17 coaches online • Server time: 04:15
* * * Did you know? The highest gate in a single match is 243000.
Recent Forum Topics  Gnome Roster - how a... | Problem to organize ... | Updated star player ... |
2011-04-02 12:46:46
39 votes, rating 3.2
39 votes, rating 3.2
About being offended and other bigger issues...
i originally threw this up on lizvis' blog post, but frankly, i'm sick of this conversation, and i'd rather put this up here, and clear the air a little bit.....
for context...here is blocknroll's post...
--------------
I think you misunderstand - Here's the rule again: Offensive language - including but not limited to racism, sexual harassment and religious persecution - is not allowed in any form.
you see the bit where it says including but not limited to? So those are examples, not the start and stop points...
And as someone with the reputation you have for shiny arguments should understand this is not that type of topic...
It's fairly obvious that you will get things wrong and will get things right, but to allow the mocking of disabled people as being whats best for the site? Really?? One of the issues here is that collectively the admins are being called out again and again for getting this one wrong but don't have the guts to admit it, leading to massive loss of respect all round. I don't know maybe Christer said to you all that it's fine to mock disabled people....If so I'd like to hear that from him please. And then there's the belittling "you happen to be THE person (emphasis added by me) that doesn't like it" well thats just not true is it....
--------------
my response?
block, again, thanks for being the voice of fumbbl, block....i'm sure you're dead on when you say the admins have had a "massive loss of respect all around"....
funny, but did i ever say you were the sole person offended by lizvis' jokes?...nope, don't think i ever did....but did i ever point out that a majority, or a minority, of the community was?...nope...
because i don't speak for everyone else, and i don't impose my level of morals and "offendedness" on everyone else...i let them decide for themselves if they wish to be offended...see how that works?...see how that "but not limited to" becomes a grey area *really quickly*?....
also, i don't think i ever made a statement that mocking *anyone* for that matter, was what's best for the site....what i *DID* say is that we have to make decisions on incidents that best benefits the site....and what subsect of person is being joked about isn't the problem at all....
see, here's the bigger issue that overruns all of this....
-censorship-
plain and simple...it's not about offense, or insults, or anything like that....it's all about censorship...which is something that we are not in the business of....which, again, is where we have to make decisions in the best interests of the site....
certain things are very clearly lined out that are unacceptable....racism, sexual harassment, religious persecution...things that incite wars, and can potentially get people killed....
things that are not covered explicitly by this rule...
fat jokes, age jokes, blind jokes, "god your mom is ugly" jokes..the list goes on and on...
included in that list?...take a wild guess...
so again, we have this nice big grey area that we have to deal with....and frankly, i'd much rather have to deal with it, then have a huge 278 point list of "no no things"....frankly i'd rather deal with the one incident every other month, of someone being butthurt because the word "downs" was uttered on irc chat...than to have to deal with the 50 daily tickets because someone made a fat joke...
first we shut down downs jokes....then age jokes...what's next?....no more making jokes at someone because their sandwich came with mayonnaise instead of ketchup?....
yes, i agree that the joke itself is crude, and tasteless....but once we start shutting that down...where do we stop?....where do we reach the point where nobody on the site is offended anymore?....
when there is no more conversation period.....and sorry, but i'm not going to be part of that....
for context...here is blocknroll's post...
--------------
I think you misunderstand - Here's the rule again: Offensive language - including but not limited to racism, sexual harassment and religious persecution - is not allowed in any form.
you see the bit where it says including but not limited to? So those are examples, not the start and stop points...
And as someone with the reputation you have for shiny arguments should understand this is not that type of topic...
It's fairly obvious that you will get things wrong and will get things right, but to allow the mocking of disabled people as being whats best for the site? Really?? One of the issues here is that collectively the admins are being called out again and again for getting this one wrong but don't have the guts to admit it, leading to massive loss of respect all round. I don't know maybe Christer said to you all that it's fine to mock disabled people....If so I'd like to hear that from him please. And then there's the belittling "you happen to be THE person (emphasis added by me) that doesn't like it" well thats just not true is it....
