Is it time for mods to review prohibited words?

[Meathead]

Perhaps, but the fact remains that they’re disallowed on this site. So why not disallow other hateful rhetoric?

No. There should be places that are not safe spaces for me, you or IQ2.

 

[Donald H]

After watching the news last night, it seems that laws are coming soon to restrict Americans from calling the extreme right, fascists or Nazis.

That might make sense if 'communist' is included?

 

[Invisibleflash]

The three words I know that are prohibited are the n-word (reprehensible), the c-word (also reprehensible), and w-ie (sort of mild, but whatever).

But now that we’ve seen how the vile rhetoric the left uses against the right can gin up such hate that it results in a political murder, now might be the time to consider how the message board is allowing the hate level to spread and thus might also prohibit the following:

1) MAGATS - this of course is calling Trump supporters “maggots” and reminds me of how Farrakhan called the Jews “termites.”

2) NAZI - this awful accusation should not be allowed to be leveled against posters, and the word should be reserved for discussions about real Nazis

3) HITLER - same as above

4) Direct racist terms - posters should not be allowed to address blacks as “black boy” or “black man” or make reference to “your black ass.” In fairness, posters should not be allowed to address whites as “white boy” or say “your white ass.”

There could be more, but this would be a start.

Don't know what w-ie word is.

Coon is banned on a lot of forums. Not referring to blacks, just talking about trapping.

A survival forum banned me for using the word abortion. Another survival forum banned me for using the word injun. When I complained they lifetime banned me.

All this comes under the auspices of censorship / nanny state. I could REALLY give you the memes and gifs if there was no censorship here.

Don't ban magat! Don't be a puss. You all need to toughen up for SHTFF, not become more pussified.

Now, if you are a filthy commie dem IM2 pig, then don't toughen up...just go kill yourself.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The three words I know that are prohibited are the n-word (reprehensible), the c-word (also reprehensible), and w-ie (sort of mild, but whatever).

But now that we’ve seen how the vile rhetoric the left uses against the right can gin up such hate that it results in a political murder, now might be the time to consider how the message board is allowing the hate level to spread and thus might also prohibit the following:

1) MAGATS - this of course is calling Trump supporters “maggots” and reminds me of how Farrakhan called the Jews “termites.”

2) NAZI - this awful accusation should not be allowed to be leveled against posters, and the word should be reserved for discussions about real Nazis

3) HITLER - same as above

4) Direct racist terms - posters should not be allowed to address blacks as “black boy” or “black man” or make reference to “your black ass.” In fairness, posters should not be allowed to address whites as “white boy” or say “your white ass.”

There could be more, but this would be a start.

/----/ NOPE NOPE NOPE. Don't go there. Part of freedom of speech is saying and listening to offensive things.

 

[Lisa558]

/----/ NOPE NOPE NOPE. Don't go there. Part of freedom of speech is saying and listening to offensive things.

Then it should APPLY to all words, no?

 

[Lisa558]

Don't know what w-ie word is.

Coon is banned on a lot of forums. Not referring to blacks, just talking about trapping.

All this comes under the censorship / nanny state. I could REALLY give you the memes and gifs if there was no censorship here.

View attachment 1160760

It’s the word “white” with a y at the end.

If the mods saw fit to censor that word, which is pretty mild, shouldnt then censor Nazi (when falsely calling a Jew that in order to offend as much as possible)?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

1) Not if it incites murder.

2) You could also claim that saying n and c is free speech too, but those words are prohibited.

3) Free speech just means the govt can’t punish you. It doesn’t mean that a privately owned message board can’t try to maintain a higher level of human decency.

I prefer all feee speech.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Libtard, Lefty, Marxist.

What would you prefer we call you?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

The three words I know that are prohibited are the n-word (reprehensible), the c-word (also reprehensible), and w-ie (sort of mild, but whatever).

But now that we’ve seen how the vile rhetoric the left uses against the right can gin up such hate that it results in a political murder, now might be the time to consider how the message board is allowing the hate level to spread and thus might also prohibit the following:

1) MAGATS - this of course is calling Trump supporters “maggots” and reminds me of how Farrakhan called the Jews “termites.”

2) NAZI - this awful accusation should not be allowed to be leveled against posters, and the word should be reserved for discussions about real Nazis

3) HITLER - same as above

4) Direct racist terms - posters should not be allowed to address blacks as “black boy” or “black man” or make reference to “your black ass.” In fairness, posters should not be allowed to address whites as “white boy” or say “your white ass.”

There could be more, but this would be a start.

Stick your censorship straight up your stanky butt.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Either permit them all or add as she suggest.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Stick your censorship straight up your stanky butt.

But you approve censorship

 

[Foxfyre]

The three words I know that are prohibited are the n-word (reprehensible), the c-word (also reprehensible), and w-ie (sort of mild, but whatever).

