This is G o o g l e's cache of http://www.mooglemb.com/printview.php?t=12745&start=0&sid=de4f544e2223dbf466303e85305376fc as retrieved on Mar 8, 2005 14:18:12 GMT.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.
This cached page may reference images which are no longer available. Click here for the cached text only.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:IWEjgsz_z2EJ:www.mooglemb.com/printview.php%3Ft%3D12745%26start%3D0%26sid%3Dde4f544e2223dbf466303e85305376fc+site:mooglemb.com+topic&hl=en&ie=UTF-8


Google is not affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.
These search terms have been highlighted: topic 

MoogleMB.com :: View topic - Democracy
MoogleMB.com

General Discussion - Democracy

Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:17 am
Post subject: Democracy
A Completely Serious And Entirely Non-Confrontational Query/Suggestion Regarding the Moderation and Running of the #SRB2 IRC Channel

Hi, guys. You might recognise me from #srb2, where I hang around quite a lot on account of quite liking most of the people in there and generally getting into amusing scrapes involving Blaze and his many curious phobias. I understand people react badly to turning up on a forum and saying this, but: I just got banned from the channel for asking why we ban people for swearing.

I did not swear myself (and never do on account of it being against the rules). Someone else swore and got kicked-banned for it. I asked why we care so much, considering that all of the people who frequent #srb2 are all either teenagers or adults, understand what a swearword is and are usually able to keep themselves from imploding on the spot whenever they hear someone swear on TV, and, in most cases, swear 'like a gay sailor' outside of the chat room itself. I have asked this question before but have never, ever gotten a genuine response to it. Apparently discussing the rules in the channel is completely against the law now because I got banned for it.

I'm not too concerned about being banned. I'll get over it. But what I honestly, honestly, honestly want to know is: why is swearing disallowed? And, if I am able to demonstrate why this is stupid, is there any way the rules could be reconsidered? Above all else, why is it impossible to even question them in the channel without being punished for it?

What I'm asking here is an honest response using any kind of rational, reasoned logic to explain itself. You may reply that, if I don't like the rules, I don't have to stay in the chatroom; but a) I did not break any of the rules this time and b) of course I can leave, but I like talking to people so it's in my interest to try and make it easier for myself (and others). I simply think it'd be rather cute if we could actually discuss the rules we all have to exist under in order to talk to each other, without the lingering threat of being penalised for it. Please don't ban me.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:23 am
Post subject:
Since I barely go into the IRC of #srb2, or am part of that decision really. I'll give my opinion on it.

I believe swearing should be allowed, but definitely not racial terms, definitely. Swearing is part of expressing feelings and fun, overly swearing is just dumb. But yes, I agree swearing should be allowed to certain extent.
Masaki - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:24 am
Post subject:
I'd quite like to know too. I can understand supporting the rules and all, but I can't see why this rule is in place. Who is seriously, <b>honestly</b> offended by swearing?
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:26 am
Post subject:
'I believe swearing should be allowed, but definitely not racial terms, definitely. Swearing is part of expressing feelings and fun, overly swearing is just dumb. But yes, I agree swearing should be allowed to certain extent.'

Yeah, there's a difference between being an outright offensive twit and harmless foul-mouthery.
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:46 am
Post subject:
"Wow, this Arguement always goes nowhere! I was given fair warning by a #srb2 operator to drop the arguement, and when I didn't, he banned me, just like he said. I know, I'll take the arguement somewhere else!"

Good Job, Pop.

Edit: For those wanting a log of the event:

Code:
<Tell> try having a 2 day hangover. After all the fucking breezers, I got a toothache, so I cant let anything hit my front tooth. i.e: No eating at all for 2 days
<Masaki> Extras..I don't know! I'll tell you later!
*** BlazeHedgehog sets mode: +b *!*@193.120.71.203
*** Tell was kicked by BlazeHedgehog ([Cuss-B-Gone v3.0]-[ "JOKE IS YOU". Do Not Cuss. 2 minute ban.])
<Masaki> good god that boy doesn't learn
<Mystic> owned
<BlazeHedgehog> Eh, it's only his second offense :P
<Popcorn> For God's sake, who cares anyway.
<BlazeHedgehog> I do, and I have the powar
<BlazeHedgehog> END
<Mystic> Blaze = win
<Popcorn> But you swear all the time.
<Masaki> he swears like a sailor!
<Masaki> a big, gay, sweary sailor.
*** BlazeHedgehog sets mode: -b *!*@193.120.71.203
*** Tell (Cino@193.120.71.203) has joined #srb2
<Mystic> Popcorn, we have had this argument 9 million times before, and the answer is always the same
<Mystic> so don't even start it today, or I'll just ban you without even giving a thought to it
<Popcorn> But the answer sucks and is a completely lame excuse for any kind of rational logic.
<Masaki> silly jamesykins.
<Masaki> "because I said so" is tried and tested parent logic
*** ChanServ sets mode: +b Popcorn!*@*
*** Popcorn was kicked by ChanServ (And we care why?)
<Neb> Rise up against your cap-oh, never mind!
<Mystic> I gave him ample warning for that...
<Mystic> The thing that really amuses me about that one is that it's not like it's an argument that ever actually goes anywhere
<BlazeHedgehog> Indeed
<BlazeHedgehog> It comes down to "Because I said so" "But that's stupid. Why?" "Because I said so"
<BlazeHedgehog> (Etc)
<Mystic> yep
<Mystic> Since no one making that argument ever would understand the actual reasoning behind it
<Ice_Dragon> besides, there are plenty of fun cuss words we can use other than those two
<Ice_Dragon> like cock and cunt and ass and bitch and damn
<Ice_Dragon> and my personal favorite
<Ice_Dragon> crap
<Mystic> <Popcorn> But that's full of s...er...crap </Popcorn>
<Ice_Dragon> crap crap crappity crap crap
<Masaki> I like visiting b3ta. It teaches me to swear in inventive ways.

Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:49 am
Post subject:
So basically there is no rational answer, then.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:53 am
Post subject:
<BlazeHedgehog> It comes down to "Because I said so" "But that's stupid. Why?" "Because I said so"
<BlazeHedgehog> (Etc)

And yet you are incapable of seeing the lunacy of this situation?
Mystic - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:54 am
Post subject:
Okay, I'm so damned tired of this I'll give you the REAL answer.

The REAL, honest to god, absolute answer of why you're not allowed to use a whole TWO words in #srb2 is "Because we said so." If you don't like that, you can kiss my ass, because that's the best answer you're going to get.

If you can't adjust your vocabulary because you can't use a whole TWO words in the English language, then I utterly pity you, and I suggest you leave. The main reason we don't allow cussing is because we don't WANT to allow cussing.

So I quote the final rule of #srb2:
7. The operators are charged with maintaining order in the channel using their own discretion. They are granted authority to do whatever they feel is necessary to accomplish this. If you don't like it, don't come back...
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:54 am
Post subject:
The rational answer is:

It's our Channel, we're ops, and we want it that way. We're tried of having an arguement that ends in that very saying. We've said it many times: If you do not agree with the rules nothing is forcing you to stay in our channel.

That's the end of the arguement, and always is.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:56 am
Post subject:
And you don't think this might be a particularly petty way of running a channel?

Edit: Besides, that's not the point. I'm asking if there's any way the rules might be revised, or be up for discussion.
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:58 am
Post subject:
Does it really matter? We've got people coming there whom abide by the rules, and if they don't, we have a very generous system for punishment that slowly gets harsher and harsher upon repeated offenses.

It works out nicely, really.
Mystic - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:59 am
Post subject:
And you keep coming back for some reason I cannot comprehend. If you hate us that much, go the hell away and leave the server slot for someone with an open mind.

We like the way the channel is run, and as I said, if you don't like it, consult your closest mirror, because that's the only person you'll find who cares.
Cinossu - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:00 am
Post subject:
Y'know, while I will comply with the rule (although when Blaze isn't in I often don't ;P) I do see Pop's side of things. Most of us in #srb2 are mature enough not to swear left, right and centre, and those that do, well, shouldn't have 'net access.

But, isn't it already a bit late to kick someone for swearing? They've already sworn, everyone has seen it, big deal. If anything, a kick for it makes it stand out more, creating the exact opposite effect of what you actually want. "HAY GUYS SOMEONE SWORE LETS MAKE IT STAND OUT A MILE!!!1!!11" etc.

Unless of course the real reason is that you just want to show off your fancy mIRC scripts. ;P
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:02 am
Post subject:
"And you keep coming back for some reason I cannot comprehend. If you hate us that much, go the hell away and leave the server slot for someone with an open mind."

I like the channel though: that's why I'm asking for it to be improved. I don't see how banning me helps anything at all. If you don't want to discuss it with me, ignore me. Jesus.
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:02 am
Post subject:
Quote:
Edit: Besides, that's not the point. I'm asking if there's any way the rules might be revised, or be up for discussion.


Never have been when you asked previous times. Why would they be, now? Because of persistance? Again, Mystic gave you a warning that you did not heed.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:05 am
Post subject:
"Again, Mystic gave you a warning that you did not heed."

If you want the honest truth, I was in the middle of typing "I don't see how banning me will help, tbh, but fine, whatever" when I got kick/banned. The line "But the answer sucks" (which got me kicked) was in response to Mystic saying "The answer is always the same". Mystic threatened to ban me after started to type that.

Besides, I really wasn't expecting you two to be this hopelessly irrational. If you don't want to discuss it, don't discuss it; don't draw attention to it by using force.
Smidge204 - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:07 am
Post subject:
Here's a suggestion... Grow up and learn to think before you talk.

Hell, it's not even talking, it's typing. It's not like you can't take an extra half second to read what you just typed.

It is not entirely unreasonable that you not say the TWO words that are on the list. Two words. Out of some three hundred thousand in the english language. Is your vocabulary so small that asking you not to use two of them a serious threat to your ability to express yourself?

#srb2 has a no swear rule. Life in general has rules. Perhaps you should learn to cope with that.
=Smidge=
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:08 am
Post subject:
You don't seem to understand this, Pop. We didn't want you to discuss it in the channel. We told you not to discuss it in the channel. That doesn't mean, we, the operators are going to ignore you - if we ignore you, we aren't doing our jobs, see?
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:10 am
Post subject:
I don't f*cking swear that much, though. My issue with this is the blatant unfairness of the rule, not that it prevents me from using my very favouritest two words in the English language. It's not like I ever swear in the chat anyway: I comply with the rules. It's just that apparently asking why they're there is against the rules, too.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:11 am
Post subject:
Quote:
You don't seem to understand this, Pop. We didn't want you to discuss it in the channel. We told you not to discuss it in the channel. That doesn't mean, we, the operators are going to ignore you - if we ignore you, we aren't doing our jobs, see?


Did banning me solve anything?
Mystic - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:13 am
Post subject:
Popcorn, we wouldn't be as insanely irrational if you weren't. You have brought this same discussion up time and time again, and we've always given the same answer. "No."

No matter how many times you bring this discussion up, you always get the same answer, and you always create a huge disturbance while doing so. I warned you before you did it, and then I banned you. It's just irritating that you keep bringing this up time after time after time, and never shut up about it.

And yes, your banning DID solve something. You see, if we never unban you, we won't ever have to hear this god damned discussion again. I'd say that's a perfect permanent solution to the problem.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:13 am
Post subject:
I think it would be more rational to say that if someone said a cuss word that would be ok. I mean, I go in there sometimes once in a great while, there's no one cussing in there, not just because of that rule that's in place. But because people know enough to not cuss left and right. People say a cuss word from time to time.

No one's going to just go in there and cuss their head off. Not letting one curse word slide is kind of lame. I mean ONE cuss word, and you get banned.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:14 am
Post subject:
Look, jesus, guys, at the end of the day if it means that much to you I won't ever bring it up ever again. I was deluded enough to believe that there might be a reasonable explanation for why you don't like swearing in the chat, which is what this post was trying to get at (as opposed to the argument it devolved into), but apparently there isn't one. I'm perfectly happy to never mention it again. Now can I come back in, please?
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:15 am
Post subject:
Quote:
You see, if we never unban you, we won't ever have to hear this god damned discussion again. I'd say that's a perfect permanent solution to the problem.


So why is me asking a question a problem?
Cinossu - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:15 am
Post subject:
actually, it's more of, first time 1 minute ban, then 2, then 4, then 8 etc
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:16 am
Post subject:
Quote:
Did banning me solve anything?


Actually, yes, after a brief discussion the topic was finally dropped and #srb2 went back to normal until I noticed you made a topic here about it.

Now you've dragged the arguement out and made an ass of yourself for two words on a subject that is not open to discussion.

Bravo!
Mystic - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:16 am
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
Quote:
You see, if we never unban you, we won't ever have to hear this god damned discussion again. I'd say that's a perfect permanent solution to the problem.


So why is me asking a question a problem?


Because the next damn HOUR is taken up by this kind of bull crap every time you do it.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:18 am
Post subject:
And if you guys didn't give a crap about such trivial nonsense in the first place, then it wouldn't be an issue, would it?
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:18 am
Post subject:
Basically what you are saying is Popcorn can't have a freedom of speach.
Cinossu - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:20 am
Post subject:
Y'know what I think would make it a little fairer? I know you op guys don't swear all the time, but I know Blaze's script ignores opped swears. If you add this in, and maybe an input script for you, Blaze, where if you swear you k/ban yourself? ;P

I know you guys can get around the bans in two seconds, but at least be fair and sit it out if you do use this idea and do swear.
JinnaiGuy - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:20 am
Post subject:
AreoZephin wrote:
Basically what you are saying is Popcorn can't have a freedom of speach.


No one ever said #srb2 was a democracy (topic title?) with no censorship. Not only are a couple words banned, but they also don't post hentai, warez, and stuff like that. It's not an open-speech platform. And questioning of rules SHOULD'VE gone directly into private discussion with an operator, since as they've mentioned it only causes termoil with a mass arguement of something that's not debateable but will get the whole channel riled up needlessly. It's not that difficult to see.
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:21 am
Post subject:
Quote:
Y'know what I think would make it a little fairer? I know you op guys don't swear all the time, but I know Blaze's script ignores opped swears. If you add this in, and maybe an input script for you, Blaze, where if you swear you k/ban yourself? ;P


I've avoided the script once in three years, and that was a few months ago, Cinos. I primarily made it ignore op swears so we could give examples on what words are considered offensive.

And Areo, seriously, dude, don't even start that sort of crap.
Mightfox - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:23 am
Post subject:
Blaze, if you can't bring up a good reason for enforcing the rule, maybe you should loosen it? It'd be okay if someone used those swears once or twice, but if they went on a field day with them, banned. Popcorn shouldn't be bringing this up as much as he expectedly is, though. Just wondering, Is there a word filter in mIRC?

Eh,i dont even go to the chat.

Annddd i'm off.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:24 am
Post subject:
Quote:
No one ever said #srb2 was a democracy with no censorship.


Absolutely. At the end of the day, the channel is run by guys who decide the rules for themselves. I absolutely respect that and think it's fine. I made the mistake of trying to get them to change the rules for (what everyone seems to agree) would be the better; what I really, really object to is getting banned for it, warning or no. (And I really don't think I was fairly warned, because I got kicked for saying something in reply to something else.)

I didn't mean to kick up so much of a fuss over this. But let me the hell back in. I promise I won't swear or anything. It's a shame if the ops in question still want to ignore the demand for the cuss-ban-lift, but what the hell...
Cinossu - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:24 am
Post subject:
How about, twice in 2 lines? so if you swear twice in 1 line, it works, if you swear once in 1 line, then the line you say has a swear (or inbetween 3, 4 or 5 lines) then it kick or bans you?
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:26 am
Post subject:
I think the answer is discretion. If someone is being blatantly offensive and awkward, deliberately, then they get a warning; if they ignore it repeatedly, ban 'em for a bit and let them cool off. Swearing doesn't have to be offensive. If someone strolls in and starts getting more pottymouthed than a Japanese scat movie, then, well, do your stuff.
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:28 am
Post subject:
Cinos wrote:
How about, twice in 2 lines? so if you swear twice in 1 line, it works, if you swear once in 1 line, then the line you say has a swear (or inbetween 3, 4 or 5 lines) then it kick or bans you?


BlazeHedgehog wrote:
Quote:
Edit: Besides, that's not the point. I'm asking if there's any way the rules might be revised, or be up for discussion.


Never have been when you asked previous times. Why would they be, now? Because of persistance? Again, Mystic gave you a warning that you did not heed.


It's all a matter of not being able to monitor the channel all the time. Some say we have way too many ops for a channel like #srb2 as it is, and even then, minus scripts, stuff still slips through.

Personally? I'd rather have the Scripts doing their job than me NOT doing my job just because I'm not looking at the channel.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:30 am
Post subject:
JinnaiGuy wrote:
AreoZephin wrote:
Basically what you are saying is Popcorn can't have a freedom of speach.


No one ever said #srb2 was a democracy (topic title?) with no censorship. Not only are a couple words banned, but they also don't post hentai, warez, and stuff like that. It's not an open-speech platform. And questioning of rules SHOULD'VE gone directly into private discussion with an operator, since as they've mentioned it only causes termoil with a mass arguement of something that's not debateable but will get the whole channel riled up needlessly. It's not that difficult to see.


XD

IT'S ONE CUSSWORD. AND SOMEONE WHO ASKED A QUESTION FOR GOD SAKES.
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:30 am
Post subject:
Kindly explain to me why the subject of this thread is "Democracy".

Anyway, it is the duty of an IRC channel operator to remove people who are repeatedly breaking rules or just being disruptive. Insisting that the ops type out the exact same arguments over and over again qualifies in my mind as "disruptive".

Incidentally, a message board administrator has a similar duty. Just a helpful hint.
Cinossu - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:31 am
Post subject:
BlazeHedgehog wrote:
Cinos wrote:
How about, twice in 2 lines? so if you swear twice in 1 line, it works, if you swear once in 1 line, then the line you say has a swear (or inbetween 3, 4 or 5 lines) then it kick or bans you?


BlazeHedgehog wrote:
Quote:
Edit: Besides, that's not the point. I'm asking if there's any way the rules might be revised, or be up for discussion.


Never have been when you asked previous times. Why would they be, now? Because of persistance? Again, Mystic gave you a warning that you did not heed.


It's all a matter of not being able to monitor the channel all the time. Some say we have way too many ops for a channel like #srb2 as it is, and even then, minus scripts, stuff still slips through.

