Should a new rule be proposed banning the use of racial slurs?

[Legion]

that is business, not ideaological submission to PC. I think. I cannot speak further lest I find myself under the mighty damming powers of the ruler of the realm of JPP.

[Life is Golden]

I respect your opinion.

As you may know, there are already limits on the speech allowed by the owner of this forum.

Since it is privately-owned, and since the government is not trying to legislate against any enumerated rights here, there is no First Amendment question involved.

What I propose is that the membership comment and vote on extending the existing prohibition in an objective manner to punish the use of specific racial slurs.

If you think that makes you less free, OK. If you want to have the option to use racial slurs, nothing is stopping you.

The limits on speech here are little to none.

If there is something I don't want to read, I scroll past it. Easy peasy. I don't need another adult to protect my eyes from reading something I don't like by removing a little box of text from my screen.

[Legion]

The limits on speech here are little to none. If there is something I don't want to read, I scroll past it. Easy peasy. I don't need another adult to protect my eyes from reading something I don't like by removing a little box of text from my screen.

OK. Your opinion is valid, and I respect it.

[USFREEDOM911]

If the proposed rule lists specific racial slurs that aren't allowed, it's objective.

The determination of what constitutes a breach of Rule 12b is subjective.

No; because Rule 12b lays out specifically what violating the rule is.

Who or what determines a racial slur?
cracker?
ole fay?
redneck?
etc.

[USFREEDOM911]

Plenty of people manage to survive here without calling other posters pedophiles. If that prohibition can be enforced, so can others.

I imagine that a sliding scale of punishment could be put in place by the Moderation team for people who use specific racial slurs.

For example, a ban of 1 week could be imposed for a first offense, 2 weeks for a second, and so on.

Once again, what is the guide line for a racial slur?

[USFREEDOM911]

I would miss being able to say wops and krauts.

There you go.

Are the words wops and krauts considered racist; because depending on who says it and who it's said to, it might be considered so.

What about calling someone a Nazi?

[USFREEDOM911]

Those aren't "racial" slurs, are they?

Aren't they / can't they be?

I find calling someone a racist, with on proof, pretty racist.

[USFREEDOM911]

I respect your opinion.

You may not know this, but using racial slurs is already prohibited by Rule 15 if such slurs are used in a thread title or user name.

15. No posting racial slurs of any kind in thread titles, it will result in the title being changed and may result in a ban for repeat offenders.

I am gauging interest in extending that rule to include post content, with a specific list of prohibited terms.

The use of slurs implying or stating that other posters are pedophiles is already a bannable offense, and the determination of what constitutes an "implication" is somewhat subjective.

What I am soliciting opinions on is different. I would like to know if the forum members would support a very specific, objective list of racial slurs. There would be complete objectivity. Either someone used one the the listed slurs or they didn't.

This was placed into affect; because of NSFW.
While someone can't really escape reading or having a thread title up on their screen, there decision to open the thread is a personal decision.

[USFREEDOM911]

Very relevant, good point. That being said, it is possible to be racist -- or to discuss racism -- without the constant use of the n-word that some here seem incapable of posting without. Some of the most racist ppl here manage to let their white sheets show w/o using direct slurs. Check out the winner here.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...ighlight=bigot

Are you now of the opinion that when a song contains a specific word, that the song should be considered racist?

[Legion]

No; because Rule 12b lays out specifically what violating the rule is.

I already stated that the list of racial slurs should be specific, in my view.

If the proposed rule lists specific racial slurs that aren't allowed, it's objective. The determination of what constitutes a breach of Rule 12b is subjective.

That way, if a racial slur is on the list and gets used, there's no wiggle room. It's completely objective.

Who or what determines a racial slur?

I addressed that question already, too.

I don't know. Unless Damocles agrees to move forward, there's no point in putting a list together. I'd hope he would solicit suggestions from all of us and out it to a vote. My choices may not be the same as other people's anyway.

[Legion]

This was placed into effect because of NSFW. While someone can't really escape reading or having a thread title up on their screen, their decision to open the thread is a personal decision.

I was under the impression that it was to avoid racial slurs appearing on the JPP Twitter feed.

[USFREEDOM911]

I already stated that the list of racial slurs should be specific, in my view.



That way, if a racial slur is on the list and gets used, there's no wiggle room. It's completely objective.



I addressed that question already, too.

And who is the almighty decision maker that formulates this list?
What if the list maker decides that certain words aren't racist?
Who holds the list maker responsible?

[iewitness]

is this about that scary "N" word? ooooh. it is very scary. ooooooh.

[Legion]

I find calling someone a racist, with on proof, pretty racist.

It's offensive and dishonest, but is it a racial slur?

[USFREEDOM911]

It's offensive and dishonest, but is it a racial slur?

Doesn't that depend on the reason one person has used it and what the one it's directed to thinks it meant.

You're trying to regulate free speech, just to avoid offending someone.

No one has the right to NOT BE offended.

And yes, I find the accusation to be very racist and based only on racism of the accuser.