Red Mosquito

Sheesh, what a cry baby.

theplatypus wrote:Also, it's absurdly hilarious to me that RM would be outraged about some Jew-themed puns while acting completely cavalier about horrifically racist posts in the past ("In the Coonlight", anyone?), or more recently the army of straight dudes defending Josh Homme's use of the word "fag" in the QotSA thread.

Our arbiter of where to draw the line is based on what members of the community here uncomfortable. That is a higher priority (to me, anyway) then someone else's desire to make tasteless jokes.

Had someone flagged some of these other posts you referenced, and their complaints were reasonable, we might have taken them down as well. But they weren't flagged by members of the community.

I don't know the QotSA thread reference, but I doubt we're going to censor a conversation about whether or not certain language is offensive, if that's all that was.

Right. The community is very selective with its outrage. I reckon it has to do with what hits close to home and what simply doesn't.

I could have scored a lot of points agains chud in Words With Friends the other day, but it doesn't accept "Jew" as a word.

theplatypus wrote:Right. The community is very selective with its outrage. I reckon it has to do with what hits close to home and what simply doesn't.

I actually made a comment about a couple of the 'coon' jokes and pretty much told to fuck off and presented with a picture of someone in a racoon hat. I don't know about the Josh Homme reference, but in my experience people seem to be pretty quick here about challenging homophobia.

Even if people are selective in their 'outrage', if that's what you want to term it, I don't think that makes it less valid; of course people are going to be more outspoken about things that affect them. And perhaps people haven't challenged other instances because of the need to repeatedly defend a position of being offended by something or feeling that a post went beyond humour into bad taste. I don't want to be responding this many times in this post, but I do feel that Stip's actions should be defended even though I wasn't someone who complained about this.

Bob Loblaw wrote:Sheesh, what a cry baby.

*fag

theplatypus wrote:Right. The community is very selective with its outrage. I reckon it has to do with what hits close to home and what simply doesn't.

perhaps. But when people take the time to flag posts or contact mods privately we take it seriously.

Next time someone mentions oranges I'm flagging the fuck out of that post.

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

theplatypus wrote:Right. The community is very selective with its outrage. I reckon it has to do with what hits close to home and what simply doesn't.

I actually made a comment about a couple of the 'coon' jokes and pretty much told to fuck off and presented with a picture of someone in a racoon hat. I don't know about the Josh Homme reference, but in my experience people seem to be pretty quick here about challenging homophobia.

Even if people are selective in their 'outrage', if that's what you want to term it, I don't think that makes it less valid; of course people are going to be more outspoken about things that affect them. And perhaps people haven't challenged other instances because of the need to repeatedly defend a position of being offended by something or feeling that a post went beyond humour into bad taste. I don't want to be responding this many times in this post, but I do feel that Stip's actions should be defended even though I wasn't someone who complained about this.

You know what? You're absolutely right. I'm just peeved that even the innocuous posts got purged.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:I could have scored a lot of points agains chud in Words With Friends the other day, but it doesn't accept "Jew" as a word.

I did a Google search for "Jew" to see if it is recognized as a word in the dictionary (it is) and this was the top link.

theplatypus wrote:

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

theplatypus wrote:Right. The community is very selective with its outrage. I reckon it has to do with what hits close to home and what simply doesn't.

I actually made a comment about a couple of the 'coon' jokes and pretty much told to fuck off and presented with a picture of someone in a racoon hat. I don't know about the Josh Homme reference, but in my experience people seem to be pretty quick here about challenging homophobia.

Even if people are selective in their 'outrage', if that's what you want to term it, I don't think that makes it less valid; of course people are going to be more outspoken about things that affect them. And perhaps people haven't challenged other instances because of the need to repeatedly defend a position of being offended by something or feeling that a post went beyond humour into bad taste. I don't want to be responding this many times in this post, but I do feel that Stip's actions should be defended even though I wasn't someone who complained about this.

You know what? You're absolutely right. I'm just peeved that even the innocuous posts got purged.

are you still upset about circumcision?

theplatypus wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:I could have scored a lot of points agains chud in Words With Friends the other day, but it doesn't accept "Jew" as a word.