Personally? I'd rather have the Scripts doing their job than me NOT doing my job just because I'm not looking at the channel.


eh, the idea I posted could easily be done in a script.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:32 am
Post subject:
Andrusi wrote:
who are repeatedly breaking rules

Mystic - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:33 am
Post subject:
Not when it disrupts the channel to this much of an extent, yes. Especially when he's brought this up many times before and we actually argued it out. Today, I decided I didn't want to have this stupid speech, and since the internet is not democracy and is a dictatorship, I am allowed to do it.

I don't understand why everyone seems to believe that the internet has "free speech". #srb2 is a dictatorship. Smidge controls the channel, and gives power to the heirarchy below him. No one was elected, no one has to answer to anyone but Smidge. That is how IRC channels work. Imagine how IRC would be like if it was a democracy...if someone was being a lamer, the ops in the channel would have to think and consider whether taking action would get them re-elected. Ops would have to sit in committee and discuss how to best deal with the guy spamming the channel with free porn for 3 weeks.

Reality check, people: The internet is NOT better off with a public voice on people in power. The public voice on the internet is the power to leave and go somewhere else, and create one's own community, with your own heirarchy and people in power. If you would like to create your own channel where you can say any word you like, go ahead and do so, nothing is stopping you.

Now I'm not saying that a questioning of the rules isn't good, I'm saying that useless questioning of the rules only causes trouble. You've done this time and time again, and we've always said that the rules there are not bendable. We've bent many of the other rules in the channel over the years. Under the original rules, you would probably have gotten banned for saying "bitch" or pretty much anything more offensive than "damn". However, that rules change was not started by the userbase, it was started by the administration. The current administration is pretty much in agreement that the rule on cursing should not be changed from where it is now, and this argument right here is a pretty good reason why. If the rules do need modification, you are not the person who needs to suggest it, because doing so publicly ALWAYS causes trouble.

Now would someone who controls this forum _please_ lock this topic. This argument is old, tired, and beaten into the ground.
NeroMan - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:34 am
Post subject:
Quote:
Just wondering, is there a word filter in mIRC?
To my understanding, not in the sense that you can have automatic word replacement.
As far as I care, chatrooms aren't politics. If you don't like a place's rules, well there's a lot of other places to hang out.

Or you can blame the server.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:34 am
Post subject:
Quote:
Kindly explain to me why the subject of this thread is "Democracy".


It was meant to be irony.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:34 am
Post subject:
But if it's freedom to make rules then there's freedom for speach.
Cinossu - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:36 am
Post subject:
There's a bit of a difference in one swear and someone swearing all over the place, posting porn links. o.O;
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:40 am
Post subject:
AreoZephin wrote:
But if it's freedom to make rules then there's freedom for speach.

You're doing the "huh?" thing again.
JinnaiGuy - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:45 am
Post subject:
Isn't what's happening here exactly what would happen in #srb2 had this discussion been allowed without Pop getting banned? ;P
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:47 am
Post subject:
Quote:
Now I'm not saying that a questioning of the rules isn't good, I'm saying that useless questioning of the rules only causes trouble. You've done this time and time again, and we've always said that the rules there are not bendable. We've bent many of the other rules in the channel over the years. Under the original rules, you would probably have gotten banned for saying "bitch" or pretty much anything more offensive than "damn". However, that rules change was not started by the userbase, it was started by the administration. The current administration is pretty much in agreement that the rule on cursing should not be changed from where it is now, and this argument right here is a pretty good reason why. If the rules do need modification, you are not the person who needs to suggest it, because doing so publicly ALWAYS causes trouble.


I understand that what goes under your totalitarian state is to go at your discretion, but all I did was ask you why you keep them as you are. If you can't see that changing the rules would make a lot of people happier, that's your problem-- there really is no reason why you shouldn't change them a little to suit what people here are politely requesting and even suggesting ways in which they might be usefully enforced. At the very least, could you not do a trial session to see how it goes? If it fails miserably, fine, consider me proven wrong; but in not considering it, you're missing the chance to improve the community. You mention how the rules on swearing have changed over the years, and presumably, since they haven't changed back, it's considered an improvement; we're all suggesting another one here. Once again, it's your call entirely on whether or not to consider trying it out, but if you don't then you'll be costing us all an opportunity to try something that might be better. And that'd be sad.

I understand completely what you're saying, it's just I think you're being *outstandingly* close-minded about it. Me questioning the rules in the channel does no-one any harm and banning me only wound me up. I wasn't intending on causing mischief or irritating anyone. My 'useless questioning of the rules' only 'causes trouble' when you deem my worthless rambling as something worth addressing. If you'd just ignored me, what's the worst that would have happened? I would have gone and made a goddamn sandwich. You're being petty. Lemme back in. I miss the love.
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:52 am
Post subject:
Quote:
I understand that what goes under your totalitarian state is to go at your discretion, but all I did was ask you why you keep them as you are


We keep them like they are because that's how we, the operators of the channel, want it :P
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:56 am
Post subject:
But you still haven't explained why, of course.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:02 am
Post subject:
Andrusi wrote:
AreoZephin wrote:
But if it's freedom to make rules then there's freedom for speach.

You're doing the "huh?" thing again.


If rules exist, freedom of speach will exist. If the rule of freedom of speach is not allowed, it can cause problems.
AKA - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:16 am
Post subject:
Holy shit.

I friggin 3 page arguement sprouts up overnight over 2 words? Insane.

And not a single female in the topic either. I think that's a record.
Smidge204 - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:30 am
Post subject:
About "Freedom of speech".

1) The existence of rules does not, in any sense, preclude the existence of freedoms. In fact just the opposite: Rules exists to eliminate freedoms, ideally to "level the playing field" though not always so.

2) "Freedom of speech" is not a rule. The phrase "If the rule of freedom of speech is not allowed" makes absolutely no sense.

3) "Freedom of speech" is about the protection of your privilege to express your opinions. This does not absolve you from being responsible for your actions. You may express any opinion you like, but you may not do so however you like.

For example, under the US Constitution the people have a right to assemble and protest anything. This does not mean riots are legal does it? You may protest but you must do so responsibly.

4) As stated in #3, "Freedoms" are privileges, not rights. You can argue as much as you like on that point, but the fact remains that if you abuse your "freedoms" -- anywhere in the world online or not -- your "freedoms" will be revoked.

5) As stated by several others, #srb2 is not a democracy. Even if #4 wasn't true in the general case, it is most certainly true there. If you act like a dick don't be surprised if you get treated like one in return.
=Smidge=
SuitCase - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:52 am
Post subject:
It's been a while since I used this word, but you guys are truly acting like total assholes. Not only do you continually ignore Popcorn's question but you're consistently smug about it (thinking there's some sort of humour in holding power over everyone, I suppose.) "Because we say so" is an obviously retarded and childish reason and you all know it.

I would have thought you'd at least be a bit more mature, Blaze and Smidge especially, but I guess when you put all that effort into a script and you've spent so much effort trying to deny even the slightest discussion of the change it must be hard. I have no real faith in the ridiculous and annoying rule being removed any time soon, but the srb2 mods have lost a lot of respect from me in general over this.. and it's such a stupid, silly little issue for you to get so hyped up about!

As for "it's not a democracy it's our channel!!" arguments.. #srb2 is entirely made by the participants, not the ability to +b someone. As mods, you owe it to the participants to regulate things in a way that makes us happy and eliminates annoyances, so yes, I do think you owe at least an explanation of your personal swearing vendettas beyond the apparent power tripping and general stubbornness. Otherwise you're just plain useless and blatantly abusing the power that has fallen into you lap during the slow evolution of #srb2 and there's clear reason for complaint like Popcorn's.
Yajirobe - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:59 am
Post subject:
i'm going to post in this topic before it's locked.






















*posts*
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:02 am
Post subject:
I wonder how Suitcase would explain me, since I have no power in #srb2 and therefore cannot possibly be on a power trip.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 11:05 am
Post subject:
Smidge204 wrote:
About "Freedom of speech".

1) The existence of rules does not, in any sense, preclude the existence of freedoms. In fact just the opposite: Rules exists to eliminate freedoms, ideally to "level the playing field" though not always so.

2) "Freedom of speech" is not a rule. The phrase "If the rule of freedom of speech is not allowed" makes absolutely no sense.

3) "Freedom of speech" is about the protection of your privilege to express your opinions. This does not absolve you from being responsible for your actions. You may express any opinion you like, but you may not do so however you like.

For example, under the US Constitution the people have a right to assemble and protest anything. This does not mean riots are legal does it? You may protest but you must do so responsibly.

4) As stated in #3, "Freedoms" are privileges, not rights. You can argue as much as you like on that point, but the fact remains that if you abuse your "freedoms" -- anywhere in the world online or not -- your "freedoms" will be revoked.

5) As stated by several others, #srb2 is not a democracy. Even if #4 wasn't true in the general case, it is most certainly true there. If you act like a dick don't be surprised if you get treated like one in return.
=Smidge=


AND HOW DID THAT PRIVILEDGE EXIST?

PEOPLE. FOUGHT. FOR. IT. People argued, people fought, people discussed. For Popcorn to come in here and discuss it because he couldn't do so in the channel, for someone to say he can't discuss it is absolutely un cival bullshit.

He wanted to know why he got banned for asking the question. And basically your answers were "it wasn't allowed to discuss it."

That is why this is here now. He brought it here because he was banned about discussing it. It was NOT childish or breaking any rule in that chat room on HIS part, but on the part of the operators who carried out the banning for absolutely no reason

What is the point of a discussion board? To discuss things. If this topic were locked without the apology and correction of this mis understanding, then that would be in vain. That would basically prove the point of why freedom of speach exists, because people argueing over something they cannot execpt and it carries this far. One cuss word, someone asked a question, he got banned.

That is bullshit.
Cinossu - Tue Sep 07, 2004 11:20 am
Post subject:
Just one thing about "if you don't like it go somewhere else", where else is there to go? A place as active as #srb2 where all the people we like to chat are? I don't like the rule, but I abide by it purely because I enjoy blabbing in #srb2.
CrazyMrLeo - Tue Sep 07, 2004 11:42 am
Post subject:
Quote:
What is the point of a discussion board? To discuss things.


The point of THIS discussion board is to discuss things in a safe and controlled manner. We have a set of rules, laws if you will, that specifically deal with what you can and can not say.

On this message board, you are entitled to an opinion and given the privledge of speech, however, that comes at a price. You are not allowed to flame, you are not allowed to spam, you are not allowed to hack, you are not allowed to advertise, and it is your responsibility to put things in the proper forum.

We can't have freedom of speech. That would negate every single one of those rules, and the forum would no longer be fun or fair. You agreed to the rules when you started posting here, and if you can't follow them, your privledge of speech has to be revoked. That's how it works.

I'm sure the internet historians of the future will look back upon this system as repressive and feudal, but I personally think that we're redeemed by the fact that we're doing this in your best interests, you participate willingly, and we're very nice about it. If you want freedom of speech, go off and start a forum without mods. Start an internet democracy with direct elections if you like, or even a parliamentary system. No one's stopping you, and you're not even going to have to fight a revolutionary war this time.

Now, with all that said, and with my opinion clearly stated, I have the following things to say to the ops of #srb2.

Banning people for swearing may be excessive, but that's your option to exercise as you will. However, banning people for talking about the rules? That's just a straight up jackass thing to do. I may not like all of Kulock's decisions, but at least I feel comfortable talking to him about them without fear of losing my mod powers or getting banned. And when I DO talk to him, you can damn well bet that his answer is better than "Because I said so"
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 12:09 pm
Post subject:
Thanks for the support everyone. Hugs for all.

I know this has been attempted before, but I'm trying to solve the problem of where to go if we 'don't like the rules of #srb2' by setting up another channel. This is #ghz -- on esper, same as #srb2-- and will hopefully act as the official IRC channel of the Green Hill Zone website. If you're interested, hop in.
Smidge204 - Tue Sep 07, 2004 12:26 pm
Post subject:
As I preview this, I already see that my post will be covering some of the same ground as recent posts. So be it... this post is mostly directed towards AreoZephin anyway.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't recall ever saying he couldn't discuss it. I said that he was expected to conduct himself appropriately, which apparently Mystic did not think he was. You might want to get your inflated head out of your self-righteous ass for a minute, especially when taking sides on an issue you have virtually no knowledge of.

I assume you are making some kind of reference to the American Revolution. Even if you aren't we can still sue that as an example....

People didn't fight for the "privilege" of "freedom". They agreed on it. They said "Hey, the current system sucks. Let's make up a better one." Then they fought to break control of the existing system to replace it with their own. But they did not "fight for their freedoms." They fought to break free of the system they already had, which just happened to include a set of rules to preserve certain privileges that the existing system didn't have.

Consider the Bolshevik Revolution... same exact thing, the people fought to break the current system and replace it with their own... which was actually LESS "free" than before. It was a matter of choice.

But back to the real issue here.

The issue of the swear rule has been discussed, without exaggeration, dozens upon dozens of times. The result is always the same: "Do now swear, that is the rule. If you do not like the rule then leave." The aftermath is also always the same: Nobody leaves (at least for any length of time). This becomes increasingly confusing when you really stop and ask yourself: "Is not being able to say two four-letter words really a huge insult to my personal freedom?" This isn't like you're not allowed to talk about a certain war, or political systems, or certain religions. In some places that rally can be considered a crime worthy of torture and execution.

This is two words.

That being said, in order to save everyone a good hour or so of arguing which we all know would lead to nothing, Mystic asked Popcorn not to start the argument. Popcorn started the argument anyway. Popcorn was then banned for doing what an op explicitly asked him not to do.

If you would like to "replace" the system, you are free to go create your own channel. This is exactly why #srb2fun and #lemonade (and now #ghz it seems) came into existence. (And if you argue that there is no place else to go because teh alternatives are not active enough, perhaps that says something about the alternatives... or at least the people who founded the place.)

So now, instead of wasting an hour or son in a chatroom, he is doing it here because nobody in #srb2 cares to listen to it all again. He has a very old and tired axe to grind and is looking for a new audience who hasn't heard it before.

It's so quite simple I don't understand why some people can't grasp the concept: As a group, there are rules of conduct. These rules are agreed upon by pretty much everyone in the group right from day 1. This is called a "social contract". If you want to be part of the group you must abide by these rules. If you do not, then expect to be punished.

This applies to any group: clubs, townships, countries, internet chatrooms and forums, even your own household. When you become part of the group you must accept the rules of the group. If you don't want to accept them then go find a different place.

And, unlike a country, the staff of #srb2 really doesn't give a hill of beans if you leave or not, so no revolution is required.
=Smidge=
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 1:52 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
"Is not being able to say two four-letter words really a huge insult to my personal freedom?"


Not really, no. There are countless 'freedoms' the individual has to give up in order to co-exist with anyone at all; this is just an inane, unecessary, banal one; a rule with-- as the ops of the channel have demonstrated-- absolutely no grounding in reason or logic. You can say the inability to use two words in the chatroom is trivial, but that's not what this about; what's really trivial is why the words should be banned at all, and that the ops take such care in preventing their use. This practice is what I was questioning, and apparently in such an awful, damaging way that I was banned for it.

Quote:
That being said, in order to save everyone a good hour or so of arguing which we all know would lead to nothing, Mystic asked Popcorn not to start the argument. Popcorn started the argument anyway. Popcorn was then banned for doing what an op explicitly asked him not to do.


I 'started the argument' before reading this threat-- the line I typed out that got me banned was in address to something else Mystic said immediately before making the threat. I have explained this before and if you'd care to check the log you'd see it checks out.

Nonetheless, banning me for raising it was incredibly petty thing to do in the first place; and if you really want to prevent this apparently age-old argument from coming up again, treat the channel participants as something more than idiot children and give them real, understandable reasons for your rules. Then people such as myself will stop questioning them; any mature, rational person will happily comply to a rule that benefits not only themselves, but the community as a whole. The fact that you have no explanation for why the rule is in place demonstrates its meaninglessness, its uselessness, its blatant lunacy. What I mainly object to is not the fact that I'm unable to use the words 'fuck' or 'shit' in the channel (and is anyone here really offended at me saying them in this forum?), but that a lot of otherwise decent people get punished for it. I never, ever swear in the channel myself, and, uh, I hate to break this to Mystic, but they're not 'my two favourite words'. Those words are 'conglomerate' and 'instigate': take those away from me and I really would be upset.

Quote:
If you would like to "replace" the system, you are free to go create your own channel. This is exactly why #srb2fun and #lemonade (and now #ghz it seems) came into existence. (And if you argue that there is no place else to go because teh alternatives are not active enough, perhaps that says something about the alternatives... or at least the people who founded the place.)


The reason these places fail is that the people it requires the attendence of to exist already have their needs met, in the form of #srb2. #srb2 met a present demand for an IRC channel and it is, by and large, a good channel. Setting up a second channel for those dissatisfied with some of #srb2's more idiotic rules seems in theory to be a good idea, but, unfortunately, the masses will not leave #srb2 because they do not want to leave badly enough. This says something for #srb2's quality as a channel, and for the strength of the community who visit it; it does not say anything about the quality of its competitor channels.

But #srb2 has its problems, as this thread has demonstrated: people are not happy with the current rule system. The problem isn't severe enough to warrant a complete abandonment of the channel, and so the 'alternative' channels set up around it don't get to pick up many deserters. I think I can honestly assure you, however, that if the rules in #srb2 were changed to allow swearing (and it really is a completely ridiculous, trivial thing to have a rule about) than most of the community would be happier. I fail to understand why the operators here don't get this; the demand for some small change is there, and in your hands is the ability to fulfil it. Fulfil it, and everyone wins.

Quote:
So now, instead of wasting an hour or son in a chatroom, he is doing it here because nobody in #srb2 cares to listen to it all again. He has a very old and tired axe to grind and is looking for a new audience who hasn't heard it before.


I'm afraid I'm only looking for an audience who will not immediately and quite unexpectantly crucify me. At the very least you could admit my exile was a trifle misguided.

Quote:

And, unlike a country, the staff of #srb2 really doesn't give a hill of beans if you leave or not, so no revolution is required.


Not even one bean? This is not meant to be a challenge, a personal insult, an organised uprising; it was Mystic who overreacted to my question, not I who overreacted to your goddamn swearing rule. It's a real shame that the dictators involved here don't seem to want to listen to any of the honest and entirely reasonable requests of their people, because anyone in any kind of power should, at least, care a bit about it. We're just asking a favour, and you haven't given any reason as to why you can't fulfil it.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 2:37 pm
Post subject:
CrazyMrLeo wrote:

On this message board, you are entitled to an opinion and given the privledge of speech, however, that comes at a price. You are not allowed to flame, you are not allowed to spam, you are not allowed to hack, you are not allowed to advertise, and it is your responsibility to put things in the proper forum.


Yes. Because of those rules that are GOOD rules, that is very likely to happen and everyone has most likely abided them as far as I can see. But there are certian rules that need to be RE MODIFIED such as what has to do with this thread.

