About the swearing rule

[Feather Spiral 1,892]

It's come to my attention [/euphemism] that the rule about swearing is extremely vague. What it says is basically: "swearing is limited across the forums and forbidden in these two fields".

Yet it's being applied very precisely. From what I've gathered, profanity seems to be banned from any field that appears in more than one place (topic titles/tags, member names/titles...) and profiles, but limited in "unique" ones (like replies and blogs).

 

This means members are kept from knowing the true extent of the rule they're supposed to follow.

And if they disagree to the warning they're given because of this communication issue... they'll meet the "just read the rules, they apply to the whole site" argument. Which is ridiculous because the rule as it's redacted doesn't show how far it stretches, so the member has no way of knowing he's breaking it in the first place.

 

 

Yes, the original intent is to keep swearing to a minimum for the sake of kids and adults who don't like it. As such, you wish to limit such content in all possible areas of the site.

But the people who visit the place don't necessarily look everywhere (profiles, blogs, Steam and Minecraft sections, Facebooks and Twitters...), and someone who's active in those other areas will consider that. There's no statistical evidence of anyone, who's not active there (guest or member), looking at them or not.

Therefore, without a clear rule about it, the judgment of how exposed an area is is entirely up to the user's discretion.

 

 

I therefore suggest the rule's last sentence (nothing else) to be modified as such:

"Swearing and slurs are strictly forbidden in profiles, and fields that appear more than once - thread titles and tags, usernames, signatures..."

I finally decided to make this thread because, if I don't, the staff will keep pulling tricks to avoid facing the fact, like they've been doing for weeks.

Edited November 4, 2012 by Feather Spiral

[Dr_Waveband 745]

Seems like a sensible modification to the rule. At its current state it clearly discourages swearing, so it should be fairly obvious to most people that swearing just for the heck of it on profile pages and whatnot might not be a good idea, but some might just not get it.

[Feather Spiral 1,892]

Truth is, this isn't really about swearing just for the heck of it or "for lulz".

Swearing can be used for emphasis, to express strong annoyance or frustration. Or someone can use racial or sexual slur to describe someone (even themselves, as I and Viscra did without being reported for months), without really thinking of it as swearing because they're used to it.

[NavelColt 22,880]

Truth is, this isn't really about swearing just for the heck of it or "for lulz".

Swearing can be used for emphasis, to express strong annoyance or frustration. Or someone can use racial or sexual slur to describe someone (even themselves, as I and Viscra did without being reported for months), without really thinking of it as swearing because they're used to it.

Swearing for emphasis has always been fine as long as it isn't being abused. Racial slurs and such tend to be cracked down more upon, because as far as I'm aware, the 'emphasis' argument doesn't work with slurs like it does generic swears.

[Feather Spiral 1,892]

Racial slurs and such tend to be cracked down more upon, because as far as I'm aware, the 'emphasis' argument doesn't work with slurs like it does generic swears.

That's why I used the "habit" argument with them, if you pay attention to the post you quoted.

 

The rule only mentions swearing, yet I'm told about "profane content" in general. Slurs are supposedly considered abuse, yet they're treated as heavy swearing.

That's one other flaw in the rules.

Unless the rules are clear, then it's the staff who's applying them wrong.

You may consider "queer" as a swear word, but people use it to describe their own sexuality. And if you warn someone for "inappropriate" speech because they call themselves one...

 

Point is, the way the rules are redacted DOES NOT MATCH the way they're applied.

[NavelColt 22,880]

That's why I used the "habit" argument with them, if you pay attention to the post you quoted.

 

The rule only mentions swearing, yet I'm told about "profane content" in general. Slurs are supposedly considered abuse, yet they're treated as heavy swearing.

That's one other flaw in the rules.

Unless the rules are clear, then it's the staff who's applying them wrong.

You may consider "queer" as a swear word, but people use it to describe their own sexuality. And if you warn someone for "inappropriate" speech because they call themselves one...

 

Point is, the way the rules are redacted DOES NOT MATCH the way they're applied.

 

I payed plenty of attention, thanks :3

 

I never said this suggestion was not worthwhile, I'm simply giving my input on a specific train of thought you gave.

[Feather Spiral 1,892]

I payed plenty of attention, thanks :3

 

I never said this suggestion was not worthwhile, I'm simply giving my input on a specific train of thought you gave.

I understand that, but the part I quoted did not exactly seem to address my point. Sorry if I sounded offensive or arrogant.

 

So what're ya guys gonna do? Edit the swearing rule the way I suggested, and make a reminder to the mods about the way to treat slurs, or what?

