To follow up on the above thought, I found it much more troubling that people DID NOT HIT the moderation button when certain people were being aggressive or crapping on each other in non-audio meltdown threads, but INCESSANTLY HIT Mike Moffat's stereotype comment on LGBT with macs. People will have to be responsible for reporting all types of bad behavior on the new site.

And you don't see these offensive posts as dumb? You set standards in audio that are not matched in behaviour in that case and we can all say exactly what we like as long as it's not dumb? Who decides what's not dumb?

No moderation is a cop out and weak. People should be able to communicate without the attitude or language shown, but there you are.

Rabbit have you checked out the other audio threads on this site?  Most of them don't even come close to the hypothetical situations that people are talking about in this thread.  There are some non-audio sections where people talk about food, politics, whatever, and that can degenerate into less than civil discourse, but those areas are contained.

My point is that when someone indignantly and suggestively asks "AND WHO DECIDES WHAT IS RUDE?" or "AND WHO DECIDES WHAT IS PC?" etc you dont necessarily have to shy away from answering simply: 'Me.' (or a mod of my chosing). Its your work, your house, your rules.



PS: I personally do admittedly tend to cuss a lot, use a lot of foul language and tendentially offensive or insulting language. In general I try not to use language that is discriminatory towards whole groups - especially not if they face actual real-life discrimination. So I'll often say 'you retard' with the implicit knowledge that the recipient and other readers would understand this as a generic insult, totally unrelated to people with neurological problems. The same goes for 'SOB' and a myriad of other generic cusswords. However I wont say 'you dirty beaneater' to a mexican or 'you abomination before god' to a homosexual: thats obviously a very targeted insult relating to real-life discrimination that people experience in society. The recipient of 'you retard' can get mad at me and respond in kind; the 'dirty beaneater' would recognize in my attack not an individual insult but an instance of a broader form of discrimination he or people he knows are suffering from. Obviously there are borderline cases: 'Fag' or 'gay' have for a lot of people become generic insults over the last decades. I too used the words in that sense as insults in everyday speech even though I fully support LGBT rights. Then I grew the fuck up and deliberately deleted those words from my 'generic insults'-vocabulary. It took some time, a few weeks, hell very rarely one might still slip out today, but I'm about 99% discrimination free But I do understand if some people havent gone through that realization yet, so I certainly would not report someone for using 'gay' as a generic insult - say towards a piece of equipment or what have you. I would however report it if I felt that it was in fact used not as a generic but as a targeted insult, coming from a place of hatred and discrimination. Context matters here. Whatever, blabla, who cares what I think.

hello,

at this juncture i'm just glad i missed the shoutbox meltdown.

believe it or not it is possible to disagree without making personal attacks.

at least i hope so.

Does me calling Los Angeles "El Lay" offend people? Just asking.