No banning when asking a fscking question.
And don't be overly extensive about a curse word someone says.
H Hog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 2:42 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
and if you really want to prevent this apparently age-old argument from coming up again, treat the channel participants as something more than idiot children


You'll have to remember that some are. ;P

Quote:
What I mainly object to is not the fact that I'm unable to use the words 'fuck' or 'shit' in the channel (and is anyone here really offended at me saying them in this forum?)


When used in moderation, it's okay - we prefer alternative ways to vent your anger, though.
Make an attempt to hold back when you can, but if extreme frustration needs to be vented and the only way to satiate yourself is by swearing your head off on a messageboard....
....you'd be better off visiting Newgrounds or Sonic Cult or something. ;D

Aside from that, I've managed myself perfectly fine using alternate words, it's really not that difficult to say "Funk" instead of "Fuck", or "Crap" instead of "Shit".
It's not a matter of freedom; nor is it a matter of why the rule is there.
You want a reason? Fine, here's one - it's generally considered rude to swear, be it in a chatroom, a forum, or real life.

Furthermore, what WE think of it is beside the point - #SRB2 is not an extention of the Moogle Cavern, despite popular assumption.
The chatroom may have different rules then we maintain in here.


Note: I'm not taking sides for anyone at this point, I'm merely stating facts and personal thoughts on the matter as a whole.
Smidge204 - Tue Sep 07, 2004 2:49 pm
Post subject:
I do not speak for the other ops when I say this, but if you want a reason why I support the banning of those words, then here it is:

I consider those words to be impolite and immature, and do not lend themselves to a productive and civil discussion. By banning the use of those words it makes it harder for a discussion to degenerate into a flamewar because, quite simply, the kinds of people who would start senseless flaming are (generally) not creative enough to do so without using those words.

Also, I feel it helps promote a slightly less casual thought process without destroying casual conversation at the same time. It's never a bad thing if you have to think about what you're going to say instead of barfing out whatever floats through your head.

At least that's my position on it, anyway.

For example, can you give me one solid reason, like I have above, for NOT banning those words? A real reason, not the "It's so idiotic" and "Who cares? What's the point?" stuff you've been dishing out, because that's just as empty as "Because we said so." So far nobody has been able to get past "everyone curses so it's not really a bad word anymore" or the "you're an oversensitive crybaby if it offends you" levels, which are equally empty.

So please, let me hear you reasonable argument for why swear words should be allowed. I'm sure I'll find it entertaining.
=Smidge=
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 2:49 pm
Post subject:
AreoZephin wrote:
No banning when asking a fscking question.

However, banning when you disobey a direct order from an admin, which is what Popcorn did.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 2:51 pm
Post subject:
I'm going to look at it again.

Look with me.

Quote:
Popcorn> For God's sake, who cares anyway.
<BlazeHedgehog> I do, and I have the powar
<BlazeHedgehog> END
<Mystic> Blaze = win
<Popcorn> But you swear all the time.
<Masaki> he swears like a sailor!
<Masaki> a big, gay, sweary sailor.


Popcorn asked a question.
People boasting about power, and feeding it.
Popcorn gives an example.
The word gay is used in a bashing term.
Popcorn GETS BANNED for...

So I'm missing a lot right?

Andrusi wrote:
AreoZephin wrote:
No banning when asking a fscking question.

However, banning when you disobey a direct order from an admin, which is what Popcorn did.


And so if an admin asks you not to express your opinion, you get banned. Or if an admin asks you not to "/laugh" and you do "/laugh", you get banned.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 3:28 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
I do not speak for the other ops when I say this, but if you want a reason why I support the banning of those words, then here it is:


Finally-- some mature discussion!

Quote:
I consider those words to be impolite and immature, and do not lend themselves to a productive and civil discussion.


Well, here's the first nonsensical thing in your argument. Why do you consider them to be 'impolite and immature'? They're just words-- words we give meaning and attributes to ourselves. They contain no objective value, no intrinsic property other than the properties we ourselves instil in them. The word 'fuck' has only come to be 'offensive' because we choose to find it offensive; if we decided the same of the word 'shoe' or 'hedgehog', they'd be similarly unacceptable. The 'immature' properties of these words are completely intangible, non-existent-- if you get over them, then they're not a problem anymore. They're just words like shoe or hedgehog. As such, swear words have come to be treated by those who don't explode upon exposure as syntactical extremeties: a means of emphasising specific points, demonstrating your passion emphatically, or whatever. You could argue that there are other words that do the same job-- to which my response is, why not ban them? It makes just as much sense.

Quote:
By banning the use of those words it makes it harder for a discussion to degenerate into a flamewar because, quite simply, the kinds of people who would start senseless flaming are (generally) not creative enough to do so without using those words.


Don't quite get your point here-- flamers are prevented from flaming because they only know two words in the whole world? Even if allowing people to swear somehow magically sends flamewars skyrocketing, offenders can be dealt with at the op's discretion. There's no need to blanket everyone at most peoples' expense.

Quote:
Also, I feel it helps promote a slightly less casual thought process without destroying casual conversation at the same time. It's never a bad thing if you have to think about what you're going to say instead of barfing out whatever floats through your head.


Once again, I fail to see how the words 'fuck' and 'shit' are in anyway intrinsically inferior words to anything else you can pull out of a dictionary. They're just words. What's ridiculous is that we all sit in #srb2 censoring ourselves (eg 'fscking', 'f*cking') as if this somehow prevents them being real words-- if it's obvious that these are the words we are using behind the asterisks, then what purpose does censoring them at all serve? You could stretch this idea and say that every time someone says 'really great' they are actually wanting to say 'fucking great'-- and in which case, what purpose does swapping the words serve if they mean the same thing? (And in this instance, they really are synonyms-- they serve to emphasise. Are you honestly saying that somehow saying 'fucking' here is just, somehow, worse than saying 'really'? If so, why is it 'worse'? Where are you getting this objective truth from? Did you ask God?)

Quote:
For example, can you give me one solid reason, like I have above, for NOT banning those words? A real reason, not the "It's so idiotic" and "Who cares? What's the point?" stuff you've been dishing out, because that's just as empty as "Because we said so."


Not at all. If no-one cares, then why are we taking the trouble to enforce it? If it's idiotic, why are we doing it? It serves no purpose to censor people in such a fickle way, and as such it should not be practiced.

Quote:
So far nobody has been able to get past "everyone curses so it's not really a bad word anymore"


Well, this is at least partially the truth. As the words become more and more widespread, they lose more and more of their offensive meaning. If absolutely everyone in the world used the word 'fuck' and 'shit' willy-nilly with no discretion or anything, then the words would lose their offensive quality. They'd become 'standard' words just like 'hedgehog' and 'shoe'-- can you not see the arbitary nature of this process? The 'offensive' or 'rude' or 'immature' properties of a word are not ingrained as of themselves, but in their use. The use of a word defines its meaning, its connotations, its properties. They're not real.

Quote:
the "you're an oversensitive crybaby if it offends you" levels, which are equally empty


On the contrary: you are an oversensitive crybaby if it offends you. These words are of no intrinsic worth or value or quality over anything else in the English dictionary, or any other dictionary for that matter. You should only be offended by the word 'fuck' when it is intended to offend, when the user is being intentionally, well, shitty-- but that rule applies to anything, including the words shoe and hedgehog. Honest.
CrazyMrLeo - Tue Sep 07, 2004 3:50 pm
Post subject:
Well, here's the first nonsensical thing in your argument. Why do you consider them to be 'impolite and immature'? They're just words-- words we give meaning and attributes to ourselves.
They contain no objective value, no intrinsic property other than the properties we ourselves instil in them. The word 'fuck' has only come to be 'offensive' because we choose to find it offensive; if we decided the same of the word 'shoe' or 'hedgehog', they'd be similarly unacceptable.


Words have connotations. Fuck, of course, is a vulgarity. It's a verb meaning "to have sex with", which is considerably less socially acceptable than a shoe or a hedgehog. Would you talk about sex with your grandmother? Probably not. Shoes on the other hand, can be very wholesome topics of conversation.

The 'immature' properties of these words are completely intangible, non-existent-- if you get over them, then they're not a problem anymore. They're just words like shoe or hedgehog. As such, swear words have come to be treated by those who don't explode upon exposure as syntactical extremeties: a means of emphasising specific points, demonstrating your passion emphatically, or whatever. You could argue that there are other words that do the same job-- to which my response is, why not ban them? It makes just as much sense.

It does not, in fact, make as much sense. "Really" and "Fucking" may share a definition, but they certainly don't mean the same thing. I mean, you can't say "I just reallied a hot chick last night." or "That stupid really." Every word is unique, and is appropriate for different circumstances. And, in many circumstances, swear words are not appropriate.

Don't quite get your point here-- flamers are prevented from flaming because they only know two words in the whole world? Even if allowing people to swear somehow magically sends flamewars skyrocketing, offenders can be dealt with at the op's discretion.

"Hey, Popcorn. You're a big jerk."
"Hey, Popcorn. You're a fucking shithead."

You see how one is more inflamatory than the other?

There's no need to blanket everyone at most peoples' expense.

This, I agree with. I'm not one to trust scripts that ban for you.

Well, this is at least partially the truth. As the words become more and more widespread, they lose more and more of their offensive meaning. If absolutely everyone in the world used the word 'fuck' and 'shit' willy-nilly with no discretion or anything, then the words would lose their offensive quality. They'd become 'standard' words just like 'hedgehog' and 'shoe'-- can you not see the arbitary nature of this process? The 'offensive' or 'rude' or 'immature' properties of a word are not ingrained as of themselves, but in their use. The use of a word defines its meaning, its connotations, its properties. They're not real.

You could use the word until the cows come home, but I doubt that would change society's view of what it represents

I think you lack a basic understanding of how a language is like a living creature. You can't just use your spleen as a kidney and hope it adapts. Likewise, you can't just remove a definition of a word just by using it the wrong way. Language won't bend that way.
Yajirobe - Tue Sep 07, 2004 3:58 pm
Post subject:
I once threw a shoe at some guy...killed him instantly. Why did I do it? Because I wanted to steal his life savings, grandma.

But still there's now way you can have a wholesome conversation with the word fuck in it..


but with shoes you can also be pretty nasty. like if you shoved a shoe up someone's ass. but on the other hand..

"I bought these shoes, and they are nice" and grandma would be proud..or would she? maybe you stole the money from the guy you threw a shoe at. i mean..anything can be vulgar. like you just went to the zoo with your daughter, but before you left for the zoo you told her to go fuck herself. umm..i'm done. sorry about that.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 3:59 pm
Post subject:
Well then look at it this way.

"Fsck you"
"Oh fsck"

"Fsck you" is more vulgar. "Oh fsck" is still actually cival. I mean, saying "Oh gosh" you don't hear that today as much, but "Oh gosh" in the 1960's or whatever can still be just as vulgar as "Oh fsck"*. You hear "Oh fsck" in the real world. Speaking of the real world, we hear that time to time. What would it hurt to see it in a IRC channel from time to time? Nooooooo, but we freak out and make a ban script for cusswords, when it should be "excessive cursing as: 'mother fscking sht idiot". If you want to use the word gay as "Like a big gay sweary sailor" you might as well have banned him for that also.
CrazyMrLeo - Tue Sep 07, 2004 4:16 pm
Post subject:
Perhaps "Oh Fuck" is less vulgar, but it IS still vulgar.
Keith Stack - Tue Sep 07, 2004 4:16 pm
Post subject:
I use curse words in real life all the time. I have nothing against them. They're often just fun to use, but if a teacher at school cais I couldn't say curses in her classroom, then I wouldn't use them in her classroom, because it's her classroom and she decides the rules of the classroom. It's not going against "freedom of speech", because I wouldn't be in legal trouble if I said it, I'd just be in... school trouble. Y'know?
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 4:19 pm
Post subject:
And if I or certain people didn't like it I'd be talking to the teacher about her cursing rules if they were overly extensive. Just like anything else.

ESPECIALLY if the teacher was cussing his or herself in front of the class. :P

Eidt: And Leo, like Popcorn said. Those words were given meaning. If people decided to see them with completely vulgarity that's their problem, not us who look at it that way.

Just like religions, not getting into it, just an example. People look at this certain religion as being correct, others look at that certain religion as being incorrect.
CrazyMrLeo - Tue Sep 07, 2004 4:30 pm
Post subject:
Eidt: And Leo, like Popcorn said. Those words were given meaning. If people decided to see them with completely vulgarity that's their problem, not us who look at it that way.

But it's not just a group of people with some secret underground swearword conspiracy. You're talking about centuries of language evolution here.

Oh, and like it or not, words have given definitions. It's the english consensus, and it's summed up in the dictionary. And if you look in a dictionary, the word fuck will likely be followed by the words Vulgar Slang.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 4:35 pm
Post subject:
That's not what I am really saying here.

I'm saying if the word "fsck" was given the meaning just as "Gosh" then there wouldn't be a problem. But I guess people look at it as vulgarity still, especially in #srb2, and because our lovely dictionary says so. I'm going to end my part of this on my opinion given to me from either it was Instant Sonic or Falcon T. Echidna. I asked them why they wouldn't go into the #srb2 channel and one of them said it was full of @holes. Not flaming, but now I can clearly see that happening when people gang up on someone.

<s>I'm done.</s>
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 4:37 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Words have connotations. Fuck, of course, is a vulgarity. It's a verb meaning "to have sex with", which is considerably less socially acceptable than a shoe or a hedgehog. Would you talk about sex with your grandmother? Probably not. Shoes on the other hand, can be very wholesome topics of conversation.


No, I wouldn't swear in front of my grandmother-- this is because she'd be offended by it, and I humour her because she's a loveable old bint. But you're missing my point-- if she wasn't offended by the word, then, get this, it wouldn't be offensive. The 'offense' is all in her mind, because she's decided that it's some intrinsically 'bad, offensive' word. That makes no sense. What I'm saying is that you could decide the same thing about the word 'shoe'-- it makes just as much sense to find that combination of letters offensive or vulgar as it does to find the words s, h, o and e.

Quote:
It does not, in fact, make as much sense. "Really" and "Fucking" may share a definition, but they certainly don't mean the same thing. I mean, you can't say "I just reallied a hot chick last night." or "That stupid really." Every word is unique, and is appropriate for different circumstances.


You've completely missed my point. The word 'fucking' in a certain context just means 'really'-- eg 'really great' means the same as 'fucking great'. In the same way, 'fucking a hot chick' means 'having sex with a hot chick'. It's just an alternative set of words, defined by their context, not any intrinsic definition.

Quote:
"Hey, Popcorn. You're a big jerk."
"Hey, Popcorn. You're a fucking shithead."

You see how one is more inflamatory than the other?


The second is more inflammatory only if you believe, for some reason, that choice of words is more important than implication or meaning. If you think offensiveness is proportional to the extremity of the words chosen, rather than the meaning, then you're looking at it all wrong. The word "no" can be the most offensive, heartbreaking thing in the world used in the right place; and banning a set of words traditionally employed in the act of flaming isn't going to stop flamers.

Quote:
You could use the word until the cows come home, but I doubt that would change society's view of what it represents


Are you kidding? What about the word 'gay'? It used to mean something else, you know. Did you know that 'decimate' traditionally means 'reduce by a tenth'? Of course, it doesn't now, it just means 'destroy' or 'obliterate'. Words are defined by their meaning. If the word 'fuck' became a completely everyday non-event of a word. used in front of your grandmother and by your grandmother, it wouldn't be 'offensive' anymore.

Quote:
I think you lack a basic understanding of how a language is like a living creature.


This is absolutely not the case. In fact, I've just spent this and the last post arguing as to why language is an organic, morphing entity, defined by its use and not by any other force intrinsic to the universe. 'Fuck' is not a bad word because the universe is built in with that feature; it's a bad word because some deluded people decided, nonsensically, that it's a bad word, and no other reason. (In actual fact, most swear words were officially labelled 'cursing' in the Victorian era, when a bunch of snobbish aristocrats decided amongst themselves to label a few of the working class' words as 'vulgar'. They're man-made.)

Quote:
Likewise, you can't just remove a definition of a word just by using it the wrong way. Language won't bend that way.


Mm-hmm? So explain to me why you find the word 'fuck' offensive. Why is it vulgar? Why is it 'bad'?

Besides-- this is all just sidelining the ultimate point, which is that we're all mature enough to get over it when someone swears because we recognise that it's only a word. And if you're not mature enough to handle it, then, well, you're not very mature at all.
Keith Stack - Tue Sep 07, 2004 4:42 pm
Post subject:
AreoZephin wrote:
And if I or certain people didn't like it I'd be talking to the teacher about her cursing rules if they were overly extensive. Just like anything else.

ESPECIALLY if the teacher was cussing his or herself in front of the class. :P


Why the hell would you waist your time on a debate thatyou would probably lose and would probably make the dislike you more when you could just, y'know, not say naughty words. It's not like you medically NEED to.
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 4:55 pm
Post subject:
To Areo and Popcorn:

Whether it makes sense or not, words like "fuck" and "shit" are considered to be vulgar by the overwhelming majority of English-speaking people. It is not just some stupid thing #srb2 does. Therefore kindly quit acting as if Blaze or whoever can just suddenly declare "Fuck is now a perfectly normal word like any other, and nobody will ever be offended by it again" and poof, it will be so.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 4:56 pm
Post subject:
Well, Keith. It never happened, thank god. We were free to express our language, but did never use racial terms. But why would I/we waste our time? Because, we would feel it was part of our expression to express ourselves in what we felt was right.

Basically, why not cuss? Does it really give a bad image to say "Sht" once every 7 hours? It sure doesn't to me.

Edit:

Andrusi wrote:
Therefore kindly quit acting as if Blaze or whoever can just suddenly declare "Fuck is now a perfectly normal word like any other, and nobody will ever be offended by it again" and poof, it will be so.


.. I'm not acting. And I'm stating the fact that the word "Fsck" should not be overly exagerated in banning as any other curse word pertaining to that of cursing not racism.
Cinossu - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:02 pm
Post subject:
AreoZephin wrote:
Edit: And Leo, like Popcorn said. Those words were given meaning. If people decided to see them with completely vulgarity that's their problem, not us who look at it that way.

Just like religions, not getting into it, just an example. People look at this certain religion as being correct, others look at that certain religion as being incorrect.


That doesn't mean you don't respect their religion/views.
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:04 pm
Post subject:
AreoZephin wrote:
Basically, why not cuss? Does it really give a bad image to say "Sht" once every 7 hours? It sure doesn't to me.