--------------
my response?
block, again, thanks for being the voice of fumbbl, block....i'm sure you're dead on when you say the admins have had a "massive loss of respect all around"....
funny, but did i ever say you were the sole person offended by lizvis' jokes?...nope, don't think i ever did....but did i ever point out that a majority, or a minority, of the community was?...nope...
because i don't speak for everyone else, and i don't impose my level of morals and "offendedness" on everyone else...i let them decide for themselves if they wish to be offended...see how that works?...see how that "but not limited to" becomes a grey area *really quickly*?....
also, i don't think i ever made a statement that mocking *anyone* for that matter, was what's best for the site....what i *DID* say is that we have to make decisions on incidents that best benefits the site....and what subsect of person is being joked about isn't the problem at all....
see, here's the bigger issue that overruns all of this....
-censorship-
plain and simple...it's not about offense, or insults, or anything like that....it's all about censorship...which is something that we are not in the business of....which, again, is where we have to make decisions in the best interests of the site....
certain things are very clearly lined out that are unacceptable....racism, sexual harassment, religious persecution...things that incite wars, and can potentially get people killed....
things that are not covered explicitly by this rule...
fat jokes, age jokes, blind jokes, "god your mom is ugly" jokes..the list goes on and on...
included in that list?...take a wild guess...
so again, we have this nice big grey area that we have to deal with....and frankly, i'd much rather have to deal with it, then have a huge 278 point list of "no no things"....frankly i'd rather deal with the one incident every other month, of someone being butthurt because the word "downs" was uttered on irc chat...than to have to deal with the 50 daily tickets because someone made a fat joke...
first we shut down downs jokes....then age jokes...what's next?....no more making jokes at someone because their sandwich came with mayonnaise instead of ketchup?....
yes, i agree that the joke itself is crude, and tasteless....but once we start shutting that down...where do we stop?....where do we reach the point where nobody on the site is offended anymore?....
when there is no more conversation period.....and sorry, but i'm not going to be part of that....
Comments
Posted by Calcium on 2011-04-02 12:55:56
You find the 'joke' crude and tasteless? Since when Shadow? About a week ago you/lizvis/prinz were having a great laugh throwing around the word 'downz' whilst attacking me. And yes it did hurt me. Does that make me an EMO? Or a RETARD? Or just a human with feelings that even in this impersonal format can be hurt?
Does the word HYPOCRITE mean anything to you?
Does the word HYPOCRITE mean anything to you?
Posted by shadow46x2 on 2011-04-02 12:58:04
just because i find a joke crude and tasteless, doesn't mean i can't find the humor in it...
same as everyone throwing around fat jokes in my direction....yes i find it tasteless...but i still find the humor in it...
so feel free to call me a hypocrite....i've never denied that i am one....but at least in this situation, i'm holding true to my principles...
same as everyone throwing around fat jokes in my direction....yes i find it tasteless...but i still find the humor in it...
so feel free to call me a hypocrite....i've never denied that i am one....but at least in this situation, i'm holding true to my principles...
Posted by gjopie on 2011-04-02 13:03:42
What's the difference between jokes about disabilities and jokes about women? Or about god? Personally, I don't get it; if you're going to ban one, why allow another? It seems like it all comes down to personal preference, and the admins don't personally have a problem with disability jokes.
But clearly, a lot of people on the site do. Whereas they don't about, say, age jokes.
But clearly, a lot of people on the site do. Whereas they don't about, say, age jokes.
Posted by shadow46x2 on 2011-04-02 13:08:16
what's the difference between jokes about women and jokes about fat people?...
what's the difference between jokes about women and jokes about blind people?...
what's the difference between jokes about women and jokes about your mom?....and to be clear, i'm not insulting your mom, i'm sure she's a wonderful woman...
see where this is leading?.....how do you know that there aren't a lot of age sensitive people on the site, and they just aren't speaking up?....
what's the difference between jokes about women and jokes about blind people?...
what's the difference between jokes about women and jokes about your mom?....and to be clear, i'm not insulting your mom, i'm sure she's a wonderful woman...
see where this is leading?.....how do you know that there aren't a lot of age sensitive people on the site, and they just aren't speaking up?....
Posted by JellyBelly on 2011-04-02 13:10:49
My opinion: Making fun of people with serious disabilities is low and I can see how it could be extremely offensive to some people. Given the site rules, I find it rather shocking that the admin team seem so relaxed about it.
