poster are given greater latitude in what can be said about certain groups that can’t be said about others.
The two standards are not mutually exclusive. All words should be allowed. If you choose the intellectual laziness to throw out loaded derisive terms such as “racist” and “bigot,” then your words show you to be a dunce.
My post was a refutation of the mod’s choice to offer a warning. You can call someone a racist, but to do so as though that is meaningful is a farce. Only the foolish fall for it.
I agree. We toss some very loaded terms around in other threads. I don’t know how you fix this though. I guess the Mods keep dancing on a knife’s edge, and the rest of us try and remember the exceptions to the rules.
The result is less than perfect at times.
If by “foolish” you mean someone who has a command of the English language and understands the meaning of its words.
Why exactly is “racist” such a “loaded derisive term” yet “dunce” is not?
Based on your logic, isn’t it “intellectually lazy” to use such a term and doesn’t it’s use make you look “weak”?
But I thought your defense was that you could call him a racist because he really is (according to you) a racist? Wouldn’t the same thing apply to cocksucker? Wouldn’t it similarly be “unfortunate” for the gay poster that his “acts” can classify him as a cocksucker because to “[some] in today’s society that’s looked down upon. Too bad for him.”? Aren’t you reducing CP to just one part of his persona when he has many others?
There are some times where even the word “gay” would get modded. If our hypothetical gay poster says that the fed should raise interest rates, and I respond, “Our gay friend makes a good point. Interest rates are far too low in today’s recovering economy,” then I would probably get modded for even pointing out the sexual orientation of the poster because it is irrelevant and I am being a jerk for doing so.
The point is that there is no need to call him a racist, fat, or a cocksucker. Why is your response directed at the poster? Just respond to the argument, or don’t, or open a Pit thread to insult him. You just can’t insult him in GD. Why is that so difficult?
Your argument doesn’t work.
The term “cocksucker” was invented as an insult and has always been used as such.
The term “racist” wasn’t created as an insult and isn’t used as an insult.
It’s used as a description of people attudes towards others, similar to the term “conservative”, “liberal” etc.
People keep insisting that the term is an insult without giving any credible reason. Instead we are given hysterical comparisons to the use of the term “witch” or claim that it has “baggage”.
Sorry, but that makes no sense.
Perhaps you can enlighten us though.
Why is the term “racist” always to be treated as an insult but the same is not true of similar terms like “Holocaust Denier”, “Birther” and “Truther” aren’t?
[QUOTE=Ibn Warraq]
I’m not the OP.
[/QUOTE]
:smack: Sorry about that.
Yeah, I don’t generally get into them either…but I know that if I do, and I call someone a racists directly in GD, I’m probably going to get smacked down for it…and there is a non-zero chance that if I call someone a ‘Holocaust Denier’ and they flag my post I might get smacked down for being a jerk, even if HD has been used in the past with no flack from the Mods.
Or ‘Tea Bagger’ when used derisively…despite the fact that the label was (originally) self applied by the Tea Party types. I don’t think any of these have the same level of baggage that ‘racist’ does (especially in the US…and this is a mostly US board wrt the majority of posters), but there is no doubt that we all throw around negative labels in GD and the Mods are trying to walk a path between hammering everyone and keeping things civil. If they come out with a ruling that no negative connotation labels can be used (I use ‘Truther/9/11 CTer’ and ‘CTer’ quite often) then it will further complicate things, but I suppose we’d have to live with that.
To me, this is all an attempt to rules lawyer…the OP skated close to the edge, though he could get away with it, and got busted. Trying to say that other terms are equally offensive but don’t get smacked down is doing the same sort of thing…trying to get out of being busted on a technicality by finding holes in the system. Of course, whether a term is offensive (or more offensive) is going to be in the eyes of the beholder…which is where the Mods come into play. They have to make a judgement call…and they did. OP got smacked down this time. C’est la vie.