Whether what you say offends yourself is not relevant, has never been relevant, and will never be relevant. What is relevant is what others think. I know I tend to form a very bad first impression of someone if one of the first words I hear/see them say/type is "fuck".

(By the way, I'm not quite sure what you think you're accomplishing with "fsck". It's not like you're effectively censoring it at all. Might as well just type the damned vowel and be done with it.)
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:06 pm
Post subject:
Exactly, so where's the respect in Popcorn's view?

Anyways. You want that cursing rule enforced still the way it is? Be my guest, but I'm pretty sure the way it's set up, this will keep comming on down the road just like this thread in some way or another until it's re modified. Someone said this has been discussed a million times? Yeah, not because the person was full of irony but the rule itself.

(But the word "fsck" is more fun to me ;p)
Ed - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:09 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
#srb2 has a no swear rule. Life in general has rules. Perhaps you should learn to cope with that.


Hello, I'm Smidge. I live in the fucking 50s.

I believe the whole swear rule thing is kind of silly. If you don't like swear words aren't there some kind of thing you can download that censors it (for you?)

The "we have this rule because we want to" and then banning them is a really horrible response. If you ops really want some respect you should have you should act at LEAST more intellegent then some fat freckled face 3rd grader.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:13 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Therefore kindly quit acting as if Blaze or whoever can just suddenly declare "Fuck is now a perfectly normal word like any other, and nobody will ever be offended by it again" and poof, it will be so.


You don't think, then, that it might be utterly stupid to find a word 'offensive'. The only thing that has the capacity to be truly offensive is meaning, intent, attitude. If you're honestly sitting there saying "I FIND THE WORD FUCK OFFENSIVE BECAUSE IT'S JUST OFFENSIVE BECAUSE I'VE DECIDED IT'S OFFENSIVE", well, then, you need to grow up a bit.

Quote:
Whether what you say offends yourself is not relevant, has never been relevant, and will never be relevant. What is relevant is what others think. I know I tend to form a very bad first impression of someone if one of the first words I hear/see them say/type is "fuck".


Once again, I don't think it's silly of us to expect people to get over the word 'fuck'. I expect, in fact, for people to damn well cope.

Quote:
(By the way, I'm not quite sure what you think you're accomplishing with "fsck". It's not like you're effectively censoring it at all. Might as well just type the damned vowel and be done with it.)


This is something else that bothers me, as I said before-- we're not allowed to swear but we're allowed to say 'f*ck', 'fsck', whatever. Where do you draw the line of ambiguity? It all means the same thing, like I keep saying.

The bottom line is that they're just words and people should get over it.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:14 pm
Post subject:
I believe the whole swear rule thing is kinda silly. If you don't like swear words aren't there some kind of thing you can download that censors it (for you?)

Or, put it in the rules that if you don't like swearing you can download that.

That's the most intelligent thing I've heard all day, Ed. Congrats.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:16 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
I believe the whole swear rule thing is kinda silly. If you don't like swear words aren't there some kind of thing you can download that censors it (for you?)


This seems to be the correct answer. Can we do that, please?
Blues The Squirrel - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:18 pm
Post subject:
You know what I think is kind of silly? A 4 page topic about someone whining about being banned from a chat room.
Ed - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:18 pm
Post subject:
Oh yeah, I love how all of the srb2 ops went "oh shit" and danced around Suitcase's reply.

VVV :)
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:19 pm
Post subject:
Blues The Squirrel wrote:
You know what I think is kind of silly? A 4 page topic about someone whining about being banned from a chat room.


It was also silly that he was banned...
Blues The Squirrel - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:20 pm
Post subject:
But a 4 page topic about why the word fuck isnt offensive? This out weighs the sillyness of him being banned.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:21 pm
Post subject:
I really wish it wasn't necessary.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:22 pm
Post subject:
Blues The Squirrel wrote:
But a 4 page topic about why the word fuck isnt offensive? This out weighs the sillyness of him being banned.


No, it's offensive to the people who take it offensively.
Blues The Squirrel - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:22 pm
Post subject:
It WASNT necessary for you to do this. You could have private messaged Kulock if you really thought you were un-fairly treated. But instead you made a public display of ignorance.
Ed - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:25 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
It WASNT necessary for you to do this. You could have private messaged Kulock if you really thought you were un-fairly treated


Blues, no offense but you really have no idea what you are talking about.

The highlighted part makes as much sense as me e-mailing Lowtax on how I was banned from a AOL Chatroom. (Is that even possible?)

This isn't about Popcorn being banned either, but about srb2 policies.
Sanius - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:25 pm
Post subject:
Blues The Squirrel wrote:
It WASNT necessary for you to do this. You could have private messaged Kulock if you really thought you were un-fairly treated. But instead you made a public display of ignorance.


but ku has no authority in #srb2, whats the point of that?
Blues The Squirrel - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:26 pm
Post subject:
Did I say Kulock? Bah. I meant whoever is in charge of SRB2.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:27 pm
Post subject:
Blues! There are many reason he made this topic. For others to be able to have an opinion, and if he wanted to just be unbanned he probably would have either pmed an Op, or messaged Kulock. But Kulock is hard to get hold of as he doesn't really want to waste his time in these discussions and I can understand why.

But, listen. He didn't just want to be unbanned, he wanted opinions and he wanted to get this sorted out. As far as I can see, he wanted opinions. He got them, I gave them, Suitecase gave them, Andrusi, everyone just about.

And god I hope that **** rule can be enforced, for the sake of your channel in the future from not having these discussions.
Smidge204 - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:29 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
Well, here's the first nonsensical thing in your argument. Why do you consider them to be 'impolite and immature'?


Your comment here is a perfect example of why I consider it impolite and immature. It boils down to: "I don't find it offensive, therefore nobody else should find it offensive either." This amazingly narrow minded view of society and what others should and should not think is the very essence of "impolite" and "immature."

The other half of why I consider them so is context. You would not use these words say, in front of your teacher (to borrow Keith's example), or your mother, or your boss. If you do you can't possibly say that it's polite to use those words in those situations. Consider chatting in #srb2 is one of those situations.

Popcorn wrote:
if we decided the same of the word 'shoe' or 'hedgehog', they'd be similarly unacceptable.


You're right, but unfortunately for you those words aren't considered vulgar in any context, so this really didn't advance your argument at all; it's self evident.

Popcorn wrote:
The 'immature' properties of these words are completely intangible, non-existent-- if you get over them, then they're not a problem anymore.


And that, again, is exactly what I mean by immature. "I'm using this word because I don't find it offensive or vulgar, and if you think it is there's something wrong with you."


Popcorn wrote:
As such, swear words have come to be treated by those who don't explode upon exposure as syntactical extremeties


Okay, so why don't you drop a few F-bombs during your next job interview and see how well it turns out. I'll bet good money that if you met your potential boss/interviewer in a bar at some point he'd be tossing them left and right himself... so clearly it's not a personal objection to the word. It is, however, considered impolite to use such language in that context.

Or better yet, if you ever work in a job that deals with the public (like a sales floor), go ahead and curse like a sailor when a customer asks for help. It does not have to be in a way that directly insults the person, just generic, casual swearing. Even if the customer is rude and uses such language in a directly offensive manner towards YOU, I'm sure your boss will chew you out for it... because it's very impolite.


Popcorn wrote:
You could argue that there are other words that do the same job-- to which my response is, why not ban them? It makes just as much sense.


Because they, like 'shoe' and 'hedgehog', are not considered vulgar in any context. Again, this is self evident.

Popcorn wrote:
Don't quite get your point here-- flamers are prevented from flaming because they only know two words in the whole world?


No, but there are two possibilities when a flamewar is starting up between two or more people:

1) Someone starts to type "Fuck you" but realizes they would get kicked for it, and perhaps pauses for a brief moment and thinks better of it (Either because they do not want to be banned or because the other side would mock them endlessly for it, or both). Presto, one less flame, or at least a brief pause while they try to think of something else.

2) Someone types "Fuck you" and DOES get kicked for it. That person is now removed from the channel (however temporarily) and the flamewar loses a little, if not all, of it's momentum.

As a side benefit, discussions are much less likely to dissolve into swearing contests. I don't know about you, but that's the kind of thing ten year olds do at the far end of the playground. That's immature.

Popcorn wrote:
Even if allowing people to swear somehow magically sends flamewars skyrocketing, offenders can be dealt with at the op's discretion. There's no need to blanket everyone at most peoples' expense.


This ties back into your "don't treat us like children" comment. You wouldn't be treated like children if you didn't, you know, ACT LIKE GODDAMN CHILDREN. I remember having to ban the word "penis" for a week or so because you were all acting like ten year olds inserting the word into everything you said as many times as possible (and that went on for a few days IIRC, so you can't use the "running gag" excuse.) If you can't even manage the word "penis" without pissing yourself laughing then you're not going to convince me you're worthy of being treated like an adult.


Popcorn wrote:
Once again, I fail to see how the words 'fuck' and 'shit' are in anyway intrinsically inferior words to anything else you can pull out of a dictionary. They're just words. What's ridiculous is that we all sit in #srb2 censoring ourselves (eg 'fscking', 'f*cking') as if this somehow prevents them being real words-- if it's obvious that these are the words we are using behind the asterisks, then what purpose does censoring them at all serve?


It makes you think about it. It makes you aware that you are using them much more often that you would otherwise. Re-read the rest of this post to understand why I feel this is a good thing.

No, I personally don't have any problems with those words. But I do think the channel (as well as the participants) are better off without them, both in short and long terms.

Popcorn wrote:
Are you honestly saying that somehow saying 'fucking' here is just, somehow, worse than saying 'really'? If so, why is it 'worse'? Where are you getting this objective truth from? Did you ask God?)


Yes, they are worse. See above. And no, I didn't ask god. Perhaps you could go ask a priest what he thinks about those words though...


Popcorn wrote:
Quote:
For example, can you give me one solid reason, like I have above, for NOT banning those words? A real reason, not the "It's so idiotic" and "Who cares? What's the point?" stuff you've been dishing out, because that's just as empty as "Because we said so."


Not at all. If no-one cares, then why are we taking the trouble to enforce it?


You're assuming noone cares. Unfortunately I care, for the reasons I have already explained. So clearly your "nobody cares" attitude is wrong. It doesn't matter if nobody else cares, the fact that one person cares is enough to pop your bubble.

And you still have not given any solid reason why swearing should be allowed. Your argument boils down exactly to: "Because I don't think it's offensive". If "Because I think it's offensive" is not a valid reason to ban them, then "Because I don't think they are offensive" is not a valid reason to not ban them.

And I consider them offensive. Ball's in your court Pop.

Popcorn wrote:
The 'offensive' or 'rude' or 'immature' properties of a word are not ingrained as of themselves, but in their use.


No, it is the word. This is because a word and it's use are not separable like you want to believe. The word is it's meaning, and it's meaning directly tied to it's use. That is the purpose of language: to express abstract concepts like "a small, nocturnal insectivore mammal closely related to the shrew family, having both hair and spines, which is native to Asia, African, Europe and Great Britain" in a very compact form such as "Hedgehog".

Or, to dig up an old geek joke, the song should go: "We collectively reside in a submersable ocean-going vessle that is visibly reflective only in the 570 nanometer wavelength of the electromagnetic spectrum..." but that's not nearly as catchy is it?

Popcorn wrote:
The use of a word defines its meaning, its connotations, its properties.


And people use swear words consistently in vulgar, offensive and impolite ways. Therefore, by your own argument, swear words are vulgar, offensive and impolite.

Popcorn wrote:
On the contrary: you are an oversensitive crybaby if it offends you.


Okay, then when you don't get the job tell the person interviewing you that he's an oversensitive crybaby. I'm sure that'll go over real well. Your whole attitude is immature.

Popcorn wrote:
These words are of no intrinsic worth or value or quality over anything else in the English dictionary


I thought of two things when you said this:

1) Then why are you making such a big deal of them being baned? If they're worthless they're worthless.

2) Again, by your own argument, if all words are equally worthless then we don't need words like "Excellent" and "Terrific" when "Good" will do just fine. But you see, "Good" just doesn't have the same ring to is as "Magnificent" does it? "Fabulous." "Stunning." "Superior." "Astonishing." "Incredible." "Exorbitant." "Stupendous." -- Lets do away with all that fluff and just use the word "Good". Perhaps maybe "Very Good" if it's, well... very good. Excellent idea, Pop. Orwell would be so proud!

And I'm still waiting for a real reason why they shouldn't be banned. I've provided reasons why they should, and you have failed to counter my argument in a most "very good" fashion.



Edit: Oh goody, more!

Quote:
If you're honestly sitting there saying "I FIND THE WORD FUCK OFFENSIVE BECAUSE IT'S JUST OFFENSIVE BECAUSE I'VE DECIDED IT'S OFFENSIVE", well, then, you need to grow up a bit.


If you're honestly sitting there saying "I DON'T FIND THE WORD FUCK OFFENSIVE BECAUSE I'VE DECIDED IT'S NOT OFFENSIVE", well, then, you need to grow up a bit.


Quote:
Once again, I don't think it's silly of us to expect people to get over the word 'fuck'. I expect, in fact, for people to damn well cope.


Once again, I don't think it's silly of us to expect people to get over the fact that there are such things as social graces that are enforced in some places, and they they can get banned from those places if they disrespect them. I expect, in fact, for people to damn well cope.


AreoZephin wrote:
I'm going to look at it again.

Look with me.

Quote:
Popcorn> For God's sake, who cares anyway.
<BlazeHedgehog> I do, and I have the powar
<BlazeHedgehog> END
<Mystic> Blaze = win
<Popcorn> But you swear all the time.
<Masaki> he swears like a sailor!
<Masaki> a big, gay, sweary sailor.


Popcorn asked a question.
People boasting about power, and feeding it.
Popcorn gives an example.
The word gay is used in a bashing term.
Popcorn GETS BANNED for...

So I'm missing a lot right?



Yeah, like, half of it. Here's the rest:

Code:

<Popcorn> But you swear all the time.
<Masaki> he swears like a sailor!
<Masaki> a big, gay, sweary sailor.
*** BlazeHedgehog sets mode: -b *!*@193.120.71.203
*** Tell (Cino@193.120.71.203) has joined #srb2
<Mystic> Popcorn, we have had this argument 9 million times before, and the answer is always the same
<Mystic> so don't even start it today, or I'll just ban you without even giving a thought to it
<Popcorn> But the answer sucks and is a completely lame excuse for any kind of rational logic.
<Masaki> silly jamesykins.
<Masaki> "because I said so" is tried and tested parent logic
*** ChanServ sets mode: +b Popcorn!*@*
*** Popcorn was kicked by ChanServ (And we care why?)


Hope that clears it up for ya.
=Smidge=
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:30 pm
Post subject:
Oh.my.god.

Now I am confuzzled, is this a rant thread now because of Smidges posts or is this still a debate/question? Can we go to a debate.

I debate on behalf of Ed's idea, and Suitecase's statement.

Oh and good edit Smidge, good way to throw me into your rant.
Smidge204 - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:42 pm
Post subject:
It's not a rant, it's a point by point debate. Try reading it. Reading doesn't seem to be something you're doing a lot of in this thread...

=Smidge=
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:46 pm
Post subject:
Who the hell wants to read an, almost, 2 foot page of a "debate", one post.

And yeah, I've read that IRC about 20 times at least:

Quote:
<Mystic> Popcorn, we have had this argument 9 million times before, and the answer is always the same
<Mystic> so don't even start it today, or I'll just ban you without even giving a thought to it
<Popcorn> But the answer sucks and is a completely lame excuse for any kind of rational logic.


Your part of your "debate" where you just throw me in, saying that "Here's the other half" isn't a debate.

This part of the IRC, Mystic states that you have all had this arguement quiet a bit. Why have you had this arguement so much? Because THE ANSWER SUCKS AND IS A COMPLETELY LAME EXCUSE FOR ANY KIND OF RATIONAL LOGIC.
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:47 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
Quote:
Therefore kindly quit acting as if Blaze or whoever can just suddenly declare "Fuck is now a perfectly normal word like any other, and nobody will ever be offended by it again" and poof, it will be so.


You don't think, then, that it might be utterly stupid to find a word 'offensive'.

What I think is that whether it's stupid or not, a lot of people are offended by it, and nothing any of the #srb2 ops can do is going to change that. Now kindly start responding to what I say, not to what you wish I'd said because it'd be easier to counter.

Quote:
Quote:
Whether what you say offends yourself is not relevant, has never been relevant, and will never be relevant. What is relevant is what others think. I know I tend to form a very bad first impression of someone if one of the first words I hear/see them say/type is "fuck".


Once again, I don't think it's silly of us to expect people to get over the word 'fuck'. I expect, in fact, for people to damn well cope.

Did I say "when someone says fuck, I cry"? No. I said that I tend to form very poor first impressions of people who say "fuck". This is in no way a problem for me, but it will be a problem for you if you ever need something from me, or from anyone else who feels the same way. And lemme tell you something, kid. If you piss someone off in any way, telling them you expect them "to damn well cope" isn't going to help.
Sz - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:51 pm
Post subject:
Ed wrote:
Oh yeah, I love how all of the srb2 ops went "oh shit" and danced around Suitcase's reply.

VVV :)




...apart from that, I agree with Leo. I completely understand the logic behind removing shit and fuck from chatroom conversation. I understand Smidge's stance that it leads to more intelligent discussion (not that that point really is that valid, as most complete morons aren't the troublemakers... most people that start crap in the chatrooms have a reasonable amount of intelligence, apart from their lack of uh... inability to be a complete jerk. But I digress), and certainly I agree with the dictatorship concept of running a MB or chatroom... but at the same time, banning people for discussing it is absurd (You want it to not be discussed? Follow Kulock's example and give good logical reasons for your decisions, and then the majority of the denizens will come to your aid in battle. ;D), and ... well, Blaze can probably attest to my hatred of his kban script. ;)

All that said, it's hardly as though this "#srb2 ops abusing their power!" thing is new... I thought it'd be expected by now. :E
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:51 pm
Post subject:
AreoZephin wrote:
Who the hell wants to read an, almost, 2 foot page of a "debate", one post.

People who have more patience than a hummingbird.

Quote:
THE ANSWER SUCKS AND IS A COMPLETELY LAME EXCUSE FOR ANY KIND OF RATIONAL LOGIC.

Welcome to Earth!
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:52 pm
Post subject:
Smidge, you don't seem to understand. Swear words aren't offensive, people are. It's in your head. It's in. Your. Head. If people are being twats, then get upset over it. If someone says, "Oh boy, I fucking love chocolate cake! ^_^", then, well, fucking don't. Yes there are 'social graces' but half of these 'social graces' are the bullshit products of being a race of backward, pretentious idiots who think they matter.

