reeuke
Banned
- Apr 19, 2011
- 172
- 10
- pull the plug....im all for it. while you're at it add memes ayo to the list too
fixed
Animals....
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by truthgetsbusy,
- Start date
- pull the plug....im all for it. while you're at it add memes ayo to the list too
fixed
- Apr 8, 2006
- 6,202
- 12
I don't come here often lately...
...but are you telling me if I describe someone as an Animal I'm getting suspended?
...maybe that's why I stopped coming here so frequently.
In other news, Kobe is fined ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND for calling someone a !*+.
...but are you telling me if I describe someone as an Animal I'm getting suspended?
...maybe that's why I stopped coming here so frequently.
In other news, Kobe is fined ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND for calling someone a !*+.
- Apr 8, 2006
- 6,202
- 12
I don't come here often lately...
...but are you telling me if I describe someone as an Animal I'm getting suspended?
...maybe that's why I stopped coming here so frequently.
In other news, Kobe is fined ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND for calling someone a !*+.
...but are you telling me if I describe someone as an Animal I'm getting suspended?
...maybe that's why I stopped coming here so frequently.
In other news, Kobe is fined ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND for calling someone a !*+.
- May 29, 2008
- 826
- 10
I was waiting for someone to bring this up. Some of the people who are the most butt-hurt about the term "Animals" (RacecardGetsPlayed, RavageBX) are the same people who say things like "I'm going to raise my kids telling them that $%++ sexuals are inherently evil". Either you think it's okay to derogate entire groups of the population, or you don't. You can't have it both ways.
- May 29, 2008
- 826
- 10
I was waiting for someone to bring this up. Some of the people who are the most butt-hurt about the term "Animals" (RacecardGetsPlayed, RavageBX) are the same people who say things like "I'm going to raise my kids telling them that $%++ sexuals are inherently evil". Either you think it's okay to derogate entire groups of the population, or you don't. You can't have it both ways.
- Dec 8, 1999
- 7,624
- 31,060
See the earlier reply re: category problems. People can make the same hair-splitting argument about literally EVERYTHING.
We've made similar judgment calls in the past and this thread is full of examples to that point. I don't expect 100% of our users to agree in 100% of all cases. Not only is that unrealistic, it's impossible.
Someone has to make the call and, in this case, it's a pretty easy call to make. The racial implications are obvious and that's what people are exploiting in attempt to get others riled up.
I really don't have much sympathy for this whole "words are inherently meaningless vessels" argument. Communication is predicated on shared meanings. I don't presume perfect congruence between all interpretations of a given word (our concepts of what constitutes a painful experience may differ, for example), but we're running a FUNCTIONAL community here and that revolves around some practical standards. Maybe you don't care about ANYTHING that others say to you - no matter how mean spirited - but that doesn't mean we need to accept YOUR standards (or lack thereof) as the basis for this community. Our goal with NikeTalk was to welcome a diverse array of users from all walks of life. Most people, myself included, find racial slurs offensive. If you DON'T, then a policy that prohibits racial slurs doesn't hurt YOUR enjoyment of the forum. Ironically, your proposed LACK of standards represents a more exclusive policy than standards based on respect. If you want to run a board to be enjoyed only by people who aren't offended by ANYTHING, your audience is actually pretty narrow.
Waiting at a traffic lights is a momentary inconvenience, but most of us agree that we're probably better off with traffic lights than trying to plow through a demolition derby every day - and it's more than a little obnoxious to object to stop signs et al. on the grounds that "you can't really define what it means to come to a full and complete stop when, fundamentally, our bodies and our vehicles consist of wavelike sub-particles that are constantly in motion. The word 'stop' is, like, an illusion, man. We're always moving, baby. Why fight it?"
Yes, "stop" represents an abstraction and it's one that's somewhat arbitrarily defined as relative to our experience - but it's nonetheless proven a useful abstraction.
The purpose of our rules, and posts like this, is to help make our standards clear so that everyone can easily follow them. The reasoning behind the policy has been expressed. If you don't think that racial slurs are personally offensive, that's on you. That doesn't give you the right to use them on this forum, however.
If you want an anarchic free-for-all, go visit 4chan. Have a great time. We've always been about providing a safe, respectful forum environment and, to that end, we've ALWAYS had language restrictions in place.
However relative and arbitrary the categories of "slur" and "profanity" may be, you're just defending behavior that is intentionally offensive and irritating.
If you agree that trolls are hindering the experience, stop defending their actions. On most other sites, you have 20 year olds acting like 12 year olds. We're asking 20 year olds to at least start acting like they're old enough to be entrusted with a car.
You can't bemoan the decline of the General forum due to trolls on one hand and then defend trolls in the same breath. If your strategy of ignoring them worked, your enjoyment of the forums wouldn't have diminished. Clearly, we need to do a better job with quality control. If we can't start with overtly and intentionally disrespectful behavior, where should we start?
That's the point I made. Go read it again. I don't care about people using the word "animals" in and of itself; I'm concerned with people intentionally using it as a troll reply. That's where the harm comes in.
