I believe as this community is essentially a parliamentary session, any vulgar or obscene commentary should be strongly discouraged. Much like the speaker of the house, moderators should consistently remind those who break the above guideline to refrain. Repeat offenders / extreme examples should be subject to a temporary ban.
Thoughts?
edit: I wonder what people think is the purpose of downvotes? Do you not want to have the discussion?
I disagree. Is your point that it’s “uncivilized”? Personally, I don’t mind whatever language anyone uses in this community, unless they’re verbally attacking another user which I think should be handled by mods like any other forum.
Edit: calls to violence and bigotry should be handled by mods too
Edit2: Also, the word shit, one most would consider “vulgar”, is in the instance name, so it’s kinda ridiculous to want to ban such words from this community
Also, the word shit, one most would consider “vulgar”, is in the instance name, so it’s kinda ridiculous to want to ban such words from this community
Yes, I don’t care about vulgarity (hell I’m a repeat offender myself), but I agree with OP that overly obscene comments don’t have their place in this kind of “serious” community.
Where do we draw the line for “overly obscene”? And is this even a problem? Can I see a link to an example?
Where do we draw the line for “overly obscene”?
When it gets to the point that it elicits a strong emotional response and it derails the conversation I guess? But then it would amount to trolling, which is already discouraged on this community?
And is this even a problem?
Don’t think so, I was speaking in the abstract, but I guess it could become one if the instance becomes more popular.
The problem here, as many have already stated, is that this is a very subjective proposal. And it is very hard to codify a rule based on a subjective. What you consider vulgar or obscene my not be close to crossing the line for me. Rules need to be objective in nature. They need to have the ability to have clear set guidelines that mean the same thing to everyone.
It is similar to the old argument about porn. What is porn? I’ve seen artistic photographs of nudity and I have seen porn. But where is that line drawn? That line is going to be somewhere different depending on the person. There are those that would say any photograph or video where the subject is nude is pornographic. Some would say only if there is a depiction of a sexual act, it is pornographic. And there are a lot of people that fall between those two and go further to the extremes in either direction. In that case, you cannot easily write an objective rule that everyone will interpret the same way. You could, say, write a rule about not having any depictions of nudity. That is more objective. Still not perfect…because what if it’s just one breast but the subject is otherwise clothed?
Anyway, this is getting way more wordy than I intended. The TL;DR is that trying to codify a subjective rule is both difficult and a really bad idea because no two people will interpret the rule in the same way. We need to focus on objective rules that leave little-to-no room for misinterpretation and solve or prevent actual problems.
But this is a great discussion on civility guidelines and I do think we need some of those. Though, again, they will likely have to be somewhat vague because of the subjectiveness of it all.
Yeah, I’m not sure I agree.
Definitely understand your point, but this is the internet after all. Will I be reprimanded if I use “fucking” or “shit” to really make a point I’m passionate about? Is it okay if the context is alright? Is it bad if I use 2 curse words but 1 is okay? Who’s to say?
Context will be big. Straight up vulgar, hateful speech is already not allowed, so I don’t think we need to add to it unnecessarily.
I guess I assumed that if the instance has a general stance on hateful, bigoted speech then any community attached within it would have to follow suit. Especially one tied specifically to the progression of the instance’s community.
I don’t feel like additional restrictions on Agora with that already in place is needed, imo.
This makes sense to me. I have to wonder how fast this community will be sidetracked with pointless comments if people wander in thinking it’s the ‘main’ sub. My thinking was - if you shouldn’t say it in a parliamentary setting, it should not be said in the Agora. Aw but that’s not fun! one might think… again I would say take it to main street. just my opinion.
Nay, much too subjective
I think vulgarity / obscene language is a pretty objective category. As opposed to ‘keep things constructive’ which can be interpreted in a variety of ways.
I agree with you that keep things constructive is a great ethos, given the gist of the community. But shouldn’t the don’t be an asshole rule more or less cover any instances where obscene language would get in the way of constructiveness?
If somebody replies “fuck you” to one of my comments, I’m fine reporting it if I want to; or it’ll be removed by a mod for breaking the asshole rule. If somebody simply drops an f-bomb in the comments in a non-insulting way, I’m not sure it gets in the way of “keep things constructive.”
If someone is bothered by profanity in a way that makes them uncomfortable participating in an open-signup forum, they can choose to say so when it comes up. Pre-emptively codifying “correct” language is a little icky.
I have to agree with the others that this rule is unnecessary. @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works said it best:
The main rule should be civility, as in, criticize ideas, not people. If that’s effectively enforced, vulgarity shouldn’t really be an issue.
And besides, I want to be able to say “Ban that fucking Nazi piece of shit!” or “Send that fucking gulag loving tankie to Bantown!”
I would argue that the language you have just employed in your example is not appropriate for the Agora as it detracts from the purpose of the community. Take it to main street.
And in my over-exaggerated examples, you’d be right, since they fail the Be Civil rule.
But how about this one?
This user’s intent was to be an asshole and a troll, and we should adjust the rules to disallow that type of conduct.