Quote:
And that, again, is exactly what I mean by immature. "I'm using this word because I don't find it offensive or vulgar, and if you think it is there's something wrong with you."


You know what, you're so completely right. And what's more, this same correct logic can be applied to everything. Next time I see someone scratch their head in front of me, I'm going to ask them to stop, because I've decided it's offensive. If they ask why, I will tell them "Because I say so." And who are they to complain about it? If they point out that I have no logic behind finding this offensive, well... it doesn't matter, because I find it offensive so they definitely should not do it and this makes complete perfect sense and I am not a deluded self-righteous eletist control freak or anything. This is because deciding that something is 'vulgar' and then forcing everyone else to correspond to it, however vastly irrational, makes complete and perfect sense.

Quote:
This ties back into your "don't treat us like children" comment. You wouldn't be treated like children if you didn't, you know, ACT LIKE GODDAMN CHILDREN. I remember having to ban the word "penis" for a week or so because you were all acting like ten year olds inserting the word into everything you said as many times as possible (and that went on for a few days IIRC, so you can't use the "running gag" excuse.) If you can't even manage the word "penis" without pissing yourself laughing then you're not going to convince me you're worthy of being treated like an adult.


There are no words. You couldn't cope with a few textual penises?
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:55 pm
Post subject:
Andrusi wrote:
Did I say "when someone says fuck, I cry"? No. I said that I tend to form very poor first impressions of people who say "fuck". This is in no way a problem for me, but it will be a problem for you if you ever need something from me, or from anyone else who feels the same way. And lemme tell you something, kid. If you piss someone off in any way, telling them you expect them "to damn well cope" isn't going to help.


Starting now, can we not threaten?

And please don't use people's quotes against people Andrusi, you understand that "Quote:
THE ANSWER SUCKS AND IS A COMPLETELY LAME EXCUSE FOR ANY KIND OF RATIONAL LOGIC. " is twisting that complete concept of that statement.

I personally never read an almost 2 foot long; one reply, that's going over the red line for a reply.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:59 pm
Post subject:
Missed this:

Quote:
Again, by your own argument, if all words are equally worthless then we don't need words like "Excellent" and "Terrific" when "Good" will do just fine. But you see, "Good" just doesn't have the same ring to is as "Magnificent" does it? "Fabulous." "Stunning." "Superior." "Astonishing." "Incredible." "Exorbitant." "Stupendous." -- Lets do away with all that fluff and just use the word "Good". Perhaps maybe "Very Good" if it's, well... very good. Excellent idea, Pop. Orwell would be so proud!


I think you're closer to achieving Newspeak than I am, Smidge, if you go about banning words.
H Hog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:06 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
But you're missing my point-- if she wasn't offended by the word, then, get this, it wouldn't be offensive. The 'offense' is all in her mind, because she's decided that it's some intrinsically 'bad, offensive' word. That makes no sense. What I'm saying is that you could decide the same thing about the word 'shoe'-- it makes just as much sense to find that combination of letters offensive or vulgar as it does to find the words s, h, o and e.


Pardon my french, but that's the biggest load of bullshit I've ever read.
"I want to swear, and if other people have a problem with it, they shouldn't interpret it as a vulgarity."
By that logic, I could simply decide for myself that I choose to take offense in the word "shoe" and punish you accordingly.
Does that make sense? No.

As much as you can rant about how "they're just letters and no more offensive then any other word in the dictionary", the thing is; That PARTICULAR combination of letters is considered rude.
Just like how a particular combination of stretching your fingers in a way that only one is extended in the middle is considered rude.
It's only a simple hand gesture, but it has an offensive meaning, and as such, people take offense in it.

Oh look! I punched you in the face! Come on, I only moved my hand to contact your head!
Just earlier, you didn't complain when I stroked your hair! It's the same, isn't it?

LOL NUKLEAR BOMB! I LIGHT IT LIKE FIRECRACKERS! =D

Where's the limit, folks?

Thing is, you're all whining about two freaking words that you can't use.
Out of what... millions?
Be creative.
Countless other people use "Fuck" and "Shit" already, why copy?
Think up your own expletives, or use ones that aren't considered generally offensive.
Asshat. People should use the word "Asshat" more often.
Smidge204 - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:07 pm
Post subject:
Edit: Fixed broken quote tag

AreoZephin wrote:
This part of the IRC, Mystic states that you have all had this arguement quiet a bit. Why have you had this arguement so much? Because THE ANSWER SUCKS AND IS A COMPLETELY LAME EXCUSE FOR ANY KIND OF RATIONAL LOGIC.


Spoken like someone who has never actually been part of it before now. Congratulations on regurgitating what Popcorn said in all capitals, because clearly any argument becomes much more effective when using all capital letters.

Back on topic.

Popcorn wrote:
Smidge, you don't seem to understand. Swear words aren't offensive, people are.


And people have developed language to express thier offensive nature towards others. The words used in such language are collectively known as swear words. This is exactly where your arguments fall apart: Give me one sentance where the word "shit" is, by definition, non-vulgar and completely relevant.

Popcorn wrote:
Yes there are 'social graces' but half of these 'social graces' are the bullshit products of being a race of backward, pretentious idiots who think they matter.


Speaking of backward, pretentious idiots who think they matter... did it ever occur to you that not everyone feels that way? Are you just that absorbed in your opinion that it has magically become a universal fact? Do you honestly think you are not a backward, pretentious idiot who only thinks he matters in the eyes of anyone else?

Popcorn wrote:
Quote:
And that, again, is exactly what I mean by immature. "I'm using this word because I don't find it offensive or vulgar, and if you think it is there's something wrong with you."


You know what, you're so completely right. And what's more, this same correct logic can be applied to everything. Next time I see someone scratch their head in front of me, I'm going to ask them to stop, because I've decided it's offensive. If they ask why, I will tell them "Because I say so."


What's funny is that I used that as an example of immature, incorrect logic, and you just made it worse. Better call Guiness, i don't think anyone has managed to put so many feet in his mouth at once before.

Popcorn wrote:
There are no words. You couldn't cope with a few textual penises?


There is no spoon!

(The above line was used instead of the very obvious and cheap shot at Popcorn, since I don't want this to turn into a flamewar)

Still waiting for real reason swear words should be unbanned. In fact, I will refuse to make any further comments until Popcorn produces one, least he try to weasel out of it.
=Smidge=
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:14 pm
Post subject:
H Hog wrote:

Thing is, you're all whining about two freaking words that you can't use.
Out of what... millions?
Be creative.
Countless other people use "Fuck" and "Shit" already, why copy?
Think up your own expletives, or use ones that aren't considered generally offensive.
Asshat. People should use the word "Asshat" more often.



Then what do you do about someone who cusses on a dialy basis in real life, comes in the IRC channel and accidently says "SHIT" and gets banned. I say go for the flipping astrix script.


Smidge204 wrote:

Spoken like someone who has never actually been part of it before now. Congratulations on regurgitating what Popcorn said in all capitals, because clearly any argument becomes much more effective when using all capital letters.


Smidge204, I'd guess speaking in caps wouldn't help on your behalf would it? For you still seem to not understand that statement as it was meant to be understood correctly which you are failing in doing so.
CrazyMrLeo - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:16 pm
Post subject:
I'm saying if the word "fsck" was given the meaning just as "Gosh" then there wouldn't be a problem.

Could you give the word "shoe" the same meaning of the word "hedgehog"?

You've completely missed my point. The word 'fucking' in a certain context just means 'really'-- eg 'really great' means the same as 'fucking great'. In the same way, 'fucking a hot chick' means 'having sex with a hot chick'. It's just an alternative set of words, defined by their context, not any intrinsic definition.

Well, you've completely missed MY point "fucking" really and "really" really aren't the same, even in that context, because the other definitions are attached to the word.

The second is more inflammatory only if you believe, for some reason, that choice of words is more important than implication or meaning. If you think offensiveness is proportional to the extremity of the words chosen, rather than the meaning, then you're looking at it all wrong. The word "no" can be the most offensive, heartbreaking thing in the world used in the right place; and banning a set of words traditionally employed in the act of flaming isn't going to stop flamers.

But assuming you mean the same thing with both expressions. The second will be harsher. Our minds are just structured to attach

Are you kidding? What about the word 'gay'? It used to mean something else, you know. Did you know that 'decimate' traditionally means 'reduce by a tenth'? Of course, it doesn't now, it just means 'destroy' or 'obliterate'. Words are defined by their meaning. If the word 'fuck' became a completely everyday non-event of a word. used in front of your grandmother and by your grandmother, it wouldn't be 'offensive' anymore.

Yes, well, you're talking about a change that happened with a great deal of people over a great deal of time. (Decades for one example, centuries for the other). You're suggesting we just randomly abandon a definition instantaneously, as if that will make it okay by nature. It doesn't WORK like that.



This is absolutely not the case. In fact, I've just spent this and the last post arguing as to why language is an organic, morphing entity, defined by its use and not by any other force intrinsic to the universe. 'Fuck' is not a bad word because the universe is built in with that feature; it's a bad word because some deluded people decided, nonsensically, that it's a bad word, and no other reason. (In actual fact, most swear words were officially labelled 'cursing' in the Victorian era, when a bunch of snobbish aristocrats decided amongst themselves to label a few of the working class' words as 'vulgar'. They're man-made.)


Fuck has been offensive since the very beginning, as far as etymologists can tell. It's earliest known appearance, in a poem called Flen flyys, some time before 1500, had to be censored. But it's origins as a swear word aren't that important. What is important is that the majority of people today consider it a swear word and use it as such.

Besides, it's not as if one can eliminate swearing. If Fuck becomes acceptable, another word will take its place, and on and on it will go, untill the year 3,000, when someone like you complains in a place like this that he's not allowed to say "glorx"

Mm-hmm? So explain to me why you find the word 'fuck' offensive. Why is it vulgar? Why is it 'bad'?

Because it IS. That's what the word MEANS. It's the same reason that chair means "A piece of furniture consisting of a seat, legs, back, and often arms, designed to accommodate one person." and not "a dish of custard." I mean, you could USE the word chair to describe a dish of custard, but that wouldn't make it so.
H Hog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:17 pm
Post subject:
Hm, an automated censor script would indeed, in my opinion, be better then an automated banning script.
However, a kick/ban script functions on re-action to something that has already been said.
A censoring script would require all incoming text to be screened BEFORE being posted in the chatroom.
I'm not that familiar with IRC, but is that even possible without some dedicated server moderator being in the room 24-7?
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:19 pm
Post subject:
CrazyMrLeo wrote:
Could you give the word "shoe" the same meaning of the word "hedgehog"?


Talking about two slang words, it's meaning in the vulgarity level.

Darn! Damn!
Shit! Crap!

Which one would ya choose!

I'm saying if the word "fsck" was given the meaning just as "Gosh" then there wouldn't be a problem.
H Hog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:21 pm
Post subject:
I prefer the less offensive alternatives, personally.
Because I don't feel like being seen as a jackass that swears like a sailor everytime the situation occurs that I might feel a bit irked.

Or even worse, for no reason at all.

Quote:
I'm saying if the word "fsck" was given the meaning just as "Gosh" then there wouldn't be a problem.


Here's an idea; Then use Gosh already.

WHAT A KEEN SOLUTION! =D
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:22 pm
Post subject:
H Hog wrote:
Hm, an automated censor script would indeed, in my opinion, be better then an automated banning script.
However, a kick/ban script functions on re-action to something that has already been said.
A censoring script would require all incoming text to be screened BEFORE being posted in the chatroom.
I'm not that familiar with IRC, but is that even possible without some dedicated server moderator being in the room 24-7?


I think that's possible, the bot can take the text, insert it in itself and post in in the room under .. like this

Bots name: "."

<.><Areo>: **** or
<.>: ****
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:25 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Better call Guiness, i don't think anyone has managed to put so many feet in his mouth at once before.


I know, it's incredible-- I've no idea how you managed to fit them all in there. I think you need to re-read what I was saying: You said that it's wrong to just go around swearing and feeling that if someone else finds your swearing offensive it's their problem. But finding a word 'offensive' is grounded in absolutely zero logic, and so is equivelent to me finding someone scratching their head offensive.

Quote:
And people have developed language to express thier offensive nature towards others. The words used in such language are collectively known as swear words. This is exactly where your arguments fall apart: Give me one sentance where the word "shit" is, by definition, non-vulgar and completely relevant.


This is what I'm trying to tell you: 'vulgar' is in your head. If you wanted to, you could decide that the word 'shoe' is 'vulgar', and it'd make just as much sense; that's what I'm trying to tell you. Please try really hard to understand this.

Look, people can be offensive-- it's what they're best at-- but an offensive person swearing at you is the least of your problems.

In the other post, you said:

Quote:
'This is because a word and it's use are not separable like you want to believe. The word is it's meaning, and it's meaning directly tied to it's use.'


Yes, a word is simply shorthand for its meaning (thus contradicting what you said immediately before you made this statement, but never mind). The words 'fuck' and 'shit' have their own context-sensitive meanings, some of which can be offensive if used by someone intending to offend. But riddle me this:

"Boy, I fucking love chocolate cake! ^_^"

... Can you really tell me in all honesty that you find this statement offensive? Because if you can, there's something seriously wrong with you.

Quote:
Still waiting for real reason swear words should be unbanned. In fact, I will refuse to make any further comments until Popcorn produces one, least he try to weasel out of it.


I'm weaseling out of it?
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:25 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
Smidge, you don't seem to understand. Swear words aren't offensive, people are. It's in your head. It's in. Your. Head.

See, the problem with this argument is that it only makes sense if Smidge is the only one who thinks the word is vulgar, or one of a few, or maybe even one of a few hundred.

Quote:
If people are being twats, then get upset over it. If someone says, "Oh boy, I fucking love chocolate cake! ^_^", then, well, fucking don't. Yes there are 'social graces' but half of these 'social graces' are the bullshit products of being a race of backward, pretentious idiots who think they matter.

Congratulations, you have realized that human society is full of bullshit. Guess what? It's time for lesson two: If you want to be part of human society, you have to put up with the bullshit, whether you like it or not.

Quote:
Quote:
And that, again, is exactly what I mean by immature. "I'm using this word because I don't find it offensive or vulgar, and if you think it is there's something wrong with you."


You know what, you're so completely right. And what's more, this same correct logic can be applied to everything. Next time I see someone scratch their head in front of me, I'm going to ask them to stop, because I've decided it's offensive. If they ask why, I will tell them "Because I say so." And who are they to complain about it? If they point out that I have no logic behind finding this offensive, well... it doesn't matter, because I find it offensive so they definitely should not do it and this makes complete perfect sense and I am not a deluded self-righteous eletist control freak or anything. This is because deciding that something is 'vulgar' and then forcing everyone else to correspond to it, however vastly irrational, makes complete and perfect sense.

There's a fundamental flaw in your argument: You are one person. The people who find the word "fuck" vulgar are hundreds of millions of people... maybe billions.

Hell, murder isn't intrinsically "wrong", we just think of it that way because most people think it is. By your logic, that's a stupid reason and murder should be legal.

AreoZephin wrote:
Andrusi wrote:
Did I say "when someone says fuck, I cry"? No. I said that I tend to form very poor first impressions of people who say "fuck". This is in no way a problem for me, but it will be a problem for you if you ever need something from me, or from anyone else who feels the same way. And lemme tell you something, kid. If you piss someone off in any way, telling them you expect them "to damn well cope" isn't going to help.


Starting now, can we not threaten?

Who's threatening? A threat is when you say "I'll a unless you b". I'm saying "Other people will a unless you b" and "I'll a because you already b". One is a notification, the other is a suggestion.

Quote:
And please don't use people's quotes against people Andrusi, you understand that "Quote:
THE ANSWER SUCKS AND IS A COMPLETELY LAME EXCUSE FOR ANY KIND OF RATIONAL LOGIC. " is twisting that complete concept of that statement.

Oh yeah, sure, the word "Because" at the beginning of that sentence REALLY changes its meaning.

Quote:
I personally never read an almost 2 foot long; one reply, that's going over the red line for a reply.

What would you suggest? That we intentionally double-post?

Areo, Popcorn, you're arguing a lot about what words mean. Here's a word, please become familiar with its meaning:
connotation
Keith Stack - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:29 pm
Post subject:
AreoZephin wrote:
CrazyMrLeo wrote:
Could you give the word "shoe" the same meaning of the word "hedgehog"?


Talking about two slang words, it's meaning in the vulgarity level.

Darn! Damn!
Shit! Crap!

Which one would ya choose!

I'm saying if the word "fsck" was given the meaning just as "Gosh" then there wouldn't be a problem.


They're on different levels of vulgarity. If I die on a videogame I might say "Crap". If I slice my finger open with a knife, I might say "Shit". In the english language some words and phrases are stronger than others. "Damn" is stronger than "Darn", just as "Horrifying" is stronger than "Scary". There's absolutly nothing you can say or do to change that.

You were in a chat room that doesn't tolerate strong language. You used strong language. You were banned. If you want to use strong language in a chat room, use another chat room that tolorates strong language.
Ed - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:30 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Okay, so why don't you drop a few F-bombs during your next job interview and see how well it turns out. I'll bet good money that if you met your potential boss/interviewer in a bar at some point he'd be tossing them left and right himself... so clearly it's not a personal objection to the word. It is, however, considered impolite to use such language in that context.


Because #srb2 is just like a job interview or a library or a bookstore.

I am failing to see the importance of banning two words.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:30 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Because it IS. That's what the word MEANS. It's the same reason that chair means "A piece of furniture consisting of a seat, legs, back, and often arms, designed to accommodate one person." and not "a dish of custard." I mean, you could USE the word chair to describe a dish of custard, but that wouldn't make it so.


Finally, you make some sense. Yes, the word has some 'offensive' connotation but what you still fail to understand is that, like most swear words, it is severely context and circumstance-specific. (See the chocolate cake example.)

But this argument has spiralled out of control and into the realm of the irrelevant. Now:

Hands up who can't deal with swear words.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:34 pm
Post subject:
Keith Stack wrote:
AreoZephin wrote:
CrazyMrLeo wrote:
Could you give the word "shoe" the same meaning of the word "hedgehog"?


Talking about two slang words, it's meaning in the vulgarity level.

Darn! Damn!
Shit! Crap!

Which one would ya choose!

I'm saying if the word "fsck" was given the meaning just as "Gosh" then there wouldn't be a problem.


They're on different levels of vulgarity. If I die on a videogame I might say "Crap". If I slice my finger open with a knife, I might say "Shit". In the english language some words and phrases are stronger than others. "Damn" is stronger than "Darn", just as "Horrifying" is stronger than "Scary". There's absolutly nothing you can say or do to change that.

