So does rule 7(b) mean no profanity?
| Site Update March 31, 2015 |
Vir losei? |
March 31, 2015
A few updates have been made to the Community Wall, including audio notification for new messages and a new set of guidelines. These guidelines will be enforced to help keep the Community Wall an open and welcoming place for discussion. Take a look and let us know any feedback you may have! |
 Mahlaansaviik March 31, 2015 |
So does rule 7(b) mean no profanity? |
by Mahlaansaviik
March 31, 2015
 paarthurnax Administrator March 31, 2015 |
Mahlaansaviik Mild profanity is allowed so long as it's not directed at other members. Excessive profanity would be, for example, the C-word or N-word. I expect everyone to be able to determine what is and isn't appropriate for a Skyrim fansite. If problems arise, I will refine the guidelines further to be more specific. |
by paarthurnax
March 31, 2015
MahlaansaviikSo does rule 7(b) mean no profanity?
Mild profanity is allowed so long as it's not directed at other members. Excessive profanity would be, for example, the C-word or N-word. I expect everyone to be able to determine what is and isn't appropriate for a Skyrim fansite. If problems arise, I will refine the guidelines further to be more specific.
 Kronvullok April 2, 2015 |
@paarthurnax This reminds me of when my grandma said that people who cuss don't have a good grip on the English language. |
by Kronvullok
April 2, 2015
@paarthurnax This reminds me of when my grandma said that people who cuss don't have a good grip on the English language.
 Rahvaatzul April 2, 2015 |
I'd suggest changing rule 7c from:
to:
I bring this up as this statement was made by valued member L: OTHER races, genders, ethnicities, or sexualities. I can make fun of Caucasians, males, Canadians, or bisexuals as much as I want.
|
by Rahvaatzul
April 2, 2015
I'd suggest changing rule 7c from:
Do not use language that is derogatory towards people of other races, genders, ethnicities, sexualities, etc.
to:
Do not use language that is derogatory towards people of any race, gender, ethnicity, sexuality, etc.
I bring this up as this statement was made by valued member L: OTHER races, genders, ethnicities, or sexualities. I can make fun of Caucasians, males, Canadians, or bisexuals as much as I want.
 Dezonikso April 20, 2015 |
@Rahvaatzul I suppose this could be a pretty appropriate change. Although, if you think about it, it isn't a necessary change, seeing as one who, for example, is a bisexual Canadian male would hypothetically make fun of another bisexual, canadian, or male (or any combination of the three) for being those specific things. In this case, the "offender" would be in turn making fun of their own attributes, therefore deteriorating any kind of actual insult the "offender" could be possibly trying to make toward the victim, and in turn making way for a joke the two could laugh at as equals in being the "punchline" (for lack of a better phrase). On the other side of the same coin, I can logically see what you are saying, as 1) the "offender" would first need to make clear (publicly or otherwise) to the "victim" that the attribute being "insulted" is shared commonly between both the "offender" and "victim", and 2) the "victim" would need to be paying attention enough to actively acknowledge #1 and accept the "insult" as a joke between the two of them. Consequently, I feel as though the change should be enacted, though I feel as though if both conditions #1 and #2 are met accordingly in the described general situation neither of the persons should be punished. My personal belief is that if you can't laugh at yourself, then you can't laugh at anyone else. Hypocrisy is unacceptable in my eyes. |
by Dezonikso
April 20, 2015
@Rahvaatzul I suppose this could be a pretty appropriate change. Although, if you think about it, it isn't a necessary change, seeing as one who, for example, is a bisexual Canadian male would hypothetically make fun of another bisexual, canadian, or male (or any combination of the three) for being those specific things. In this case, the "offender" would be in turn making fun of their own attributes, therefore deteriorating any kind of actual insult the "offender" could be possibly trying to make toward the victim, and in turn making way for a joke the two could laugh at as equals in being the "punchline" (for lack of a better phrase). On the other side of the same coin, I can logically see what you are saying, as 1) the "offender" would first need to make clear (publicly or otherwise) to the "victim" that the attribute being "insulted" is shared commonly between both the "offender" and "victim", and 2) the "victim" would need to be paying attention enough to actively acknowledge #1 and accept the "insult" as a joke between the two of them. Consequently, I feel as though the change should be enacted, though I feel as though if both conditions #1 and #2 are met accordingly in the described general situation neither of the persons should be punished. My personal belief is that if you can't laugh at yourself, then you can't laugh at anyone else. Hypocrisy is unacceptable in my eyes.