[NavelColt 22,880]

I understand that, but the part I quoted did not exactly seem to address my point. Sorry if I sounded offensive or arrogant.

 

So what're ya guys gonna do? Edit the swearing rule the way I suggested, and make a reminder to the mods about the way to treat slurs, or what?

 

It didn't address your point because I was simply clarifying something the best I could with my limited knowledge, not attempting to give you an answer on what -will- be changed or not changed. Admins make and change the rules ultimately, Mods just help enforce them, so without discussing it with everyone else, I can't really make any call in here ^^ To that end, several of the global rules, including the swearing rule, could do with some rewording and additional content to their sentences, and it is being discussed at the moment.

[RazzyJam 1,519]

This seems like a logical modification. Swearing shouldn't really need to be on the forum anyway, but this seems fair enough and much more direct than the previous rule

[Starshine 16,333]

Even if the swearings took place in a hidden corner of the forum, the mods will eventually remove it if the swearings were meant to insult someone.

 

Not to be picky, but the modification implies that I'm allowed to open the massive crate of "***** YOU!" in places like PMs and profile comments and blog comments

[Doctor XFizzle 8,669]

CAPS LOCK PONY will be extremely saddened by this development...or extremely belligerent. Probably the latter.

[Feather Spiral 1,892]

Even if the swearings took place in a hidden corner of the forum, the mods will eventually remove it if the swearings were meant to insult someone.

 

Not to be picky, but the modification implies that I'm allowed to open the massive crate of "***** YOU!" in places like PMs and profile comments and blog comments

Isn't that already the case? As I recall (from the content of a couple of threads on the matter whose titles I forgot), flaming and excessive profanity is already forbidden in those fields.

All this edit will do, is make that more explicit, instead of assuming everyone understands it because "it's clearly implied in the Terms of Use and the Board Rules".

CAPS LOCK PONY will be extremely saddened by this development...or extremely belligerent. Probably the latter.

What are you talking about, CLOP is my-

um.

Anyway, if she opposes me, I'll-

Bah, y'all know what I'll do.

Edited November 6, 2012 by Feather Spiral

[Viscra Maelstrom 3,718]

CAPS LOCK PONY will be extremely saddened by this development...or extremely belligerent. Probably the latter.

 

tbh, i don't think i can do that stuff here anymore, like, at all. ever since the amount of members on this site has increased to the size it is of today, a lot of people have absolutely no idea about this inside joke i started at the beginning of the forums. even if Feld0 himself appreciated and found my commentary as CAPS LOCK PONY to be hilarious, that time is past.

 

doesn't mean i'll stop using explicit language, though, since that's how i've always been: an explicit person. but i do have a sense of the common variety, and that is that CAPS LOCK PONY, as far as the forums go by, anyway, is more or less dead at this point, despite what my profile page says about him.

 

---

 

sorry for the long off-topicness. to be more on-topic, i think this is a good addition to the rules. cursing in common language will exist, no matter what, but limiting it in this way seems good, as it adds more clarification as to when and where swearing is allowed and forbidden.

[Jokuc 8,173]

ugh big topic about such a little thing.

 

I'd say one should be allowed to swear but not to insult someone or something.

[Marcato 2,143]

Hm, well simply making a rule more obvious would be a good idea. I know I have a had a few moments when I wonder what is and is not okay in a post/thread. I think it would be a good idea to clear this up in the rules and guidelines. After all, confusions like this can just make for unnecessary conflicts between users and staff right? It would likely save a lot of trouble to simply add a little more explanation.

[Feather Spiral 1,892]

ugh big topic about such a little thing.

 

I'd say one should be allowed to swear but not to insult someone or something.

Don't call it "little thing", that shit gave me 100 warning points for having "Faggot" in my member title. Unless the rule is made clearer, others in the future may be warned, even banned, for breaking a rule they didn't even understand.

The rule about "abusive behavior" (insulting and flaming?) in contrast, is pretty clear - insulting a person/group/belief/... is forbidden, period.

 

As I'm told, profane content is limited whether it's meant to insult or not, and forbidden in profiles and topic titles/tags.

[twilight_sparkle 53]

Admins should be looking out for the over-used swearing members. I think swearing is still bad, being a christian, but if you can't seem to find a more appropriate word to get a point across, by all means use it. If you're just trying to be a dick, then admins should remove the post, warn them, give them points, or whatever those admins do. Now please don't start a religious debate because I am christian, because I've had enough of those and I am sick of them. :3