I did a Google search for "Jew" to see if it is recognized as a word in the dictionary (it is) and this was the top link.

A lot of those word games don't allow proper nouns. I know Scrabble doesn't.

If I had known before that the "report this post" button was anything besides a trap door lever, I would have spent the last few years abusing the shit out of it.

Now I know fully the power that I wield, and no force in the universe can stop me.

Seriously, that was awesome

gems and rhinestones wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:I am OUTRAGED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Finally got around to watching Smokey and the Bandit 2 did ya

2 is a classic American film, but they thought they could make a third without me?! Insanity. There is only one Bandit.

theplatypus wrote:I'm just peeved that even the innocuous posts got purged.

Me too.

For the sake of clarity, I didn't realise (until BA's posts) that anyone had made a song title pun using the word "kike" which, obviously, is an unambiguously offensive term. Hopefully that provides some context for my flippant "yeah, not really" response earlier; I'd been under the impression that puns such as "Sweet Jew" and "Jew Are" were the sole cause of the complaints and the accusation that these were reflective of "the attitudes of people here."

That said, I still don't agree with the moderation decision. If someone took offense to one of the puns and it was felt it was in the wider interests of the board to not have that post remain up, then I think it's reasonable to delete that one post, but I don't see the logic in removing all of the other non-offensive puns. As just explained, I didn't even see the offensive post and had presumed we were debating the merits of the innocuous examples. Had at least some of them been left up, I doubt I would have thought that.

(As an aside, I don't believe using words like "kike", "coon", "nigger", etc. is an inherently racist act or necessarily evidence of underlying racism or prejudice; there was no malice in the manner that they were being used here. Of course, that doesn't preclude genuine and understandable offense being taken when people see those words used in frivolous way given the loaded nature of their history.)

Birds in Hell wrote:

theplatypus wrote:I'm just peeved that even the innocuous posts got purged.

Me too.

For the sake of clarity, I didn't realise (until BA's posts) that anyone had made a song title pun using the word "kike" which, obviously, is an unambiguously offensive term. Hopefully that provides some context for my flippant "yeah, not really" response earlier; I'd been under the impression that puns such as "Sweet Jew" and "Jew Are" were the sole cause of the complaints and the accusation that these were reflective of "the attitudes of people here."

That said, I still don't agree with the moderation decision. If someone took offense to one of the puns and it was felt it was in the wider interests of the board to not have that post remain up, then I think it's reasonable to delete that one post, but I don't see the logic in removing all of the other non-offensive puns. As just explained, I didn't even see the offensive post and had presumed we were debating the merits of the innocuous examples. Had at least some of them been left up, I doubt I would have thought that.

(As an aside, I don't believe using words like "kike", "coon", "nigger", etc. is an inherently racist act or necessarily evidence of underlying racism or prejudice; there was no malice in the manner that they were being used here. Of course, that doesn't preclude genuine and understandable offense being taken when people see those words used in frivolous way given the loaded nature of their history.)

the joke that got all of these deleted was something like:

"Word Wide Jew-

hmmm, nevermind"

Most of those posts weren't very offensive. However, if some were, isn't it just easier to delete all the jew song puns?

On a related not, it's probably good we don't have many black posters because In The Coonlight comes up from time to time.

cutuphalfdead wrote:Most of those posts weren't very offensive. However, if some were, isn't it just easier to delete all the jew song puns?

How is that easier than just deleting the offensive post(s)? Are the mods trying to discourage song puns in general as a matter of board policy? It seems silly to me.

Birds in Hell wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:Most of those posts weren't very offensive. However, if some were, isn't it just easier to delete all the jew song puns?

How is that easier than just deleting the offensive post(s)? Are the mods trying to discourage song puns in general as a matter of board policy? It seems silly to me.

Well, to be fair, we were making these puns to be funny. And in a subtle way, the fact the word Jew is funny is mildly offensive. I know I'm stretching here, but put yourself in the mods shoes for a second. Some people are rightly offended at some of the posts made, and each post exists somewhere on the spectrum of offensiveness. So where do you draw the line? If people are reporting these puns because they're offensive, it's just easier to delete them. It's not the end of the world.

What we should be outraged at is when B deletes cat puns simply because he hates fun.