|
|
Post by Neo on Feb 12, 2015 17:40:55 GMT -6
This topic is an open forum where site rules can be discussed, and if necessary, changed by a majority vote. A majority will be determined by 3 or more votes from Staff members. This topic is strictly for this purpose, and none other. If you have a question regarding one of the site Rules, you may ask on the Ask the Mods board. Afterwards, If a Moderator or other Staff member feels your issue needs to be sent to the House, then the discussion will move here. Any future discussion of official rules that does not take place here will be considered off topic and will be treated accordingly, regardless of where else the posts may occur.
The first discussion that requires the House's attention was brought up by AlmostDoug, and is in regards to the curse word Goddammit, which currently resides under the Banned Words list.
I believe, at this point, most of us already know my stance on the matter, as well as AlmostDoug's stance. I see no reason to remove the word from the Banned List. In my eyes, all of the arguments for removing it thus far bear no relevance to the Verse; this is not the general media, this is a site for writing. The purpose of the rules of this site is to keep the site clean, user friendly, free of clutter and chaos, and an all around safe site to write. I see no reason to change the rules to allow more freedom to upload pics; that is not what this site is about. I also cannot think of a writing scenario where censoring the curse word in question would be detrimental to the author. If one simply needs to use a stronger exclamation than damn or dammit, then I do not see a problem with the word remaining censored.
However, I am open to change, if a strong enough reason is presented. So far, I do not feel one has. I would hear your opinions on the matter first. Please bear in mind, that all registered members can participate, but only Staff may vote. Also keep in mind, that you must be a registered user to post in this thread. Guests are not permitted to post in this thread. This is to prevent using the Guest system to loop the system, and to avoid general confusion. I also feel, that if you are not a registered member, you should not have a hand in official site rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by AlmosDug on Feb 12, 2015 18:35:54 GMT -6
cyoa-verse.boards.net/search/results?what_at_least_one=goddammit&who_only_made_by=0&display_as=0Neat. And I feel that when it comes to the rules we should be blacklisting words, not whitelisting them. So I see finding scenarios where censoring would be detrimental to be pointless. As for why it shouldn't be blacklisted, I beg you to look at why the other words that are blacklisted are blacklisted. B****, w****, c***, n*****, f**, and their derivatives are all examples that are blatantly offensive by way of either demeaning or having been used to demean the groups that could be described as such. The remaining words are: f*** and its derivatives, s***, a******, and j******. One might ask, what is the purpose behind censoring these words? It's a social stigma, quite simply, and something that is very much an individual thing. However, one can gauge the GENERAL reaction to the word, and the severity of how offensive it might be, by looking at the general media's censoring habits, and the banlist for other sites like GameFAQs. Now, don't get me wrong, GameFAQs has some odd things censored, but they've got alternative reasons behind them, such as censor bypassing or site-specific abuse. Many of the other censored words there can be seen to reflect the general consensus echoed in the media. Though, I'm fairly certain j****** isn't censored elsewhere either, but considering this is a phrase that could only be used to refer to an animal with a more common alternative name, or to "flame", I can understand the ban. The word up for debate, however, is an expletive, a word merely used as filler, to express frustration, however mild. Distinctly NOT inflammatory or hateful towards a group. Even in the presence of those the phrase's origins trace to (Catholics and other Christians) the word is seen as a personal sin, not a plague upon its audience, and I have seen no evidence to the contrary. So, considering its meaning, and the general audience's reaction to it, I see no reason to ban it.
|
|
|
|
The House
Feb 12, 2015 19:18:42 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by GX1997 on Feb 12, 2015 19:18:42 GMT -6
You know what? We know why Neo has banned this in particular. He personally finds it offensive due to religious reasons. Fair enough. It's offensive in my religion too. But I notice that the additional things that Christians find offensive, but that Jewish people do not, are not banned. The same reasoning that Neo used to ban that particular phrase is not being applied to the Christian perspective when it works there also.
This shows a deeper issue with the current list. It was made by one person, who naturally has a certain viewpoint. It's very hard to remember other viewpoints that we aren't familiar with and keep them in mind when making a list of banned words. This is an issue that will take time to deal with though, so I will simply mention it now and return to the current issue.
