Malicious use of slurs against players that are based on race and/or ethnicity. We will show absolutely no tolerance towards racist and xenophobic ideals.
Expires in 6 months
zhuorb the difference is the rapist is being put in prison where they can't (or, shouldn't be able to) rapé (I love how rapé is censored but rapist isn't, good job censorship team), banning a person from a website just results in them rejoining the site, it's a temporary fix and a really shítty bandaid
ladies maybe I didn’t explain myself well and I’ll take the blame for that. I agree w nearly everything said in here i just don’t get the push against at least trying to make words w hateful insinuations less frequently used. I agree you can be racist without slurring, and it can be infinitely more harmful than a slur. I agree that harassment is worse than a slur. I’m not disagreeing w your opinions at all i just don’t see why not at the very least try and stop slurring too and now try and find a way to also lessen racist / sexist / homophobic rhetoric and behaviors altogether ??
deleteddeletedalmost 8 years ago
Ok you explained what you meant so like disregard what i Just said because what u said makes sense :DDDDDDD
I mean that's true to an extent, Linxe. To my knowledge in Australia (and certain parts of England?) the word cúnt is relatively harmless, it just means someone who's a nuisance, meanwhile in the US we take it as the patriarchy attacking us
I think the meaning of a word really depends on society's value in it, if we all stopped caring about the negative attributes of a word it wouldn't have any power to begin with
deleteddeletedalmost 8 years ago
I actually disagree Zhuorb about moderator discretion, I'd prefer less mod discretion and more specific rules. The thing about this rule is that it's still pretty vague/unrestrictive, thanks to "malicious" and "against players".
agreed. A word is not inherently hateful, it's the context. The entire argument stems from laziness because nobody wants to go through the trouble of understanding context ("hurrrrr how can we possibly differentiate between those joking about it and those using the joke as a facade???")
But as someone who has never really had homophobic thoughts, I still called annoying people fgot.
Was I propagating homophobia by using its slurs, or was I acting against homophobia by using its slurs on non-gay people, thereby nulllifying the effect of the word.
As JK Rowling once said: that fear of the word only increases fear of the thing itself. If we use the word fgot all the time, then its initial meaning and power is lost and it is rendered useless.
my argument is it doesn't really do as much for protecting them as punishments for actual racist implications would. This is a lazy if-then rule for moderators who are either unwilling or unable to apply their discretion in cases
if they don't believe in this then what are they doing about the actual racism lol this is clear moral vanity, especially because no one would want to argue against this rule- it makes you like a complete arsehole
Poll
