Clarification please

[koshergrl]

I'm confused. I see threads in protected forums with the terms "Teaper" "Teabagger" and "Fundy" included in the title...when there is absolutely no connection in the OP or any subsequent posts to the tea party or fundamentalist Christians.

Shouldn't the random attachment of the terms "teaper" "tea bagger" and "fundy" to any negative current event (with no corroborating evidence that there is a connection to Tea Party or fundamentalism provided) wouldn't the teaper/fundie/bagger threads qualify, if not as fodder for the badlands, as a conspiracy theory? Because the associations are truly random and completely without merit. The posters admit, always, "I'm sure he's/she's/they're teapers" which is an admission that there is no evidence that it's so...yet these offensive, inflammatory, and patently untrue thread titles linger on..and on...and on.....

 

[koshergrl]

And I thought deliberately offensive terminology...think "******" "****" "ho" "****"....were disallowed in the protected forums? Aren't the terms "bagger" "Teaper" "teabagger" and "fundy" along these lines? They are derogatory terms meant to demean and insult...i.e., flame...they are offensive...and I thought that wasn't allowed in the protected forums?

But I see mods posting in those threads, and in fact lending credence to them....so I continue to be confused.

 

[Ravi]

PC to the end, that's kgrill

 

[Zoom-boing]

I don't find the term "teaper" offensive at all.

 

[TheOldSchool]

I'm confused. I see threads in protected forums with the terms "Teaper" "Teabagger" and "Fundy" included in the title...when there is absolutely no connection in the OP or any subsequent posts to the tea party or fundamentalist Christians.

Shouldn't the random attachment of the terms "teaper" "tea bagger" and "fundy" to any negative current event (with no corroborating evidence that there is a connection to Tea Party or fundamentalism provided) wouldn't the teaper/fundie/bagger threads qualify, if not as fodder for the badlands, as a conspiracy theory? Because the associations are truly random and completely without merit. The posters admit, always, "I'm sure he's/she's/they're teapers" which is an admission that there is no evidence that it's so...yet these offensive, inflammatory, and patently untrue thread titles linger on..and on...and on.....

 

[Nutz]

I don't find the term "teaper" offensive at all.

It is not an offensive term, nor was it never meant to be. Tea Partier = TeaP'r - Teaper.

They are just a thin skinned bunch...they want to be able to spew whatever nonsense they want...but they can't handle Teaper, a harmless term.

 

[koshergrl]

So you're okay with teaper.

The point is, if there's no evidence that the Tea Party (or fundamentalist Christians) are involved in the story...then the title is deliberately misleading and libelous.

Just sayin. It's against the rules.

 

[koshergrl]

PC to the end, that's kgrill

You get me.

 

[Howey]

This has been discussed over and over and over on this forum. The current usage of the term "teabagger" was the work of the Tea Party. I even posted pictures of teabaggers waving their signs a while back.

Enough With The Whining! 'Teabaggers' Actually Introduced The Term They Now Claim Is A Slur | Crooks and Liars


But while we're banning offensive words, how about "fag" "queer" et al?

 

[koshergrl]

So I'll be sure to use the term "******" in the thread title of every single story featuring alleged criminal behavior..whether or not the perp is black.

Cuz I certainly don't find the word "******" offensive...and black people use it all the time. So it's okay.

 

[koshergrl]

How about faggot?

Can I attach the term "faggot" or even "homo" to the title of every story that features an asshole?

After all, those terms were coined by homos.

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm confused. I see threads in protected forums with the terms "Teaper" "Teabagger" and "Fundy" included in the title...when there is absolutely no connection in the OP or any subsequent posts to the tea party or fundamentalist Christians.

Shouldn't the random attachment of the terms "teaper" "tea bagger" and "fundy" to any negative current event (with no corroborating evidence that there is a connection to Tea Party or fundamentalism provided) wouldn't the teaper/fundie/bagger threads qualify, if not as fodder for the badlands, as a conspiracy theory? Because the associations are truly random and completely without merit. The posters admit, always, "I'm sure he's/she's/they're teapers" which is an admission that there is no evidence that it's so...yet these offensive, inflammatory, and patently untrue thread titles linger on..and on...and on.....

Teaper is roughly on a par with Libtard.. We have no "stylebook" on USMB anymore. Used to be about 3 or 5 banned words. Hard to ban words that are included on hits in the Top 40 or allowed on basic Cable.

HOWEVER -- repetition and overuse of certain terms is up to Mod discretion. As is the use of those terms in OPs if they create a hostile topic description..

The term "protected forum" only has meaning to threads that were grandfathered in under special understandings. Like the music forum or some of the earlier "lounges". We have ZONES tho. And I don't think enough posters know the difference in the rules between zones. It would help every member to know the limits of the forums that are posting in.

 

[koshergrl]

So is the term "Libtard" allowed in thread titles in the protected forums?

 

[Howey]

Why get rid of a word used at Tea Party rallys?

 

[koshergrl]

So do we not abide by this rule anymore:

"
"Zone 2": Political Forum / Israel and Palestine Forum / Race Relations/Racism Forum / Religion & Ethics Forum: Baiting and polarizing OP's (Opening Posts), and thread titles risk the thread either being moved or trashed. Keep it relevant, choose wisely. Each post must contain content relevant to the thread subject, in addition to any flame. No trolling. No hit and run flames. No hijacking or derailing threads. "
http://www.usmessageboard.com/announcements-and-feedback/277648-usmb-rules-and-guidelines.html

 

[flacaltenn]

BTW:

There is no requirement for an OP description to be true. Along with our reluctance to censor post content, we leave the PROOF of certain OPs up to the community to debate. If it's a WEAK assertion, it often ends up in bickering. And THAT is the reason some weak threads die. It's not Moderation made a judgement on the topic..

None of that to be construed as discussing of any SPECIFIC moderation actions. Just a clarification on WHY certain threads are not culled..

 

[flacaltenn]

So is the term "Libtard" allowed in thread titles in the protected forums?

You're still using the term "protected forum" instead of referring to certain zones. So I don't get the emphasis. I just told you that the use of these words in OP descriptions, titles CAN affect a moderation decision on it's baiting and polarizing nature.

 

[koshergrl]

"Baiting and polarizing OP's (Opening Posts), and thread titles risk the thread either being moved or trashed. "

Use of the term "Teabagger" and "Fundy"..by ANYONE'S definition, except the trolls who do it, is baiting and polarizing...and in the instances I'm referencing, completely unrelated to the OPs.

 

[Nutz]

So I'll be sure to use the term "******" in the thread title of every single story featuring alleged criminal behavior..whether or not the perp is black.

Cuz I certainly don't find the word "******" offensive...and black people use it all the time. So it's okay.

You and your racist teaper crew do it anyways! But, I just want to be clear as to your position. Teaper is offensive to you and a few others with a guilty conscience, so you believe it should be banned?


Oh, and of course you don't find the word, ******, to be offensive. Most racist asswipes don't.

 

[koshergrl]

So is the term "Libtard" allowed in thread titles in the protected forums?

You're still using the term "protected forum" instead of referring to certain zones. So I don't get the emphasis. I just told you that the use of these words in OP descriptions, titles CAN affect a moderation decision on it's baiting and polarizing nature.

Meh. Zone 2. Way to hang up on irrelevancies while ignoring the meat.