That search shows some very interesting results. Golurk is the most common offender, and he's a mod and shares my religious views, meaning that the word is also offensive in his viewpoint. Yet he disregarded that when he made those posts. This is a representation of a fairly common mindset in our society.
Looking at this in the most objective way possible, I'll just say I don't agree with using the word. I don't agree with cursing at all, actually. And while it is offensive, if we have to censor absolutely everything that anyone finds offensive, well, there won't be much of a site left. I currently think that the most practical way to deal with this is by forcing all image links with the word in question to be put in spoiler tags with a warning. Once again, this isn't because I agree with using the word, but simply for practicality. That are other, more egregious violations currently on this site that are untouched. The best example is a serious portion of Austur's first topic. If that can be ignored, with all of its potentially objectionable content, then why can't a spoiler tagged image with a warning about its content be okay? I think this is probably the most reasonable solution, but I'm still listening.
|
|
|
|
Post by AlmosDug on Feb 12, 2015 19:28:32 GMT -6
*Still doesn't get the offensiveness thanks to no religious person I've ever met being offended by it, only finding it to be sinful to say*
|
|
|
|
Post by Golurkcanfly on Feb 12, 2015 19:31:33 GMT -6
*is most serious offender*
Huh...
|
|
|
|
Post by AlmosDug on Feb 12, 2015 19:35:33 GMT -6
If only the search also looked for text in pictures. I don't think there'd be many offenses there though.
|
|
|
|
The House
Feb 12, 2015 19:39:14 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by GX1997 on Feb 12, 2015 19:39:14 GMT -6
It's offensive, or at least objectionable, but most people just ignore it these days. I go to a public high school, and if I got offended or at least made an issue out of every time I heard someone say something I found offensive/objectionable, I would probably have been killed or very badly injured through one or multiple violent acts by now. I hear it all day long. Most of my classmates have filthier mouths than my aunt, and that's almost impossible to do. I ignore so many things, I have a reputation for being silent and just generally acting like other people don't exist. Sure, I would rather not have to hear all the garbage all day long, but I don't really have a choice in the matter. That's just how life is sometimes.
|
|
|
|
Post by AlmosDug on Feb 12, 2015 19:44:14 GMT -6
Well, I've directly asked people, and they just don't give a s***. Not the people I've asked anyway. I get that I'm not the type of person who would give a s*** anyway, but I made sure to ask people who are religious.
And I think the latter part of your first sentence, "most people just ignore it these days" is rather important as well, for obvious reasons.
I'm mostly curious as to WHY you find it offensive, or at least objectionable. You've stated that it is, but not why. I've mentioned that I'm aware it's supposedly a sin to say your god's name in vain, but I've not heard of any other things regarding it. And I think it's safe to say that things that are simply sinful shouldn't be censored here, because that's imposing on the people who aren't religious or of the same religion.
|
|
|
|
The House
Feb 12, 2015 19:46:58 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by HHDeception on Feb 12, 2015 19:46:58 GMT -6
I'm too tolerant to be offended by all that much so...up to you guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by empireoffire on Feb 12, 2015 19:57:50 GMT -6
I curse like a sailor and I never got a straight answer on whether calling a coward a pussy is considered banned or not, but I can't help but not ultimately care.
|
|
|
|
The House
Feb 12, 2015 19:59:53 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by GX1997 on Feb 12, 2015 19:59:53 GMT -6
I agree that we can't censor everyone based on religion. Like I mentioned, so many things that aren't considered to be bad in the Jewish faith are in my faith, but they aren't censored or banned. And to answer your question, it really comes down to not using the Lord's name in vain. It's plenty of reason for people to be against it by itself. It's not one of the optional things in our faiths. But once again, many people ignore it because in this world we are so desensitized to all sorts of cursing. Look at all the taboos related to individual curse words that have disappeared or are disappearing in just the last 50 years. Modern culture just isn't based on religion anymore, and the sheer number of religions mean that even if it was, there would still be too many cultural differences for us to compensate for and take into consideration. We would end up in a virtually identical hole to the one we are in now.