Posted by shadow46x2 on 2011-04-02 13:12:37
jelly: if you were an admin, you'd have a different perspective on whether or not we are "relaxed" about it....
Posted by gjopie on 2011-04-02 13:13:04
I appreciate the patrolling the grey area here is a difficult job, and I'm in no way admin-bashing.
But in my opinion? I think that when you start to get a lot of people complaining about age-jokes/your-mum-jokes - thats when you have to start thinking about whether they are appropriate or not. I think you just need to keep an eye on the mood of the community (which is a tricky task, I'll admit - but it seems to be at least split over downs jokes more than about, say, age jokes).
(Incidentally, I just read the other thread and the "would that be acceptable to a work-colleague" is a fairly good measure between strangers, I think. Obviously, between friends in private, you can say whatever the hell you want to each other.)
But in my opinion? I think that when you start to get a lot of people complaining about age-jokes/your-mum-jokes - thats when you have to start thinking about whether they are appropriate or not. I think you just need to keep an eye on the mood of the community (which is a tricky task, I'll admit - but it seems to be at least split over downs jokes more than about, say, age jokes).
(Incidentally, I just read the other thread and the "would that be acceptable to a work-colleague" is a fairly good measure between strangers, I think. Obviously, between friends in private, you can say whatever the hell you want to each other.)
Posted by Garion on 2011-04-02 13:46:14
Regardless of what my opinion is on this subject of every thing you covered above. I don't think these type of jokes do any good for the image of the site or this community and at the least I think it would probably be a good idea if the admin gave the offenders a reminder that they should show a little bit more respect to the community and try and help make it a more welcoming friendly environment and not one that is rife with downz jokes. I personally think we all owe it to this site to try and contribute towards making it the best site around and the biggest BB community on the web again and anything that alienates people as much as this seems to probably isn’t a good think.
Then again for all we know the admins might well have had a word with the people in question already and asked them to tone it down.
Then again for all we know the admins might well have had a word with the people in question already and asked them to tone it down.
Posted by Keith-Lemon on 2011-04-02 13:55:32
I would like some one to go into anther community and post a downs joke on there forum and see how long it takes you to get banned simple as that.
Posted by Garion on 2011-04-02 14:00:41
Thats true mind, post anything in any forum with that type of joke on it would be an immediate ban. Try and post something like that on BBC site forums, or Nintendo forums etc... or any other site that claims to be friendly for all ages and it would result in permanent bans.
Posted by Prinz on 2011-04-02 14:14:26
Quote
Posted by Keith-Lemon on 2011-04-02 13:55:32
I would like some one to go into anther community and post a downs joke on there forum and see how long it takes you to get banned simple as that.
EndQuote
I love how the other camp ( the nothing should ever get censored, ever camp) always says we ban everyone here in fascist ways and that would never happen on any other site.
Posted by Keith-Lemon on 2011-04-02 13:55:32
I would like some one to go into anther community and post a downs joke on there forum and see how long it takes you to get banned simple as that.
EndQuote
I love how the other camp ( the nothing should ever get censored, ever camp) always says we ban everyone here in fascist ways and that would never happen on any other site.
Posted by Postie on 2011-04-02 14:18:10
I didn't think jokes were allowed on fumbbl?
Posted by koadah on 2011-04-02 14:34:16
You're sick of it Shadow? My heart bleeds.
>>you know exactly what was said...context isn't everything....you and i both know it was a racial slur, no matter what the intentions....
Damn. I'd better throw out all my rap & comedy CDs.
No Shadow, that is you enforcing YOUR version of what is acceptable. Which is of course a mod's job. But you also let enough go for me to not feel inclined to join main chat.
That you deleted my post shows that there is a line. The argument is what should be which side of it.
Disability has a massive impact on people's lives. If you expect everyone to just accept others ridiculing that you are going to be disappointed.
You call it trolling. I'd call it fighting my own corner. Thanks for upholding Fumbbl's great reputation around the net.
So disability doesn't get people killed? Damn. Godwinned already.
http://www.neurodiversity.com/murder.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/8283872.stm
>>you know exactly what was said...context isn't everything....you and i both know it was a racial slur, no matter what the intentions....
Damn. I'd better throw out all my rap & comedy CDs.
No Shadow, that is you enforcing YOUR version of what is acceptable. Which is of course a mod's job. But you also let enough go for me to not feel inclined to join main chat.
