Language Petition

[Sirotnikov]

Gasmaske, though I agree that nasty language is to be avoided, often it's the way some people talk.

I completely agree that hate posts with bad words are evil. but how else would you do it? The simplest thing is to avoid threads going bad or leaving. That's usually what I do.

Often in my own post when I respond I remove curses, and often criticize those who use curses.


However if anyone calls another person a wanker... it's not that serious. It's a loving nickname. It usually has nothing to do with the person ... wanking. And even if it does, would you appriciate it better if one would call him masturbator?

Sh*t is an every day expression for some. What other expressions do you know that show anger and a bad day? "Darn" "Heck"? We'd sound like the brady family....

But generally, I think that hate posts (like what hapenned between paiktis and someones DL in another thread) may be deleted for the good of the community. Or edit out all the curse words.

If I curse anyone, even for laughs, or say something really nasty, I ususally say that if one is bothered, he should letme know and I'll promptly edit the post.

I suggest that if you are bothered by some post, first talk to the poster to edit it and to use less curses, and only then report it.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
That's just a non-issue. I don't think having the image of Rommel or even Hitler displayed on your browser means a thing.

Rommel was a military leader which wasn't related to the killings of jews.

There was a picture of stalin as one's avatar. He killed 20M russians, including my grand grand father. So?

I don't mind pictures or words.

It's the message that they convey is what I look for.

I know there is now some mess about a display of pictures of hitler, showing him in life. People say it would let some legitimize him and say he was really a nice man. Sure, it may happen if someone doesn't know the whole story. And I do think hitler was human. I thinks humans are capable of almost anything. A lot of good things... and a lot of evil. Hitler himself was deranged and crazy. so was Stalin. But there's no reason we stop discussing them. They are part of what we are as a humanity, and if we hide it instead of dealing with it, someitme in the future it would reoccur.

I think that it will reoccur, no matter what. I don't think humans are as smart or nice as they claim to be. I'm nice. But even I can be harsh at times. And other people are not as nice as I am. We're just monkeys with big egos.

I'd just prefer it would reoccur later, than sooner.

[Urban Ranger]

That's not what I meant.

Just seeing an image of some person or thing on a person's browser makes no indication of said person's stance towards the displayed person or thing.

For example, on a page detailing Hitler's crimes on your website, you could have an image of him. You could even have a caption that says "The biggest monster history has ever seen" under the image.

Without knowing the context, an image doesn't mean anything.

[Urban Ranger]

DP

[Extreme netlag or server slowdown today - page load time: 100.29 seconds]

[Sprayber]

One key to life is not to be overly sensitive about things. I can see if someone is using non stop cursing,(Giancarlo) you may get offended. But why in the heck would anyone get offended by the occasional use of them? How do you all get along in the real world? If you run into some of the curse words you can always scroll past them.

What would our VP **** Cheny say about such things?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Gasmaske


well MtG posted

It's only a few of the pathetic wankers.

I presume that Wanker is now official 'Poly language.

Can a mod confirm that I can use Wanker?

It's only been used oh, a thousand times or so. If you want to use it in some context or another, feel free. You certainly won't be banned for it.

[spartak]

Thank you. I Shall

[Solver]

Worse than language are national insults...fascism.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Gasmaske
Thank you. I Shall

<img src="http://apolyton.net/forums/attachment.php?postid=365386">

Is that some sort of anti-smoking sign? That looks like a skull with a cigar.

[spartak]

Its a gasmaske.

[spartak]

Originally posted by Solver
Worse than language are national insults...fascism.

Quite but not on topic in this thread.

Feel free to start a new thread elsewhere but this discussion has degenerated into the whys and wherefores of the use of the word "Wanker". Feel free to discuss this.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Gasmaske
Its a gasmaske.

Ah. Why don't you use it as an avatar? I think you have been here for more than six months.

[spartak]

Doh. I hadn't realised I could have a custom avatar after six months. I thought it was a year.

Good idea. I'll try and see if I can work it out...

[SlowwHand]

[Winston]

That's obviously Mrs. SuperSneak and SuperSneak himself in the middle of the night when Prosper starts crying.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Winston
PH, that's one of the worst justifications I've ever heard. You could say the same about observing children starving to death or totalitarian regimes conducting genocide. Numerous wrongs don't make any rights for all I know.

I agree with the message of DarkCloud's post although I don't percieve it as big a problem as he does - but his observation is correct and I for one respect it...

Get a damn sense of proportion. How in the name of buggery is a naughty word even remotely comparable with watching children starving and totalitarian regimes? If you think the two are on a par, you must be very naive indeed. They are articulated noises which have been given a special status and taboo nature in our society. It is still silly though.

[Winston]

Take it easy, PH. Of course there's no connection between the phenomena. It was just an allegory of how your justification of "don't worry; once you've been exposed to it long enough, you won't notice anymore" can be used to legitimize just about anything.

You have to admit it was a pretty silly thing to say, no?

[KrazyHorse]

No it wasn't. There's no inherent harm in individual words. There may be in actions. To equate the two is ridiculous.

[Winston]

Well, I respectfully disagree. If anyone can come up with a real reason why people shouldn't be offended by inherently offensive words, I'm all ears.

Try to respect the position of others who would rather see the language toned down a bit, in this case DarkCloud.

Saying things like "Ah, you'll get used to it" doesn't really cut it...

[KrazyHorse]

Why are the words inherently offensive? I'm inherently offended by very few words, and none of them are colloquialisms for bodily functions. The words I am offended by are those such as: ni**er, w*p, k*ke, fa**ot, etc. These are offensive to me because of the possible inference by the person using them that the group in question is inferior. None of these words are banned, but something like *sshole is? I'm not in favour of the words which offend me being banned, though. If somebody comes up with a legitimate reason to use them, then it's fine with me.

Somebody recently got banned for telling paiktis that he (the soon-to-be-banned poster) would have forcible oral sex with paiktis (in a slightly cruder way than this). I'm in full support of the banning, because the meaning of what the person posted was clear, even if half of his words were blanked out.

[Loud Medicine]

Originally posted by DanQ
If you find a thread that you find particular offensive, email us and we will look into it privately.

Originally posted by MarkG2:
it probably didnt pass the "doestheposterhavearealproblemorishejustplayingsil lygames" filter....

[Provost Harrison]

You can gain tolerance to the sight of anything Winston, including starvation and poverty. That is still not a moral justification for them.

[MarkG]

LM, a great man that we both know, once posted about the greatness of not using smilies when you're joking, in order to not ruin the joke. I guess he was wrong after all. Not using smilies might lead people to take your joke seriously....

[Rasputin]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


It's only been used oh, a thousand times or so. If you want to use it in some context or another, feel free. You certainly won't be banned for it.

Wow shows how time shave changed, if i said that word when i was a kid i would have been belted for it, yet i probalby would have just been reprimanded for using the S word for crap...

Now in apolyton forums we can use the word w**ker with no penalty but we dare not mention the sh!t word.... Does this seem weird or what...

Society has definatly changed , for the worse IMHO.. but nothing we do will stop that, so why are we differentiating between these words, why is one word banned and not anothr, is it mark and dans call on what gets banned or is there a Dictionary of "bad words"

[MichaeltheGreat]

All of the rules are Mark and Dan's call - while they may ask us for our opinions, it's their site. Mostly (from what I've observed) whether a word is banned or not has a lot to do with how often it's used, and either how patently offensive it is, or how many complaints it triggers.

[Rasputin]

thankyou MTG ..

Markos / Dan can we please add the "W" Word to tthe banend list it upsets me to see it used !!!