You were in a chat room that doesn't tolerate strong language. You used strong language. You were banned. If you want to use strong language in a chat room, use another chat room that tolorates strong language.


No, see, I don't go to the chat room. I was mainly giving an opinion until someone attacked it. Just like Ed gave his opinion, I was agreeing with the * script idea.

And, really. Would you seriously use a different cuss word for everything you do? Crap, for video game, shit for cutting your finger? I never heard of that. I've always heard people use the same cussword basically anything they use it at.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:37 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Congratulations, you have realized that human society is full of bullshit. Guess what? It's time for lesson two: If you want to be part of human society, you have to put up with the bullshit, whether you like it or not.


You mean like you guys?

Quote:
There's a fundamental flaw in your argument: You are one person. The people who find the word "fuck" vulgar are hundreds of millions of people... maybe billions.


But. They're. Wrong. If everyone in the world decided to find head-scratching offensive, do you think that'd be rational of them? Even though it makes no goddamn sense at all, on any kind of scale? Even though it causes no harm or damage or inconvenience to anyone? And then for someone else to pop up and say, "Hang on, this doesn't make any sense"-- you'd treat them just as you're treating me: like I'm fucking insane? It doesn't matter if people are offended; I think it's actually good for them. If I had my way people would be offended every day of their lives. What I'm telling you people is to get. Over. It, because they're just words in fucking cyberspace and they're not going to hurt you. And that is why swearing should be allowed in #srb2.

Quote:
Hell, murder isn't intrinsically "wrong", we just think of it that way because most people think it is. By your logic, that's a stupid reason and murder should be legal.


I refer you to Mill's 'Harm Principle': offense is not the same as harm. Please let's not mix language with physical action, because then it gets very, very complicated.
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:37 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
This is what I'm trying to tell you: 'vulgar' is in your head. If you wanted to, you could decide that the word 'shoe' is 'vulgar', and it'd make just as much sense; that's what I'm trying to tell you. Please try really hard to understand this.

I could decide that. I could also decide that "nuclear bomb" is a synonym for "shoe". But what happens when I then use the word among other people? I think I'll try an experiment with that.

(actual dialogue)
[Andy]: Hey Matt, I'm doing an experiment. Do you keep nuclear bombs in your room?
[Matt (my roommate)]: [laughs] No.

Presumably you see my point, unless you honestly believe my roommate doesn't own any shoes (in which case you are of course a moron). Just because I decide "nuclear bomb" means "shoe" does not mean I can now arbitrarily say "nuclear bomb" and have everyone understand that I refer to my footwear.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:39 pm
Post subject:
Andrusi wrote:

Quote:
And please don't use people's quotes against people Andrusi, you understand that "Quote:
THE ANSWER SUCKS AND IS A COMPLETELY LAME EXCUSE FOR ANY KIND OF RATIONAL LOGIC. " is twisting that complete concept of that statement.

Oh yeah, sure, the word "Because" at the beginning of that sentence REALLY changes its meaning.


No. You said "WELCOME TO EARTH" which had nothing to do with what Popcorn was saying about the cussing rule. You're using this quote for another subject.
Andrusi wrote:

Quote:
I personally never read an almost 2 foot long; one reply, that's going over the red line for a reply.

What would you suggest? That we intentionally double-post?

Areo, Popcorn, you're arguing a lot about what words mean. Here's a word, please become familiar with its meaning:
connotation


No, more kindly put, more simply. SUMMARIZE IT.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:41 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Presumably you see my point, unless you honestly believe my roommate doesn't own any shoes (in which case you are of course a moron). Just because I decide "nuclear bomb" means "shoe" does not mean I can now arbitrarily say "nuclear bomb" and have everyone understand that I refer to my footwear.


Yes, I absolutely see your point and have been seeing it from the beginning. But the definition of 'fuck' is not 'offensive swear word', because it is entirely up to the maturity and intelligence of the individual as to how offensive they find it.
H Hog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:43 pm
Post subject:
I'm sorry, but you're not meeting very interesting people, then.

Are you seriously suggesting that there's people out there who'd have the same word choice for every single setback? I can imagine it now.

"FUCK I dropped my keys!"
"FUCK I stubbed my toe!"
"FUCK I cut my arm off with the chainsaw!"
"FUCK Someone drank all the beer!"
"FUCK I missed the latest episode of Cars Weekly!"
"FUCK I'm out of toilet paper!"
"FUCK the garbage can's full again!"
"FUCK there's no more room on my desk!"

Surely not all of the above situations call for the use of such language.

There's moments to use those words, and there's moments where it's uncalled for.
Know the moments.
Ed - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:44 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Congratulations, you have realized that human society is full of bullshit. Guess what? It's time for lesson two: If you want to be part of human society, you have to put up with the bullshit, whether you like it or not.


Because the internet is this clean human place (like a temple of wisdomic people!) where saying horrible words like FUCK and SHIT make you look like a bad pedophilic kitten-kicking person. :{

This is so stupid.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:48 pm
Post subject:
H Hog wrote:
I'm sorry, but you're not meeting very interesting people, then.

Are you seriously suggesting that there's people out there who'd have the same word choice for every single setback? I can imagine it now.

"FUCK I dropped my keys!"
"FUCK I stubbed my toe!"
"FUCK I cut my arm off with the chainsaw!"
"FUCK Someone drank all the beer!"
"FUCK I missed the latest episode of Cars Weekly!"
"FUCK I'm out of toilet paper!"
"FUCK the garbage can's full again!"
"FUCK there's no more room on my desk!"



Surely not all of the above situations call for the use of such language.

There's moments to use those words, and there's moments where it's uncalled for.
Know the moments.


80% yes, and 100% on the level of the vulgarity XD
CrazyMrLeo - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:52 pm
Post subject:
But. They're. Wrong.

There is no absolute method of determing right and wrong. As such, we go with the majority to determine what society considers right. Survey says... YOU are wrong. And guess what? We're a part of society.

Don't like it? Tough. That's how it is.

If everyone in the world decided to find head-scratching offensive, do you think that'd be rational of them? Even though it makes no goddamn sense at all, on any kind of scale?

What is sense? I mean, if there was a society where, since the dawn of time, head scratching was a sign of great disrespect, it would make perfect sense. Likewise, since the invention of the word fuck, it has been a vulgarity. As far as we can tell, it's express PURPOSE was vulgarity.

Even though it causes no harm or damage or inconvenience to anyone?

Some people are greatly offended by cursing. Others simply don't enjoy hearing it. Either way, that's at least some harm.

And then for someone else to pop up and say, "Hang on, this doesn't make any sense"-- you'd treat them just as you're treating me: like I'm fucking insane?

It's all relative. There are a lot of things in society that, from a certain perspective, make no sense whatsoever. And yes, the swearing taboo ranks among them. But we aren't accustomed to that other perspective. We have our OWN perspective. As far as we're concerned, it makes sense. And we keep it because it WORKS.

It doesn't matter if people are offended; I think it's actually good for them. If I had my way people would be offended every day of their lives.

There is a saying. "Except for one utterly insignificant exception, the entire universe is composed of other people." You don't mind being offended. Good for you. Most people, however, do. And you should respect them enough to not offend them. That's what civility is based on.

What I'm telling you people is to get. Over. It, because they're just words in fucking cyberspace and they're not going to hurt you. And that is why swearing should be allowed in #srb2.

What I'm telling YOU is to get over it. They're just words in cyberspace, and not using them isn't going to hurt you. Your argument is baseless and inconsiderate, and that's why the ops of #srb2 should be allowed to decide whether or not swearing should be allowed in their channel.

I refer you to Mill's 'Harm Principle': offense is not the same as harm. Please let's not mix language with physical action, because then it gets very, very complicated.

Well, I mean, that depends on your definition of harm. Some people consider it to be a violation, be it physical, mental, or emotional. Offense is an emotional violation, and it's perfectly reasonable that some consider it harmful.
CrazyMrLeo - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:54 pm
Post subject:
Yes, I absolutely see your point and have been seeing it from the beginning. But the definition of 'fuck' is not 'offensive swear word', because it is entirely up to the maturity and intelligence of the individual as to how offensive they find it.

Actually, the definition of fuck specifically notes that it is vulgar slang.
Kiro - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:55 pm
Post subject:
This is off topic, but I wonder if this has blown up more than a religional debate?

But back on topic, I have to go with what Suitecase said. And Ed's suggest, if we could leave that at that now. Or not.

I'm done with it though, so, whoever can have the last word on my posts, I could give a damn now. :)
H Hog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:56 pm
Post subject:
Gasp.
Well, I'll just say this to all involved;

We all know these words exist.
We all know people are going to use them.
Howver, if someone prefers not to hear/read those words in particular, don't be a jackass by forcing it your way because you just happen to feel like being a little controversial today.
Have a bit of respect to eachother.
The disability of using the F and S words doesn't make you any less a person, nor does it limit any of your life neccesities.
All it is is a request, out of respect to the people maintaining the place.
It's like silence in a library.
Everyone knows the rule exists, and people do their best to comply.
So if you suddenly barge in there and stir up a lot of noise because you "have the freedom to do so" and other people "shouldn't be bothered by it because it's just sound", then clearly you've got the wrong mentality about life.
As much as the librarian has both the ability and the right to dismiss a noisy person from a library, the same reason applies to a person administrating a chatroom where a no swearing rule is active.

It's all a matter of respecting eachother.
So if you can't bring that up, don't be surprised if you're no longer welcome at places.
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:58 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
But. They're. Wrong. If everyone in the world decided to find head-scratching offensive, do you think that'd be rational of them? Even though it makes no goddamn sense at all, on any kind of scale? Even though it causes no harm or damage or inconvenience to anyone? And then for someone else to pop up and say, "Hang on, this doesn't make any sense"-- you'd treat them just as you're treating me: like I'm fucking insane?

The fact that people are offended by something is what makes it offensive. No, it wouldn't be rational. But nevertheless, if they were offended by it, then they would be correct in saying that they found it offensive.

And while you're saying "Hang on, this doesn't make any sense", you're also saying a hell of a lot of "You're all morons because you acknowledge that some people are offended by this". And if your hypothetical person was saying that as well, then yes, we'd treat him like he was fucking insane.

Quote:
It doesn't matter if people are offended; I think it's actually good for them. If I had my way people would be offended every day of their lives.

I am confident that you could do the job. Why, you're doing an excellent job of offending me right now.

Quote:
What I'm telling you people is to get. Over. It, because they're just words in fucking cyberspace and they're not going to hurt you. And that is why swearing should be allowed in #srb2.

Tell that to every single person on the planet, and convince them of it, and we'll talk.
Popcorn - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:04 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Actually, the definition of fuck specifically notes that it is vulgar slang.


That's just a generalism for the purposes of the dictionary. A dictionary is meant to describe a literary definition, not describe how you're meant to feel about it. But for someone who just spent an entire post arguing for relativism, to stand up and say that a swear word is point-blank vulgar seems awfully rich. Can we just pretend you never did any of that stuff?

I'm not very much interested in arguing the finer points of lingustics anymore; what I'm trying to tell you guys is that if you grin and bear it, the word 'fuck' will not do you any lasting damage. I'm sure everyone here can cope. Would you please answer the chocolate cake question?

I've gotta go to sleep now-- it's 1am here and I've got work in the morning, so I'll show up again sometime later. Can we get an answer on whether or not we can try a test lift on the swearing ban?
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:10 pm
Post subject:
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that we think we, personally, are in some way harmed by your use of the word "fuck". If this was the case, CML or H Hog would have banned your ass several pages ago.
CrazyMrLeo - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:11 pm
Post subject:
That's just a generalism for the purposes of the dictionary. A dictionary is meant to describe a literary definition, not describe how you're meant to feel about it. But for someone who just spent an entire post arguing for relativism, to stand up and say that a swear word is point-blank vulgar seems awfully rich. Can we just pretend you never did any of that stuff?

I was talking relative to societies at large, not just person to person.

Would you please answer the chocolate cake question?

I must have missed that question.

I'm not very much interested in arguing the finer points of lingustics anymore; what I'm trying to tell you guys is that if you grin and bear it, the word 'fuck' will not do you any lasting damage.

One could also argue that NOT saying fuck will also not do any lasting damage. That arguement could continue forever. However, you are not in a position to implement your opinion as policy, whereas the ops of srb2 ARE.
Smidge204 - Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:55 pm
Post subject:
There was no question. It was an "example". A rather poor one.

And would you please answer my real and rather good question: Why should swear words be unbanned?

I honestly don't expect an answer, because it's becoming clear to me that you don't have one. I don't think you ever had a real reason to bitch except that maybe you didn't think I could hold my end of the argument either, and was hoping for a stalemate in which you could rally everyone around your "you have no reason to ban those words" flag and make me look stupid.

Well that didn't work, did it?

The best you have been able to do is steer this into a more philosophical debate on "what words really mean," which you are rapidly losing.

Lame.

But I'll take this opportunity to make you look like an ass again, though, since there's not much to it...

*ahem*

You seem pretty offended that you were banned from #srb2. I'd like to remind you that what is and is not offensive is all in your head, and that I do not feel that being banned from a chatroom is offensive.

Therefore you are a backward, pretentious idiot who actually thinks he matters, and you should learn to cope with being banned. I honestly feel I am doing you a great service by banning you, since everyone can benefit from being offended once in awhile.

I'm not very much interested in arguing the finer points of why you were banned anymore; what I'm trying to tell you is that if you grin and bear it, being banned will not do you any lasting damage.

I suggest you really try, too, because at this rate you're going to be banned for a very, very long time.

=Smidge=
P.S... if you found the preceeding post offensive I suggest you cope with it, since it's all in your head.

P.P.S... Am I the only one who read "Boy, I fucking love chocolate cake!" as "Boy, I love fucking chocolate cake!" ...?
Nik Jam III - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:09 pm
Post subject:
I sometimes thought what it would be like if there was an online democracy. Creepy.
Ed - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:26 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
And would you please answer my real and rather good question: Why should swear words be unbanned?


Because it's stupid to ban them to begin with?

It's just out of place, it's like censoring porno.

If a person who can memorize command lines and addresses to a chatroom, and then feel that certain words might be inappropriate for the other people who also memorize command lines and addresses to get to the very same chatroom, might not be working on all cylinders.
Bartman - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:39 pm
Post subject:
Look the real point is, theres no room for cussing.


Unless theres a giant explosion, and you have no loved ones to say good bye to. All you can do is just go..






"Shit"

*Fizzle*
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:47 pm
Post subject:
Ed wrote:
If a person who can memorize command lines and addresses to a chatroom, and then feel that certain words might be inappropriate for the other people who also memorize command lines and addresses to get to the very same chatroom, might not be working on all cylinders.

Because the only people who are offended by swear words are people who can't operate an IRC client.
Ed - Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:59 pm
Post subject:
Unless you're a sheltered child (then what the heck are you doing on the net anyways?) You should be just fine with people using swear words.
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:03 pm
Post subject:
HEY GUYS I HAVE A GREAT WAY TO STOP THIS ARGUMENT:

The ops run #srb2, The ops say you can't say those two words, The ops say the topic isn't up for debate or discussion.

PROBLEM SOLVED.
Sz - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:07 pm
Post subject:
BlazeHedgehog wrote:
HEY GUYS I HAVE A GREAT WAY TO STOP THIS ARGUMENT:

The ops run #srb2, The ops say you can't say those two words, The ops say the topic isn't up for debate or discussion.

PROBLEM SOLVED.

Hey guys, I have a way to solve all political arguments!

The politicians run the US, they say we should go to war, the topic isn't up for debate or discussion.

PROBLEM SOLVED.


(Yeah, that was exaggerated. But maybe it shines a bit of light on how much your way sucks. :E)
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:11 pm
Post subject:
Think of it this way:

Hey yeah, it'd be great if you could waltz in to Circuit City and walk out with a 50 inch HDTV for free, right? But you can't do that, because the Police say that's stealing.

Maybe you should go to the cops and beg them to legalize theft!

Oh wait, you can't! But, getting things for free, that'd be really awesome! They should do it!

Doesn't matter. The Police say you can't steal. The Ops say you can't swear.

Get used to it or get out.
Cinossu - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:21 pm
Post subject:
Y'know Blaze, at least Smidge actually gives out a reasonable reply to the topic. Saying "HAY GUYS GUES WOT WE HAV POWAR WE OWN U BITCHES OUR WERD ISAL THAT MATERS BLAHBLAH" really doesn't help matters, and if anything will make people actually see all of you in a really bad light.

...and if your word is the only thing that matters, why not just +m the chat permenantly? That way the only people who can speak are you ops (as there are no auto-voices in #srb2).
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:30 pm
Post subject:
I'm just tired of the arguement, Cinos. Smidge can flex his brainmeats all he wants and debate the real issues at hand, but for me, it comes down to one simple thing: I help run the channel, and I say so.

Arrogant? Probably. But as it's been beaten in to the ground: If you're so lost without two words, you have more important things to worry about than some silly rule being altered to fit your needs.

Rules are rules and we don't want to change them. "Get used to it or get out". *shrug* Pop already has, infact. He started up #ghz where they can swear and post porn and what-the-hell ever. Good for them.

Meanwhile, I'm gonna stay where I'm at.
Cinossu - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:34 pm
Post subject:
...so no permenant +m? aww... *shot*
BlazeHedgehog - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:37 pm
Post subject:
Cinos wrote:
...so no permenant +m? aww... *shot*


<img src="http://blazefire.mooglecavern.com/Yourecoldman.jpg">
Blues The Squirrel - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:42 pm
Post subject:
The way I see it, Smidge has already explained their stance in a more than convincing manor so Blaze now has the right to burn everyone who opposes them to a crisp.
Andrusi - Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:46 pm
Post subject:
Ed wrote:
Unless you're a sheltered child (then what the heck are you doing on the net anyways?) You should be just fine with people using swear words.

Exposure/awareness =/= support/liking
Perfect Chaos Zero - Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:19 pm
Post subject:
Ok, now, I personally would like to see this rule gone but, I can see VERY well why it's there. While I do not agree with it, I do understand it. Therefore, I choose to support neither side of the argument. Instead, I'd like to see this discussion bloody over with. I've fought the war for swears many, MANY, times. I know where this ends and it's no where.

So I'd like to say, no matter what the user base says, does or wants, there's no chance in hell that this rule is gonna be gone, so just end the bloody discussion.
Nik Jam III - Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:27 pm
Post subject:
The reason is Sonikku didn't like casual swearing in #srb2. Despite that he's long gone. We're keeping that rule.
Ed - Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:52 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Exposure/awareness =/= support/liking


You don't have to like it. I don't. I don't have some shine dedicated to swear words. It's just that I think banning the two words are quite dumb.