That you deleted my post shows that there is a line. The argument is what should be which side of it.
Disability has a massive impact on people's lives. If you expect everyone to just accept others ridiculing that you are going to be disappointed.
You call it trolling. I'd call it fighting my own corner. Thanks for upholding Fumbbl's great reputation around the net.
So disability doesn't get people killed? Damn. Godwinned already.
http://www.neurodiversity.com/murder.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/8283872.stm
Posted by KenThis on 2011-04-02 14:38:28
I don't mean to hijack a thread but look at my team
http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=team&op=view&team_id=586586
I spent a long time researching slang names for this team, and my intention was not to cause offense. I personally have no problem with the names I chose, if I did I wouldn't have included them obviously. But I am also very aware that I'm at the edge of acceptability.
They were already reported once for a nickname "Fag" which I have since learned in much more offensive in USA than it is in UK, and I was more than happy for the admins to change it.
I have since been contacted by a coach that I respect on Fumbbl who pointed out that he found some of the Nickname's offensive but that he wasn't going to report the team and did not expect me to actually do anything about it but just wanted me to know that I was skirting a line.
I was quite worried so canvassed opinion from an openly gay coach on fumbbl as to whether he felt any of the nickname's were offensive but he thought the team was funny, though he did think some of his gay friends may have found some of the nicknames offensive.
So what do I do? Do I change the team myself or wait till someone reports it?
I put the admins in the position of judging the grey area surrounding my team. A thankless task I bet they don't want, however if an admin called me in and said that the team concept or team nicknames were unacceptable then I wouldn't hesitate in changing them.
It's up to them and ultimately Christer to judge what is reasonable for fumbbl and the rest of us to abide by their decisions or go find something else to do with our time.
HOWEVER If my team caused/causes only half of the people offended by lizvis' use of that term to be uncomfortable enough to report it I'd hope the admins would call me into admin chat to do something about it.
To me that doesn't mean censorship but rather is just a sensible approach to keep fumbbl as broad and welcoming place to be as it is.
We don't all come from the same backround and we don't all find the same things offensive but we all agree to come play in the same place and abide by the same rules, not necessarily because they are fair in the real world but because Christer and the admins decide that it is the best way of keeping fumbbl running smoothly.
As I see it it's the exact same reason why we have bowlbot managing swear words in chat not because the majority of people find those words offensive, but because Christer decided that it was important in order to keep fumbbl working so well.
So ultimately its down to Christer and the admin's and rather than keep rehashing this discussion why not just follow the rules of fumbbl.
If you find something offensive then individually report it, if the admins and christer get enough reports they'll have to make a decision as to how to handle it for the good of fumbbl. Then we all as individuals decide if we agree enough with that decision as to whether we want to continue to play here or not.
Anyhow that turned out longer than I expected.
Cheers Ken
http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=team&op=view&team_id=586586
I spent a long time researching slang names for this team, and my intention was not to cause offense. I personally have no problem with the names I chose, if I did I wouldn't have included them obviously. But I am also very aware that I'm at the edge of acceptability.
They were already reported once for a nickname "Fag" which I have since learned in much more offensive in USA than it is in UK, and I was more than happy for the admins to change it.
I have since been contacted by a coach that I respect on Fumbbl who pointed out that he found some of the Nickname's offensive but that he wasn't going to report the team and did not expect me to actually do anything about it but just wanted me to know that I was skirting a line.
I was quite worried so canvassed opinion from an openly gay coach on fumbbl as to whether he felt any of the nickname's were offensive but he thought the team was funny, though he did think some of his gay friends may have found some of the nicknames offensive.
So what do I do? Do I change the team myself or wait till someone reports it?
I put the admins in the position of judging the grey area surrounding my team. A thankless task I bet they don't want, however if an admin called me in and said that the team concept or team nicknames were unacceptable then I wouldn't hesitate in changing them.
It's up to them and ultimately Christer to judge what is reasonable for fumbbl and the rest of us to abide by their decisions or go find something else to do with our time.
HOWEVER If my team caused/causes only half of the people offended by lizvis' use of that term to be uncomfortable enough to report it I'd hope the admins would call me into admin chat to do something about it.