EVERYONE knows this is trolling. EVERYONE knows this is being done to irritate others. Both of those things are against the rules.
- Dec 8, 1999
- 7,624
- 31,060
See the earlier reply re: category problems. People can make the same hair-splitting argument about literally EVERYTHING.
We've made similar judgment calls in the past and this thread is full of examples to that point. I don't expect 100% of our users to agree in 100% of all cases. Not only is that unrealistic, it's impossible.
Someone has to make the call and, in this case, it's a pretty easy call to make. The racial implications are obvious and that's what people are exploiting in attempt to get others riled up.
I really don't have much sympathy for this whole "words are inherently meaningless vessels" argument. Communication is predicated on shared meanings. I don't presume perfect congruence between all interpretations of a given word (our concepts of what constitutes a painful experience may differ, for example), but we're running a FUNCTIONAL community here and that revolves around some practical standards. Maybe you don't care about ANYTHING that others say to you - no matter how mean spirited - but that doesn't mean we need to accept YOUR standards (or lack thereof) as the basis for this community. Our goal with NikeTalk was to welcome a diverse array of users from all walks of life. Most people, myself included, find racial slurs offensive. If you DON'T, then a policy that prohibits racial slurs doesn't hurt YOUR enjoyment of the forum. Ironically, your proposed LACK of standards represents a more exclusive policy than standards based on respect. If you want to run a board to be enjoyed only by people who aren't offended by ANYTHING, your audience is actually pretty narrow.
Waiting at a traffic lights is a momentary inconvenience, but most of us agree that we're probably better off with traffic lights than trying to plow through a demolition derby every day - and it's more than a little obnoxious to object to stop signs et al. on the grounds that "you can't really define what it means to come to a full and complete stop when, fundamentally, our bodies and our vehicles consist of wavelike sub-particles that are constantly in motion. The word 'stop' is, like, an illusion, man. We're always moving, baby. Why fight it?"
Yes, "stop" represents an abstraction and it's one that's somewhat arbitrarily defined as relative to our experience - but it's nonetheless proven a useful abstraction.
The purpose of our rules, and posts like this, is to help make our standards clear so that everyone can easily follow them. The reasoning behind the policy has been expressed. If you don't think that racial slurs are personally offensive, that's on you. That doesn't give you the right to use them on this forum, however.
If you want an anarchic free-for-all, go visit 4chan. Have a great time. We've always been about providing a safe, respectful forum environment and, to that end, we've ALWAYS had language restrictions in place.
However relative and arbitrary the categories of "slur" and "profanity" may be, you're just defending behavior that is intentionally offensive and irritating.
If you agree that trolls are hindering the experience, stop defending their actions. On most other sites, you have 20 year olds acting like 12 year olds. We're asking 20 year olds to at least start acting like they're old enough to be entrusted with a car.
You can't bemoan the decline of the General forum due to trolls on one hand and then defend trolls in the same breath. If your strategy of ignoring them worked, your enjoyment of the forums wouldn't have diminished. Clearly, we need to do a better job with quality control. If we can't start with overtly and intentionally disrespectful behavior, where should we start?
That's the point I made. Go read it again. I don't care about people using the word "animals" in and of itself; I'm concerned with people intentionally using it as a troll reply. That's where the harm comes in.
EVERYONE knows this is trolling. EVERYONE knows this is being done to irritate others. Both of those things are against the rules.
- Dec 5, 2010
- 3,080
- 368
cosign of the year award
- Dec 5, 2010
- 3,080
- 368
cosign of the year award
- Feb 9, 2003
- 10,791
- 932
Oh so now we're just making up whatever we want huh? I never said a damn thing about homosexuals being evil nor did I ever say anything derogatory about them. I have legit friends who are homosexual and bisexual, so you can definitely miss me with that nonsense. I said I do not agree with the lifestyle and I will not preach homosexuality to my children.
And ftr I'm not at all incensed about the usage of the term "animals". It's just a word on a message board. Won't lose an iota of sleep over people goin for lulz. But I'm also no fool who's going to act like I don't see the sly and subversive ways many choose to operate with on here. Don't be mad because I call a spade a spade.
- Feb 9, 2003
- 10,791
- 932
Oh so now we're just making up whatever we want huh? I never said a damn thing about homosexuals being evil nor did I ever say anything derogatory about them. I have legit friends who are homosexual and bisexual, so you can definitely miss me with that nonsense. I said I do not agree with the lifestyle and I will not preach homosexuality to my children.
And ftr I'm not at all incensed about the usage of the term "animals". It's just a word on a message board. Won't lose an iota of sleep over people goin for lulz. But I'm also no fool who's going to act like I don't see the sly and subversive ways many choose to operate with on here. Don't be mad because I call a spade a spade.
- May 29, 2008
- 826
- 10
So cliche.
I'm not mad because you're being hyper-sensitive; I'm just pointing out your blatant hypocrisy.