But hell, this debate's over.
Scott - Tue Sep 07, 2004 11:57 pm
Post subject:
I remember having to ban the word "penis" for a week or so because you were all acting like ten year olds inserting the word into everything you said as many times as possible
In all fairness, and I remember this because I was exposed to the other side of this situation than you were, in private discussions and non-#srb2 discussions, people continued doing this because the word was banned. We had a discussion about this when it occurred. It would not have lasted nearly so long had it not been banned.

Childish? Hell yes, that's childish. But the fact that the banning of said word caused people to say it surely is relevant.

Maybe you should go to the cops and beg them to legalize theft!

I have to say your analogy was a nice try, but it fell apart very quickly. Theft - along with almost any crime I can think of - requires a victim. Which is the purpose of laws. They exist to limit the aspects of your life which would otherwise limit the aspects of other peoples lives.
H Hog - Wed Sep 08, 2004 4:23 am
Post subject:
I'll repeat what I said before.

Swearing is generally, among most humans on this planet, considered a rude thing.
You can't go on the streets and say "FUCK YOU" to the nearest guy you see and expect him to accept that.
Aside from the fact that the F and S words aren't words that ought to be used in regular conversations much, they're also words that, when overused, make people angry eventually.

Now, doesn't everyone prefer a good conversation about whatever it is that's discussed in SRB2 as of late, instead of a sourmouthed rant-fest?

Have any of you even considered what would happen if those words were unbanned?
People start using them. Probably a lot, too.
I don't have to tell any of you how quickly everyone put "Fuck" in their topicline in the Fluff forum when the first "Michael Moore is a Fucking Moron" topic was made.
They saw the possibilities, and everyone massively started doing it.
It didn't take long before people like Sz and Andrusi became annoyed by it.

So now do you see the point that's trying to be made?
Swearing causes annoyance and to a higher rate, aggression.
No one wants that.
No one wants a room full of people swearing like Eric Cartman.
SuitCase - Wed Sep 08, 2004 5:34 am
Post subject:
Blaze, read the first post of this topic. Your comments are not relevant to it so don't take Smidge's temporary appearance of having "owned" Pop as an opportunity for making yourself sound reasonable.

H Hog, I see your intention and agree, but as I'm about to elaborate on, I don't believe Popcorn is trying to get you to think the chat room should be full of foul language and insults.

Smidge, your arguments are jumbled and repetitive at best. While you are at least trying to justify yourself it appears you lost it quite a while ago but at the same time Pop and Areo are stuck in the awkward position of having to reiterate and reiterate the point as you keep lunging for opportunities to pull Pop's arguments apart but not considering the wider picture he's trying to depict at all.

I agree that the chocolate cake example wasn't a particularly good one, and I think Popcorn has made some statements that are overly idealistic, however the main point (in my view) is not one of philosophy but just.. practicality.

I don't swear too much online. I do it when I'm angry or feel strongly about something, which is quite often in my rare posting on this board or when the words are appropriate for a joke, but 80% of the conversations I have don't involve objectionable words. This includes when I visit #srb2.

However, what I think is not a universally offensive or objectionable statement is to say something like "Shit, that really is awesome" or "Ah, fucking hell, I hate this thing!" You're treating this as if "Oh, that's just fucking brilliant!" is similar to "I think you're a fucking dickhead."

Perhaps the best way to put this in a more.. understandable sense that's not so easy for you to pick away semantics and partially subjective and emotional comments until there's nothing left: Consider the analogy of IRC with real life! If your house or school or workplace could install some kind of swear filter that kicked you out every time you uttered one of the two chosen nasty words, I feel that you'd be more upset and consider it more of an injustice. In any case, it is close to Popcorn's suggestion of Newspeak. In a chatroom, it's very easy to set up scripts to do this same job, and I don't feel there's significant difference between the two.

However, it's ridiculous to say the two words are just.. always bad. Maybe to the oversensitive crybabies, yes, but the majority of people that find "Damn you to hell!" offensive wouldn't find "Hell yes!" offensive, much like "Ah, shit. I'm sorry for that.." isn't in any way similar to "This shit has to fucking stop!" What Popcorn repeatedly told you is that it's the meaning that counts, not the words, and that makes sense. As you desperately try to shift the blame of paranoia and oversensitivity to the people complaining over the paranoia and oversensitivity, you complain they're just two little words and have no application where they're ever necessary. But to continue the example of myself - I feel it works well when I'm really angry or want to use it to express myself in a more succinct way.

Hence, having a dumb script that goes "YOU'RE BAD HAHA OUT FOR TWO MINUTES" whenever I or another like-minded person who isn't an idiot makes the occasional "That's bullshit! >:O" or "How totally fucking ridiculous XD" is a disadvantage and an annoyance. It hampers at least mine and Popcorn's ability to communicate certain emotions to a reasonable for some sort of weird distorted reason you and your side can't seem to coherently state or defend.

But, of course, if I descended into rambling that you refuse to process: <b>Just stop with the nazi-ism and let the chatroom work like real life does. Scripts don't solve these sort of problems. Social pressure causes people to act reasonably and it has done for these millenia to this billions of people you fondly speak of. If some moron comes in saying "Crap crap this is crap darn you all to heck!" they're gonna be considered just as much an idiot as the next guy who shows similar intensity of anger but with one or two "fuck"s instead. You aren't changing people, and there is no reason to try - just act like 90% of other chatrooms and let the place regulate itself beyond the technical issues and a democratic method of choosing people to ban.</b>

How about we just try turning off the filter and waiting for the lack of\anarchy?

(Anyway, what does it matter to me :| Espernet k-lined me a week ago for no reason I can tell.)
H Hog - Wed Sep 08, 2004 7:25 am
Post subject:
Quote:
Consider the analogy of IRC with real life! If your house or school or workplace could install some kind of swear filter that kicked you out every time you uttered one of the two chosen nasty words, I feel that you'd be more upset and consider it more of an injustice.


Some schools do.
And well, kicking someone out of the house is of course a bit strong in a real life analogy, but I do still know certain households that keep a bar of soap handy for language purposes. =o

I agree with the fact that in some cases, the "Fuck" and "Shit" words can be meant in a positive sense.
I also know that at times, I've been kicked out of #srb2 as well, for laughing at something, and going "LMAO, WHAT THE SHIT? XD"
Thing is, I got kicked, I rejoined, I said "Oops" and got over it.
Some people just take it better then others I suppose.

SuitCase wrote:
H Hog, I see your intention and agree, but as I'm about to elaborate on, I don't believe Popcorn is trying to get you to think the chat room should be full of foul language and insults.


Could have fooled me. =\
But I suppose Popcorn honestly just... doesn't see the damage that insults and swearing can cause at times.
I know he wants the words to be there to add power to certain situations, but the thing is... Not everyone thinks like he does.

While he's happily saying "Shit, this stuff is funny" in a harmless way, someone else can just as well join in, go "SHIT ASS FUCK COCK BASTARD DICKGIRLS LOL I USE TEH INTERNET FUCKFACES" for fifty lines in a row, annoy the rest of the room, and if the room operators just happen to be AFK or asleep, no one's there to stop him.
Which is why the filter's in place, to do the work of the operators in case they're not there. ;P
I know it's a bit inconvenient at times, but it just makes everything so much easier as a whole.
(Yeah, I know. It's for the most part laziness. But it functions when it needs to, at least.)
To that effect, I suppose I might have an idea of a possible compromise; that it can be turned off if operators are active, and turned on (with a heads-up to the people in the room) when the last active operator goes AFK. Idea?

Quote:
What Popcorn repeatedly told you is that it's the meaning that counts, not the words, and that makes sense.


True, true. It does. But to continue on the previous point of this post; let me know if you find any "meaning filters" out there. =\

Still though.... it could be worse.
You could be chatting on the <a href="http://www.rpgamer.com/editor/2001/q2/060301cu.html">"Phantasy Star Online"</a> server.
Let's all be glad about that one. ;P
Smidge204 - Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:18 am
Post subject:
SuitCase wrote:
Smidge, your arguments are jumbled and repetitive at best. While you are at least trying to justify yourself it appears you lost it quite a while ago but at the same time Pop and Areo are stuck in the awkward position of having to reiterate and reiterate the point as you keep lunging for opportunities to pull Pop's arguments apart but not considering the wider picture he's trying to depict at all.


And what, exactly, is this "wider picture" you speak of... because the only arguments I see coming from him boil down to "I don't think it's offensive and anyone who disagrees with me should deal with it."

That's not very compelling, you know.

Perhaps the reason my argument seems repetitive is probably because I've been spending most of my time refuting Pop's highly repetitive argument. I might add that you are beating the same exact drum that he is, so I'm not even going to waste my time replying to your post in full.

So, since you seem to have forgotten exactly what my argument was, I shall repeat:

Smidge204 wrote:
I do not speak for the other ops when I say this, but if you want a reason why I support the banning of those words, then here it is:

I consider those words to be impolite and immature, and do not lend themselves to a productive and civil discussion. By banning the use of those words it makes it harder for a discussion to degenerate into a flamewar because, quite simply, the kinds of people who would start senseless flaming are (generally) not creative enough to do so without using those words.

Also, I feel it helps promote a slightly less casual thought process without destroying casual conversation at the same time. It's never a bad thing if you have to think about what you're going to say instead of barfing out whatever floats through your head.

At least that's my position on it, anyway.


That is my argument, as a whole. That is the reason why I support the ban. It is not because I personally find the words offensive, but because I feel it will do the channel a disservice to allow them.

Pop then tried to refute this by claiming they are not impolite or immature. He has failed because he only considered the individual (namely, himself) who determines the true meaning and value of a word. As I and several others have demonstrated, the true meaning and value of a word is defined by society as a whole and not by the individual. This is exactly where this argument falls apart.

The second argument, an extension of the first (so it was already in trouble), and the one which Pop really failed to deliver properly... and I quote him directly on this: "What I'm trying to tell you guys is that if you grin and bear it, the word 'fuck' will not do you any lasting damage. I'm sure everyone here can cope."

This translates as: "I don't think it's offensive and anyone who disagrees with me should deal with it."

If that's his entire argument, then I can offer: "I think it IS offensive, and since I'm the op in the channel anyone who disagrees with me can deal with being banned." Hopefully we both agree this argument sucks, but that's exactly what Pop is saying.

And I'm still waiting to hear a reasonable argument for swearing to be allowed. Nobody has even attempted to give one.
=Smidge=
H Hog - Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:29 am
Post subject:
Quote:
And what, exactly, is this "wider picture" you speak of...


Read the lower half of Suitcase's post. ;P

Quote:
Nobody has even attempted to give one.


I'd say Suitcase made a pretty good attempt, don't be so quick to dismiss that.

I've also attempted to give a compromise, though.
It'd do you good to sometimes read the (parts of) posts that don't just address you personally. ;P
Diabloid - Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:33 am
Post subject:
what i find funny about this is that if it was someone like say zhan who decided to question the rule i highly doubt you would have banned him, and/or started talking to him like a bitch like you are treating popcorn.
Andrusi - Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:21 am
Post subject:
In the case of the MCers, at least, that's because we know Zhan well enough to know that if he acts like we're not smart enough to wipe our own asses, he's probably kidding. For all we know, Popcorn actually believes we have the collective IQ of a bottle of Mello Yello.
Matt_TY - Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:22 am
Post subject:
THE WAY IT SHOULD HAVE GONE.
By Matt.


1. Popcorn asks frequently asked question.
2a. Smidge posts answer he gave midway down page three.
2b. Even better, said reason is posted to #srb2 rules page.
3. Popcorn sees that even though he disagrees with logic displayed in (2), there is some sensible logic. He shuts up, (or takes it up with mods by PM).
4. Topic goes back to normal.


THE WAY IT HAPPENED:
By a Bunch of Immature Morons.

1. Popcorn raises frequently asked question.
2. Blaze and Mystic reply: RAR WE R MIGHTY MODS BOW BEFORE OUR POWOR.
3. Popcorn idiotically refuses to take situation to PM. So do mods.
4. Popcorn is banned.
5. Popcorn and mods instigate largest single collection of human stupidity posted at MoogleMB since Kackro.
6. All involved suck.
Andrusi - Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:27 am
Post subject:
::goes over thread with a vaccuum cleaner::
Smidge204 - Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:27 am
Post subject:
Diab: He's treated like a bitch because he acts like one.

Sorry H, I had started writing that post before you posted yours so I didn't see it (took so long 'cause I had to get dressed and get to work). But okay, let's go back and take a closer look at Suit's post first:

SuitCase wrote:
However, it's ridiculous to say the two words are just.. always bad. Maybe to the oversensitive crybabies, yes, but the majority of people that find "Damn you to hell!" offensive wouldn't find "Hell yes!" offensive, much like "Ah, shit. I'm sorry for that.." isn't in any way similar to "This shit has to fucking stop!" What Popcorn repeatedly told you is that it's the meaning that counts, not the words, and that makes sense. As you desperately try to shift the blame of paranoia and oversensitivity to the people complaining over the paranoia and oversensitivity, you complain they're just two little words and have no application where they're ever necessary. But to continue the example of myself - I feel it works well when I'm really angry or want to use it to express myself in a more succinct way.


1) Again, as we've already covered, the meaning of the word is based well beyond the individual's use and context. "Shit" and "fuck" are vular words, period. Their purpose for existing is to be vulgar, and regardless of how colloquial they become they will always be vulgar.

2) You are desperately trying to label as "paranoia and oversensitivity" what which I actually consider "common courtesy and politeness". This argument may have some merit is I personally felt the words were offensive, but I do not. I use them quite freely myself, but only if courtesy allows it. For example, I don't swear in a church, or in a courtroom, or when talking to a client while on the job. To do so is all but universally considered rude and unprofessional.

3) Maybe if you build your vocabulary a little more you might find better, less ambiguous ways to express yourself than with vulgarities? Or maybe you should take a page out of Popcorn's philosophy and deal with it.

SuitCase wrote:
Hence, having a dumb script that goes "YOU'RE BAD HAHA OUT FOR TWO MINUTES" whenever I or another like-minded person who isn't an idiot makes the occasional "That's bullshit! >:O" or "How totally fucking ridiculous XD" is a disadvantage and an annoyance. It hampers at least mine and Popcorn's ability to communicate certain emotions to a reasonable for some sort of weird distorted reason you and your side can't seem to coherently state or defend.


This sounds like a personal problem; not being able to communicate yourself effectively. See #3 above. as for stating and defending my opinions, I seem to be doing fairly well, though I get the impression you missed exactly what my opinions are. See my previous post.

Suitcase wrote:
But, of course, if I descended into rambling that you refuse to process: Just stop with the nazi-ism and let the chatroom work like real life does. Scripts don't solve these sort of problems. Social pressure causes people to act reasonably and it has done for these millenia to this billions of people you fondly speak of. If some moron comes in saying "Crap crap this is crap darn you all to heck!" they're gonna be considered just as much an idiot as the next guy who shows similar intensity of anger but with one or two "fuck"s instead. You aren't changing people, and there is no reason to try - just act like 90% of other chatrooms and let the place regulate itself beyond the technical issues and a democratic method of choosing people to ban.


1) The chatroom does work like real life does. It has rules (very, very basic rules I might add), and if you break the rules you get punished. One of the rules happens to be that you are expected to at least try to be polite in your manner of speech (no swearing). This is why partial misspellings and inserting *'s are allowed, because it makes you more aware that you are using these words and that you are trying, at least on some level, not to swear.

2) Scripts are a form of social pressure. Considering how infrequently people swear in the channel you have to admit it's working.

3) If some moron comes in saying "Crap crap this is crap darn you all to heck!", they will be banned. This has nothing to do with the no swearing rule. As H pointed out, there is no such thing as an "intent" or "meaning" filter. If there was I certainly wouldn't allow it anyway (as it is I don't like scripts). However, I have demonstrated that the words "fuck" and "shit" can have no other connotation than as a vulgarity, so they can be effectively filtered.

And this is still not an argument why they should be allowed, it's an argument that "the ban is stupid." -- which we've covered. The "wider picture" seems to be along the lines of "I don't want to have to change my behavior to fit into a group, I think the group should change so that it finds my behavior acceptable". How selfish.

#srb2 has always had a no swearing rule. It used to be a lot worse: nearly a dozen words at one point, plus all known spelling variations, and even substituting one or two letters with * was not enough if it was still clear what the word was... since Sonikku left me in charge I've simplified this down to two words that are only bannable if you use them explicitly. So all that is required now is that you at least be semi-conscious of the fact that you're swearing. That's it. That's all that is expected of you.
=Smidge=
Matt_TY - Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:37 am
Post subject:
Actually, Smidge, (and, oh brother, I can see myself getting sucked up by Andy's suckiness vaccuum, but here we go), that's not true. Words change in vulgarity level all the time. In the Thirties, for example, "jazz" was considered an unspeakable word. While in 1666, "Piss" was quite socially acceptable. (The famous quote is the Lord Mayor of London's first reactions to what would become the Great Fire of London: "Pssh! A woman could piss it out!")

But that's beside the point. The _real_ points are:

Popcorn and friends: if someone asks you to stop doing something, what's the problem in stopping?

Mods: if someone asks you a question, what in hell is wrong with answering it in a sensible fashion? While we're at it, what is wrong with giving somoeone more than five microseconds between ban-threaten and ban?

Can someone please answer these questions before I lose _all_ respect for all the people involved?
Scott - Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:42 am
Post subject:
Smidge, but you know that's not true. Shit and fuck aren't, in fact, at the same levels of vulgarity in all contexts. "Shit" has appeared on television on several occasions, I believe it was NYPD Blue, and of course the South Park episode following it. When Bono said "Fucking" in I believe the sentence "This is fucking amazing" the FCC said that it was acceptable because the context was just an adjective expressing something extreme, and not vulgar or explicit. This wasn't a new law - it had always been that way.
BlazeHedgehog - Wed Sep 08, 2004 10:06 am
Post subject:
Quote:
"Shit" has appeared on television on several occasions, I believe it was NYPD Blue, and of course the South Park episode following it.


After fairly large, hard-to-miss disclaimers and a TV-MA rating. #srb2 is not TV-MA. Furthermore it is to be said that half of South Park's infamy is due to it's offensive comedy, and NYPD Blue is known to be a "hardcore cop drama". Why do these apply to what should be allowed in #srb2? Are they really examples you wanna be using in this situation?

Quote:
When Bono said "Fucking" in I believe the sentence "This is fucking amazing" the FCC said that it was acceptable because the context was just an adjective expressing something extreme, and not vulgar or explicit. This wasn't a new law - it had always been that way.