To me that doesn't mean censorship but rather is just a sensible approach to keep fumbbl as broad and welcoming place to be as it is.
We don't all come from the same backround and we don't all find the same things offensive but we all agree to come play in the same place and abide by the same rules, not necessarily because they are fair in the real world but because Christer and the admins decide that it is the best way of keeping fumbbl running smoothly.
As I see it it's the exact same reason why we have bowlbot managing swear words in chat not because the majority of people find those words offensive, but because Christer decided that it was important in order to keep fumbbl working so well.
So ultimately its down to Christer and the admin's and rather than keep rehashing this discussion why not just follow the rules of fumbbl.
If you find something offensive then individually report it, if the admins and christer get enough reports they'll have to make a decision as to how to handle it for the good of fumbbl. Then we all as individuals decide if we agree enough with that decision as to whether we want to continue to play here or not.
Anyhow that turned out longer than I expected.
Cheers Ken
Posted by shadow46x2 on 2011-04-02 14:41:35
feel free to continue railing against me because i chose to delete a post that you chose to make involving multiple racial slurs towards black people...since we can't edit blog comments, the only option i had was to remove it....
and congrats on posting a website showing a few news articles....people get shot over their nikes...should we ban all discussion of tennis shoes as well?....
and congrats on posting a website showing a few news articles....people get shot over their nikes...should we ban all discussion of tennis shoes as well?....
Posted by JellyBelly on 2011-04-02 15:01:03
I think that's really well said KenThis, and it pretty sums up my feelings on the matter too. I agree that it's not an easy task for the admins, who have to decide where the line should be drawn.
Also, sounds to me like you take a very sensible and considered approach with your own team.
Also, sounds to me like you take a very sensible and considered approach with your own team.
Posted by koadah on 2011-04-02 15:34:42
There were no racial 'slurs' in that post Shadow.
There are a couple of reasons I can see for deleting the post but you don't seem to understand them at all. You appear to have deleted it based on the use of one word regardless of context. Maybe it was all too subtle for you.
That's a bad sign you being a mod and all.
The news posts (as you don't seem to get those either) show how much stress many disabled people and there carers are under and that idiot behavior adds to that stress and can push people over the edge.
That is one reason why there is so much bitterness over this issue. Another is that Lizvis appears to be deliberately setting out to wind people up and create a bad atmosphere. And that the admins appear to be encouraging that.
So, don't be surprised if th emos won't just let it go.
There are a couple of reasons I can see for deleting the post but you don't seem to understand them at all. You appear to have deleted it based on the use of one word regardless of context. Maybe it was all too subtle for you.
That's a bad sign you being a mod and all.
The news posts (as you don't seem to get those either) show how much stress many disabled people and there carers are under and that idiot behavior adds to that stress and can push people over the edge.
That is one reason why there is so much bitterness over this issue. Another is that Lizvis appears to be deliberately setting out to wind people up and create a bad atmosphere. And that the admins appear to be encouraging that.
So, don't be surprised if th emos won't just let it go.
Posted by SillySod on 2011-04-02 15:43:45
Wait, so Koadah is a racist?
... or is it just that the USA is rather primitive when it comes to discrimination?
Hmm, think think. Which could it be? Help me out here people :)
... or is it just that the USA is rather primitive when it comes to discrimination?
Hmm, think think. Which could it be? Help me out here people :)
Posted by shadow46x2 on 2011-04-02 15:45:26
btw koadah...
i find it highly amusing that you are railing against the admins for not acting against something you find offensive, that is not directly forbidden by the site rules...
but yet you complain when i removed your post with racial slurs....which is directly forbidden by site rules...
seriously...how about taking a stance and sticking with it, instead of waffling when it suits your argument?
i find it highly amusing that you are railing against the admins for not acting against something you find offensive, that is not directly forbidden by the site rules...
but yet you complain when i removed your post with racial slurs....which is directly forbidden by site rules...
seriously...how about taking a stance and sticking with it, instead of waffling when it suits your argument?
Posted by koadah on 2011-04-02 16:40:03
The thing is Shadow you don't appear to know what a racial slur is. If all you can do is check the list of forbidden words then you are of no more use than the swear bot.
You have a brain. Use it.
You have a brain. Use it.