And that's why censoring based on religion in a group without a common religion just isn't viable.
|
|
|
|
Post by AlmosDug on Feb 12, 2015 20:00:50 GMT -6
I curse like a sailor and I never got a straight answer on whether calling a coward a pussy is considered banned or not, but I can't help but not ultimately care. To quote Neo in the rules post... |
|
|
|
Post by AlmosDug on Feb 12, 2015 20:02:53 GMT -6
I get that it's not one of the optional things in your faiths, but that only applies to not saying it yourself, doesn't it? Just like a Jew might not be able to eat pork (IIRC) but is still fine going to a place where pork is served.
|
|
|
|
Post by empireoffire on Feb 12, 2015 20:03:01 GMT -6
I curse like a sailor and I never got a straight answer on whether calling a coward a pussy is considered banned or not, but I can't help but not ultimately care. To quote Neo in the rules post... I'm 95% sure that wasn't there before. |
|
|
|
Post by AlmosDug on Feb 12, 2015 20:03:37 GMT -6
He did update it once or twice. So it might not've been.
Regardless, you've your answer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2015 20:06:22 GMT -6
As everybody on the verse knows I am Catholic. We all know the stigma Catholics have but that's not here or there.
I never mentioned this but I am a deeply religious person and I have strong beliefs. I believe in God 100% (even though there are times in my moment of bad depression I do question it.)
Before anyone says anything or makes a snarky remark know this about me. I know this is rare for a Catholic but I am totally accepting and open minded towards peoples beliefs. I always felt that if you want to believe in God or whatever deity you choose to worship good for you. You don't want to believe in a higher deity good for you because that's your right. I would never force my beliefs on anybody here because that just seems counter productive. Again I am different like that.
I know I am not officially considered staff but I am one of two people here (the other being Fennekin) to reach eternal stats. Also I am the second oldest one here (behind that Neo dragon) so hopefully my word means something.
I have no problem with G**Damit (I just can't curse unless I am really pissed off). I said it before and I used it before too when something happens and I am upset about it. Again its just my opinion take it for what its worth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Golurkcanfly on Feb 12, 2015 20:11:03 GMT -6
I get that it's not one of the optional things in your faiths, but that only applies to not saying it yourself, doesn't it? Just like a Jew might not be able to eat pork (IIRC) but is still fine going to a place where pork is served. Except in Chinese restaurants, where everyone decides to break kosher. (Source: My 2 Jewish friends) |
|
|
|
Post by Neo on Feb 12, 2015 20:14:30 GMT -6
I find myself, perhaps surprisingly, agreeing with a lot of points here. So, What's the current tally? If you guys want to downgrade it to a minor, I won't object too loudly.
But, allow me to clarify something. I didn't choose that word based of my personal religious views, but because of how offensive I believe the phrase can be as a whole, based off my experience working with many people from many different cultures, and the general uselessness, in my eyes, it is in writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by AlmosDug on Feb 12, 2015 20:15:02 GMT -6
Break kosher? I'm not familiar with that phrasing. Like, they eat pork anyway, regardless of the rule?
|
|
|
|
The House
Feb 12, 2015 20:16:39 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by GX1997 on Feb 12, 2015 20:16:39 GMT -6
I can't speak for people of the Jewish faith, since I don't fully understand their entire faith. But I do know that there is also the problem of individual convictions. As I said, Golurk made a conscious choice to go against traditional values of his religion in a post or two. And on a different part of the spectrum, you have me, and I don't curse at all. Golurk and I share a very similar upbringing in terms of religion, and are even the same denomination.
That's where convictions come in. Everyone has different ones. One of my friends is a different denomination than I am. She doesn't wear pants, makeup, and doesn't actually cut her hair, only trims it. People I've known who are the same denomination as I am, in which we condemn the use of tobacco, are some of the worst smokers I've ever met. Traditional religion is one size fits all, but as you can probably see, it doesn't really fit anyone particularly well. This is why I'm particularly fond of trascendentalist philosophy, which eschews one size fits all religious dogma and instead values the individual's relationship with God, or even just the natural world in some cases. We are inidividuals, we all have different convictions, even those who aren't religious.
Generalizations are meant to make things simpler, but sometimes they are just too general. Something to keep in mind.
|
|