A one-off that happened how many years ago? You honestly think the FCC would let that slide today? Look how big of a stink a single breast caused (excuse me; "Wardrobe Malfunction"). On some Live events there are safeguards against those sorts of "vulgar slips"; time delays between when it was recorded and when it airs on TV, to give editors some time to bleep what's necessary.
Scott - Wed Sep 08, 2004 10:46 am
Post subject:
BlazeHedgehog wrote:
Quote:
"Shit" has appeared on television on several occasions, I believe it was NYPD Blue, and of course the South Park episode following it.


After fairly large, hard-to-miss disclaimers and a TV-MA rating. #srb2 is not TV-MA. Furthermore it is to be said that half of South Park's infamy is due to it's offensive comedy, and NYPD Blue is known to be a "hardcore cop drama". Why do these apply to what should be allowed in #srb2? Are they really examples you wanna be using in this situation?


The point is that they aren't as vulgar in certain contexts as others. If you can't see how that's relevant, that sounds like a personal problem.

Quote:
Quote:
When Bono said "Fucking" in I believe the sentence "This is fucking amazing" the FCC said that it was acceptable because the context was just an adjective expressing something extreme, and not vulgar or explicit. This wasn't a new law - it had always been that way.


A one-off that happened how many years ago? You honestly think the FCC would let that slide today? Look how big of a stink a single breast caused (excuse me; "Wardrobe Malfunction"). On some Live events there are safeguards against those sorts of "vulgar slips"; time delays between when it was recorded and when it airs on TV, to give editors some time to bleep what's necessary.


It happened in 2003, silly-pants. (Foot in mouth, oh no!)

This issue arose as a result of the annual Golden Globe Awards ceremony held in January 2003, during which singer Bono of the band U2 uttered the phrase "this is really, really, fucking brilliant" (also reported as "this is fucking great"). Bono's comment was aired, intact, by various television stations, prompting about 200 complaints to the FCC that those TV stations had violated the FCC's restrictions on obscene broadcasts by carrying that portion of the awards ceremony. Several months later, in October 2003, the FCC's Enforcement Bureau issued a response to those complaints in which it maintained that broadcasts of Bono's words had not violated the FCC's prohibition of indecent program content because the word "fucking" was a "fleeting and isolated" remark used "as an adjective or expletive to emphasize an exclamation" and not "to describe or depict sexual and excretory organs and activities"

uh oh there's my point in full. The FCC is a giant fucking head that decides what's suitable for America to see and hear, and they understand the distinction between different contexts of a word like "fuck," don't they?
Smidge204 - Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:48 pm
Post subject:
Well if you insist on using the FCC as an authority on what can and can't be said in public... I just thought you'ld like to know that the FCC <a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=%5CCulture%5Carchive%5C200403%5CCUL20040319a.html">flip-flopped on that very decision</a>.

(Foot in mouth)^2
=smidge=
Popcorn - Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:05 pm
Post subject:
There's too much garbabe being tossed around in here to go into on an individual basis, but I would like to announce that SuitCase is, like, my personal god or something, and also that I'd like to to refute this particularly central bit of nonsense:

Quote:
The second argument, an extension of the first (so it was already in trouble), and the one which Pop really failed to deliver properly... and I quote him directly on this: "What I'm trying to tell you guys is that if you grin and bear it, the word 'fuck' will not do you any lasting damage. I'm sure everyone here can cope."

This translates as: "I don't think it's offensive and anyone who disagrees with me should deal with it."


Look. You can find what you like offensive. You can choose to find shoes or hedgehogs offensive. You and all the entirety of the population of the world can choose to find them offensive, but that won't stop you having absolutely zero rational logic behind it. You have no rational logic behind finding the words 'fuck' and 'shit' intrinsicially offensive. Now, to break this down in a step-by-step-process:

1) Words are defined by their meaning
2) The words 'fuck' and 'shit' no longer meant to necessarily offend: eg, "I fucking love chocolate cake," and "Wow, what a fuckin' beautiful day".
3) If someone says, "Man, I fucking love chocolate cake", they're not meaning to offend anyone. They're merely wishing to express their deep love for chocolate cake.
4) The only way you can find therefore find the phrase "I fucking love chocolate cake" offensive is by arguing that the word 'fucking' has an intrinsic, context-exclusive offensive value (or in fact any of the other words in that sentence, such as 'cake'). In order to justify this you will have to explain what it is that these words contain, perhaps chemically or ingrained within the fabric of the universe, that is necessarily and intrinsically offensive as of itself.
5) Therefore, swearing should not be considered intrinisically offensive as they very usually are not intended to offend. The only time swearing (not to mention anything else) is offensive is when they are used in order to offend.
6) Since you can offend people in a variety of different ways, this makes the words 'fuck' and 'shit' just as 'offensive' as any other word you could feasibly use to offend someone, eg, anything in this sentence: "You are ugly."

This is why swearing should not be banned in #srb2.

As a final, seperate point, I believe that the ops should choose themselves what goes and doesn't go in their own channel. I don't tihnk it's up to us to decide at all. But what is being requested here is a favour, an act of harmless kindness towards the people who use your service. You, of course, do not owe it to any of us to do anything, but are you guys really that... shitty?
Yajirobe - Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:15 pm
Post subject:
popcorn..was that a permanent ban?
Andrusi - Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:21 pm
Post subject:
Regarding the "Is fuck offensive?" issue:

The issue is not what offends or should offend us in particular. That would be "Do you find 'fuck' offensive?"

The issue is not what should logically offend us or other people. That would be "Logically, should 'fuck' be offensive?"

The issue is what does offend people in general.

Thank you, and have a nice day.
Popcorn - Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:36 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
The issue is what does offend people in general.


If people find illogical, stupid, trivial things offensive, then that is their own problem to deal with in their own time.
Andrusi - Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:41 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
Quote:
The issue is what does offend people in general.


If people find illogical, stupid, trivial things offensive, then that is their own problem to deal with in their own time.

You'd be surprised at how easily someone else's problem can become []i]your[/i] problem.
Popcorn - Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:44 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
You'd be surprised at how easily someone else's problem can become []i]your[/i] problem.


As incredibly cool and care-to-the-wind as I'm sure that sounds, it doesn't seem to be saying anything at all.
Andrusi - Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:57 pm
Post subject:
Maybe examples would help:

1. You offend someone by saying "fuck". That's their problem. Someday you need something from that person, and he/she won't give it to you because of what you said. His/her problem has thus become your problem.

2. Japan bombs Pearl Harbor. That's the USA's problem, not Japan's. The USA enters World War Two and eventually nukes a couple of cities in Japan. The USA's problem has become Japan's problem.

3. How about an example from Sonic online community history? Pachuka thinks MCers are idiots. This is Pachuka's problem. Pachuka thus feels it is appropriate to make a nuisance of himself at MoogleMB, driving Kulock insane (wait, driving?). It is now Kulock's problem, not Pachuka's. Kulock handles this problem by banning Pachuka. It is now Pachuka's problem. Pachuka, who disagrees, retaliates by orchestrating the hacking of MoogleMB's database. Pachuka's problem has now again become Kulock's problem. Playing Ping-Pong with problems like this is one way that people become enemies.

4. Just to demonstrate that it need not be a problem that you yourself inflicted. Your girlfriend has had a really crappy day. That's her problem. She takes it out on you. That's your problem.
Scott - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:00 pm
Post subject:
Touche, Smidge. Touche. But I still think my point stands, considering shit is still acceptable in certain contexts on television and both those words are acceptable in certain contexts in real life. Which is an issue that has not yet been addressed by the other end of this argument.
Popcorn - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:03 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
1. You offend someone by saying "fuck". That's their problem. Someday you need something from that person, and he/she won't give it to you because of what you said. His/her problem has thus become your problem.

2. Japan bombs Pearl Harbor. That's the USA's problem, not Japan's. The USA enters World War Two and eventually nukes a couple of cities in Japan. The USA's problem has become Japan's problem.

3. How about an example from Sonic online community history? Pachuka thinks MCers are idiots. This is Pachuka's problem. Pachuka thus feels it is appropriate to make a nuisance of himself at MoogleMB, driving Kulock insane (wait, driving?). It is now Kulock's problem, not Pachuka's. Kulock handles this problem by banning Pachuka. It is now Pachuka's problem. Pachuka, who disagrees, retaliates by orchestrating the hacking of MoogleMB's database. Pachuka's problem has now again become Kulock's problem.

4. Just to demonstrate that it need not be a problem that you yourself inflicted. Your girlfriend has had a really crappy day. That's her problem. She takes it out on you. That's your problem.


I'm afraid none of these have anything to do with whether or not swearing should be found offensive or not (and since we seem to agree that it does not necessarily have to be offensive, no one has explained why, with this accepted, we shouldn't swear).

Yes, you can argue for the pragmatic reasons of not pissing someone off. But that isn't the same as swearing being the point-blank wrong. What if you met someone who hated the colour blue, and liked to stab people who wore it? Sure, you'd make a careful effort not to wear blue around them, but that wouldn't make the wearing the colour blue instantaneously wrong. In fact, the blue-hater would be the one in the wrong since hating blue has absolutely no rational explanation behind it. Would you agree on this point?
Popcorn - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:07 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
both those words are acceptable in certain contexts in real life. Which is an issue that has not yet been addressed by the other end of this argument.


No, this is the issue I have been pushing from the start: #srb2, being a channel made up almost entirely of people who aren't afraid to watch TV past the 8pm swearing watershed and who likely would not burst into tears after hearing someone swear in a movie, is exactly the sort of context in which swearing is acceptable. Many of the people who frequent #srb2 also frequent this very forum (and others).

But seriously, once again: anybody who is offended by the use of a written word, irrespective of context, has serious issues and needs to see someone for help; becuase I'm afraid they are going to be confronted by these very words, some of which they may find offensive, for the rest of their lives. But I think everyone here has more important things to worry about. Don't you?
H Hog - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:16 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
Quote:
The issue is what does offend people in general.


If people find illogical, stupid, trivial things offensive, then that is their own problem to deal with in their own time.


Why do you try so hard to get your way regarding such an, in your words illogical, stupid, trivial thing in the first place, then?
Popcorn - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:20 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Why do you try so hard to get your way regarding such an, in your words illogical, stupid, trivial thing in the first place, then?


Allow me to rephrase: "If people find stupid, trivial things so offensive, which is illogical, then that is their own problem to deal with in their own time." I am trying so hard to change an illogical objection to something trivial, because I think it would improve #srb2.
Sz - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:23 pm
Post subject:
Pop, it's becoming rather obvious that nothing anyone else says is going to change your mind on the matter, and nothing you say is going to change anyone else's mind. So, er... the most viable option seems clear to me...
Andrusi - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:23 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
Quote:
1. You offend someone by saying "fuck". That's their problem. Someday you need something from that person, and he/she won't give it to you because of what you said. His/her problem has thus become your problem.

2. Japan bombs Pearl Harbor. That's the USA's problem, not Japan's. The USA enters World War Two and eventually nukes a couple of cities in Japan. The USA's problem has become Japan's problem.

3. How about an example from Sonic online community history? Pachuka thinks MCers are idiots. This is Pachuka's problem. Pachuka thus feels it is appropriate to make a nuisance of himself at MoogleMB, driving Kulock insane (wait, driving?). It is now Kulock's problem, not Pachuka's. Kulock handles this problem by banning Pachuka. It is now Pachuka's problem. Pachuka, who disagrees, retaliates by orchestrating the hacking of MoogleMB's database. Pachuka's problem has now again become Kulock's problem.

4. Just to demonstrate that it need not be a problem that you yourself inflicted. Your girlfriend has had a really crappy day. That's her problem. She takes it out on you. That's your problem.


I'm afraid none of these have anything to do with whether or not swearing should be found offensive or not (and since we seem to agree that it does not necessarily have to be offensive, no one has explained why, with this accepted, we shouldn't swear).

But I just... but it's a... ARGH.



Quote:
Yes, you can argue for the pragmatic reasons of not pissing someone off. But that isn't the same as swearing being the point-blank wrong. What if you met someone who hated the colour blue, and liked to stab people who wore it? Sure, you'd make a careful effort not to wear blue around them, but that wouldn't make the wearing the colour blue instantaneously wrong. In fact, the blue-hater would be the one in the wrong since hating blue has absolutely no rational explanation behind it. Would you agree on this point?

You are still arguing that the people should not be offended by the word "fuck". I am telling you that regardless of whether or not people should be offended by it, they are offended by it, and therefore when you say "fuck" it will offend them whether it is reasonable or not, and you will suffer any consequences of having offended them whether you intended to do so or not.
Popcorn - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:24 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
Pop, it's becoming rather obvious that nothing anyone else says is going to change your mind on the matter, and nothing you say is going to change anyone else's mind. So, er... the most viable option seems clear to me...


Yeah, I've been thinking the same thing for a while now. In terms of doing any long-term good it's futile, but the debate itself is pretty fascinating.
Popcorn - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:27 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
I am telling you that regardless of whether or not people should be offended by it, they are offended by it, and therefore when you say "fuck" it will offend them whether it is reasonable or not.


Yes, and I'm saying that

a) this is their problem, not ours, and should only be kept in mind when it is necessary not to offend someone. I don't swear in front of my grandmother because I don't want to offend her. (Despite what I said earlier, I don't enjoy going out and upsetting people-- when I said 'offending people is good' I meant it's a healthy mental practice to be offended. It gets you to challenge your beliefs and not take them as granted truth, but that's another story.)

b) #srb2 is an area where, I believe, everyone is mature enough to understand that there is no rational logic behind being offended by the words 'fuck' or 'shit' and hence no offense can come of it.
H Hog - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:30 pm
Post subject:
I'm not even sure of its short-term benefits, for that matter.

Also...



And as a further edit note:
Since everyone's starting to sound like a broken record, what's say we lock this baby up?
I'm pretty sure no more wholesome conversation is to be gotten from this anymore.
Popcorn - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:35 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
I'm not even sure of its short-term benefits, for that matter.


Debate is an entertaining mental exercise and we can learn from talking to each other.

Quote:
Since everyone's starting to sound like a broken record, what's say we lock this baby up?
I'm pretty sure no more wholesome conversation is to be gotten from this anymore.


Us discussing it isn't going to do anyone any damage. If you don't want to discuss it anymore, don't join in anymore. I'm pretty much finished up here anyway, because evidently everyone here is too damn stubborn/righteous to even attempt a risk-free trial session.
Kiro - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:35 pm
Post subject:
I know there are rules for things on the Internet just like anywhere else. In this case, IRC. But you don't want the operators and moderators to look like Hitler figures.

You can't just slap down rules and expect everyone to be happy with them all the time. Rules are meant to be abided by, modified, and justified.

I know the Internet can't be a democracy. But it can not be a despotism figure of government either. Freedom of speech is a privilege to anyone who wants it to be a privilege. Pushing people out of the way to discuss it is wrong. All out wrong.

Going off and saying "We are the ops, abide us or die" is lame, things go out of wack. I came from a community where that happened and it was a good one until people started becoming uneasy, the place fell.

Take my advice.
Popcorn - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:37 pm
Post subject:
Quote:
http://coldflame.echidnoyle.org/images/funnycrap/MMBtopicwinner-DEMOCRACY.gif


I would've voted for Suit, personally. See what I did there?
H Hog - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:40 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
Us discussing it isn't going to do anyone any damage. If you don't want to discuss it anymore, don't join in anymore. I'm pretty much finished up here anyway, because evidently everyone here is too damn stubborn/righteous to even attempt a risk-free trial session.


That's why I asked beforehand before immediately doing it.

I'm not sure what you mean by "everyone here", but I'll repeat what I said before; #srb2 is NOT an extention of the Moogle Cavern.
Logically, this discussion didn't even fit in here in the first place.
As for the "risk free trial session"... that's something you're gonna have to take up with the ops. Preferrably through Personal Message.
I've attempted an alternate compromise idea, but no one listened to me about that, either.

So I'm pretty much done here, too.
Scott - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:40 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
No, this is the issue I have been pushing from the start: #srb2, being a channel made up almost entirely of people who aren't afraid to watch TV past the 8pm swearing watershed and who likely would not burst into tears after hearing someone swear in a movie, is exactly the sort of context in which swearing is acceptable. Many of the people who frequent #srb2 also frequent this very forum (and others).


The OTHER end of this argument, i.e. the opposition to you, has not addressed this.
H Hog - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:42 pm
Post subject:
Popcorn wrote:
Quote:
http://coldflame.echidnoyle.org/images/funnycrap/MMBtopicwinner-DEMOCRACY.gif


I would've voted for Suit, personally. See what I did there?


You gave a personal opinion, which you are entirely free to do. =P
And while Suitcase made some mighty valid points, all things (and all topic pages) considered, I think Andy has had an overall best outlook, was the most humorous, and has made the best effort to not actually start swearing himself, aside from quotes.
Plus the image at the end won him bonuspoints.
This all in my opinion. ;P
Kiro - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:44 pm
Post subject:
Plain and simple though, like I've been trying to keep it from my mouth except it's hard for me to describe it in English because I am not good at speaking my mind worth a shit and please don't tell me that, I know it.

But I'm going to leave it with this.

1) It would be a hassle to find a script to make asterisks for the curse words, so as I thought about it, it would be out of the way.
2) One curse word banning is ridiculous, I will agree all the way with that. Here's an example of what a curse banning should be:

"<AreoZephin> God damn fucking cocksuckers need to go to hell, excuse me but I just needed to express myself with my anger unintentionally.

An example of O.K.

<Kulock> Damn, the Sage is going to be delayed." (lol)

3) God, please don't ban people for discussing it. And don't bash them either by rubbing it in their face about power.
Popcorn - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:48 pm
Post subject:
To recap:

- #srb2 is a fine channel made up of fine people
- #srb2 can be improved, as a good bunch of people here seem to agree
- Attempting a trial session without a swear-ban would have absolutely no long-term risks attatched to it whatsoever
- Yes, the running of #srb2 is completely at the discretion of its operators, as it should be. I would once again like to stress that what is being requested here is requested simply as a simple favour. All it requires is the deactivation of a script for 48 hours.

And additionally, I'd like to thank Smidge for giving in and explaining to me the reasoning behind the rule in the first place, however nonsensical I really think it is. You've answered a question I've been thinking about for a very long time (although all it's done is confirm my darkest suspicions.)

I'm out, unless anyone else has anything else of interest to say.
H Hog - Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:54 pm
Post subject:
Fine. Now that the recap's out of the way, I think we're pretty much done here.
If anyone DESPERATELY needs to say something... preferrably take it through PM.
This debate has finished - on the MoogleMB, at the very least. I'll be closing this baby up, lest this entire debate starts all over again.
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Powered by phpBB 2.0 .0.1 © 2001 phpBB Group