- May 29, 2008
- 826
- 10
So cliche.
I'm not mad because you're being hyper-sensitive; I'm just pointing out your blatant hypocrisy.
whyhellothere
Banned
- Jan 2, 2011
- 18,975
- 2,397
So ayo getting banned too or what?
whyhellothere
Banned
- Jan 2, 2011
- 18,975
- 2,397
So ayo getting banned too or what?
- Feb 9, 2003
- 10,791
- 932
No, what're you're doing is putting words in my mouth to try to prove a point. And you're a clown for that.Originally Posted by whiterails
So cliche.
I'm not mad because you're being hyper-sensitive; I'm just pointing out your blatant hypocrisy.
- Feb 9, 2003
- 10,791
- 932
No, what're you're doing is putting words in my mouth to try to prove a point. And you're a clown for that.Originally Posted by whiterails
So cliche.
I'm not mad because you're being hyper-sensitive; I'm just pointing out your blatant hypocrisy.
- Mar 28, 2004
- 22,625
- 15,421
"ayo" is used incorrectly on here anyway, it's an interjection, not a noun or adjective *kanyeshrug*
- Mar 28, 2004
- 22,625
- 15,421
"ayo" is used incorrectly on here anyway, it's an interjection, not a noun or adjective *kanyeshrug*
reeuke
Banned
- Apr 19, 2011
- 172
- 10
I don't think the word ayo should be banned but it is one of the most commonly used troll responses right behind grammar police troll responses.
reeuke
Banned
- Apr 19, 2011
- 172
- 10
I don't think the word ayo should be banned but it is one of the most commonly used troll responses right behind grammar police troll responses.
- May 29, 2008
- 826
- 10
Originally Posted by RavageBX
No, what're you're doing is putting words in my mouth to try to prove a point. And you're a clown for that.Originally Posted by whiterails
So cliche.
I'm not mad because you're being hyper-sensitive; I'm just pointing out your blatant hypocrisy.
I was slightly exaggerating, I'll give you that.
But if you say things like "I'm going to teach my children that !!$* sexuality is wrong", you can't hold it against me when I say that you're perpetuating hate towards another group of people.
You honestly think that if your kids are raised with that attitude, they will be accepting of gays? And not look down on them? Please.
- May 29, 2008
- 826
- 10
Originally Posted by RavageBX
No, what're you're doing is putting words in my mouth to try to prove a point. And you're a clown for that.Originally Posted by whiterails
So cliche.
I'm not mad because you're being hyper-sensitive; I'm just pointing out your blatant hypocrisy.
I was slightly exaggerating, I'll give you that.
But if you say things like "I'm going to teach my children that !!$* sexuality is wrong", you can't hold it against me when I say that you're perpetuating hate towards another group of people.
You honestly think that if your kids are raised with that attitude, they will be accepting of gays? And not look down on them? Please.
- Dec 8, 1999
- 7,624
- 31,060
We already cracked down on homophobic responses in the past - and faced this exact same nonsense "protesting" in response. Even in practice, it was the same thing. People were using abbreviations. People were trying to get slick and use substitutions (e.g. celebrity/athlete names like Amaechi and Karamo.)
I encourage people to report that garbage. The problem is, a lot of people only feign outrage at the "acceptance" of such conduct when they're looking to DEFEND their preferred form of prejudice.
Don't just talk about it; be about it. The report button's right there, yet most people don't use it and, of those who do, I can practically guess what type of offense it is by the name of the reporter. "Oh, so and so is reporting a thread... must be something about White folks and/or Knicks fans...."
I encourage people to report that garbage. The problem is, a lot of people only feign outrage at the "acceptance" of such conduct when they're looking to DEFEND their preferred form of prejudice.
Don't just talk about it; be about it. The report button's right there, yet most people don't use it and, of those who do, I can practically guess what type of offense it is by the name of the reporter. "Oh, so and so is reporting a thread... must be something about White folks and/or Knicks fans...."
- Dec 8, 1999
- 7,624
- 31,060
We already cracked down on homophobic responses in the past - and faced this exact same nonsense "protesting" in response. Even in practice, it was the same thing. People were using abbreviations. People were trying to get slick and use substitutions (e.g. celebrity/athlete names like Amaechi and Karamo.)
I encourage people to report that garbage. The problem is, a lot of people only feign outrage at the "acceptance" of such conduct when they're looking to DEFEND their preferred form of prejudice.
Don't just talk about it; be about it. The report button's right there, yet most people don't use it and, of those who do, I can practically guess what type of offense it is by the name of the reporter. "Oh, so and so is reporting a thread... must be something about White folks and/or Knicks fans...."
I encourage people to report that garbage. The problem is, a lot of people only feign outrage at the "acceptance" of such conduct when they're looking to DEFEND their preferred form of prejudice.
Don't just talk about it; be about it. The report button's right there, yet most people don't use it and, of those who do, I can practically guess what type of offense it is by the name of the reporter. "Oh, so and so is reporting a thread... must be something about White folks and/or Knicks fans...."