But now that we’ve seen how the vile rhetoric the left uses against the right can gin up such hate that it results in a political murder, now might be the time to consider how the message board is allowing the hate level to spread and thus might also prohibit the following:

1) MAGATS - this of course is calling Trump supporters “maggots” and reminds me of how Farrakhan called the Jews “termites.”

2) NAZI - this awful accusation should not be allowed to be leveled against posters, and the word should be reserved for discussions about real Nazis

3) HITLER - same as above

4) Direct racist terms - posters should not be allowed to address blacks as “black boy” or “black man” or make reference to “your black ass.” In fairness, posters should not be allowed to address whites as “white boy” or say “your white ass.”

There could be more, but this would be a start.

Thank you for a thoughtful and interesting topic Lisa. I regret that it generated so many negative responses because it didn't deserve that.

The problem with censoring this or that word on any venue is that the hateful will just find another word to use. Or they'll make one up.

There is probably no law, no regulation, no legal provision that won't have a downside. The downside to free speech is that the immature, ugly, hateful, malicious will use speech that is hurtful. But at least when they do that, the mature, reasonable, intelligent people will see them for what they are.

Those using rhetoric that provoke or inspire the criminal or mentally unbalanced to do violence is the huge risk of free speech. But suppressing opinions is even worse and gives license to government to do violence to people who do not deserve that.

Our duty as moral people I think is to lead by example, promote decency, civility, constructive debate. We should consider the childish ugly stuff for what it is, i.e. the language of the poorly educated or those too unintelligent to formulate and actual valid argument.

I can't imagine a mentality that uses the most vile and hateful/hurtful words they can think of to address other members here at USMB. But many do that. It has become a blood sport here. Maybe some have fun doing that here because they wouldn't ever do it in real life. Some are immune to such attacks. Those that are hurt by them probably won't ever say that.

But the alternative is to take away an unalienable right of the people to express their opinions. The precise words used do not matter. Either those people are decent and constructive in their speech or they aren't.

I was giggled on a 'Christian forum' for using the term Democrat instead of Democratic. That was considered 'harassment' on that forum. Once you start censoring words, it can get that silly.

I could go for a rule that you could not call another member a 'Nazi' or some other derogatory term. That would restore an element of civility. But in reality, it would just change into "Your post is Nazi-like because. . . ." The childish and uncivil will continue to be that way no matter how much you change the rules.

One of the laws of management drilled into me long ago:
--You can't change bad people by changing the system.
--You can't change a bad system by changing the people.

So no easy solution for this particular problem. We need to change the culture and the mindset of most of the people to fix it I think. I don't want to take away rights in a futile effort to accomplish that.

And, I would not have to like to consult a word list before I made a post and I think that would add another burden to the mods in keeping the board as sane as possible.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Once you start censoring words

Have you ever spoken about the current censorship? You know this forum already censors you don't you? Or are you okay with the 3 examples she gave being censored

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

But you approve censorship

Nope.

 

[Foxfyre]

Have you ever spoken about the current censorship? You know this forum already censors you don't you? Or are you okay with the 3 examples she gave being censored

Three words--words I would never use to describe another USMB member in a million years even if the words were not banned--are not an excessive burden for members to remember or for the mods to moderate.

I tend to look at these things as to what is pragmatic and reasonable.

But when you start expanding the list where do you stop?

 

[norwegen]

It’s the word “white” with a y at the end.

If the mods saw fit to censor that word, which is pretty mild, shouldnt then censor Nazi (when falsely calling a Jew that in order to offend as much as possible)?

Before we ban that word, I'd just like to mention it in honor of an old white station wagon my dad (RIP last month) drove on his fishing trips. He named it ******. That old piece of junk rattled down the road for many years.

 

[Lisa558]

I prefer all feee speech.

Well, I’m just looking for balance.

If the mods recognize how offensive it is to yell the N word at a black, why do they tolerate others yelling Nazi at a Jew?

 

[norwegen]

Before we ban that word, I'd just like to mention it in honor of an old white station my dad (RIP last month) drove on his fishing trips. He named it ******. That old piece of junk rattled down the road for many years.

Dang, it got censored. A perfectly innocent name.

 

[Lisa558]

Three words--words I would never use to describe another USMB member in a million years even if the words were not banned--are not an excessive burden for members to remember or for the mods to moderate.

I tend to look at these things as to what is pragmatic and reasonable.

But when you start expanding the list where do you stop?

Is it that hard to remember not to call a Jew a Nazi? It’s reprehensible.

 

[Natural Citizen]

But you're okay with yourself and your crew calling anyone who disagrees with your content an anti-semite or a terrorist or a terrorist supporter or a Hamas as you so often and so arbitrarily do.

Right?

Pft. What an uppity, opportunist fraud...