Posted by JimmyFantastic on 2011-04-02 17:22:34
I can't believe that an admin of all people is actually comparing mocking Disability with fart jokes because they aren't one of three things that are specifically stated by the rules to not be the only forms of unacceptable behaviour.
Posted by Calcium on 2011-04-02 18:02:50
I had a scan through your earlier blogs Shadow....
MS walk and 'sick jokes'
Intresting reads indeed.....I hope you raised lots of cash to support that worthy cause btw.
*Down's Syndrome Association - Helping people with Down's syndrome to live full and ... Registered charity no. 1061474*
MS walk and 'sick jokes'
Intresting reads indeed.....I hope you raised lots of cash to support that worthy cause btw.
*Down's Syndrome Association - Helping people with Down's syndrome to live full and ... Registered charity no. 1061474*
Posted by Arktoris on 2011-04-02 18:03:27
This is exactly why censorship has no place on the internet. what is considered offensive to a nation full of liberal metrosexuals isn't offensive to a nation that has real men. What is not offensive to a country full of agnostics and atheists, may be considered an act of war by someone who lives in a hardcore Muslim country.
so if we cater to this lowest common denominator and censor everything that might upset someone what eventually happens...
...no conversation occurs.
but if you ignore good taste and respect for others then you end up with a lot of drama.
so where's the line to be drawn.
It's drawn by the host of the site. Christer. This is his party in his house. And any host of a party gets to toss out any guest they deem inappropriate. period. The host defines the rules for politeness and respect. If Christer says d0wns jokes are not allowed, then they are not allowed, whether you agree with it or not.
but it should be Christer that says this, and not a monkey trying to extrapolate from the rules, or imposing his own.
and under no circumstances is forcing someone to apologize acceptable. apologies are acts of admitting guilt. guilt is an emotion. and emotions cannot be commanded or regulated by human authorities. Any attempt to do so is simply power playing.
so if we cater to this lowest common denominator and censor everything that might upset someone what eventually happens...
...no conversation occurs.
but if you ignore good taste and respect for others then you end up with a lot of drama.
so where's the line to be drawn.
It's drawn by the host of the site. Christer. This is his party in his house. And any host of a party gets to toss out any guest they deem inappropriate. period. The host defines the rules for politeness and respect. If Christer says d0wns jokes are not allowed, then they are not allowed, whether you agree with it or not.
but it should be Christer that says this, and not a monkey trying to extrapolate from the rules, or imposing his own.
and under no circumstances is forcing someone to apologize acceptable. apologies are acts of admitting guilt. guilt is an emotion. and emotions cannot be commanded or regulated by human authorities. Any attempt to do so is simply power playing.
Posted by Calcium on 2011-04-02 18:17:00
Sorry Arktoris, but this is not about censorship.
On the street this wouldn't be about censorship. This would be about good taste and mocking/attacking a group of people that don't deserve it and can't defend themselves.
Put lizvis' team logo on a banner and stand in any high street in the UK and see what happens.....I don't think many ppl would applaud the fact that one's uncensored views are being aired.....
There are some lines that shouldn't be crossed in any enviroment. This is one such line imo.....
On the street this wouldn't be about censorship. This would be about good taste and mocking/attacking a group of people that don't deserve it and can't defend themselves.
Put lizvis' team logo on a banner and stand in any high street in the UK and see what happens.....I don't think many ppl would applaud the fact that one's uncensored views are being aired.....
There are some lines that shouldn't be crossed in any enviroment. This is one such line imo.....
Posted by t0tem on 2011-04-02 19:53:28
Arktoris said: [and under no circumstances is forcing someone to apologize acceptable. apologies are acts of admitting guilt. guilt is an emotion. and emotions cannot be commanded or regulated by human authorities. Any attempt to do so is simply power playing.]
Couldn't agree less with most of what you said there Arktoris, but i belive you're right here.
EDIT: but is this implemented?
Couldn't agree less with most of what you said there Arktoris, but i belive you're right here.
EDIT: but is this implemented?
Posted by strikereternal on 2011-04-02 20:27:39
edit: screw it, this is not worth getting involved in
Posted by Arktoris on 2011-04-02 21:14:20
depends on the street, Calcium. On some streets of the world, you'll get beat up, on others you'll get a chorus of laughs.
This is Christer lane. He decides when the line is crossed, and when it's just boys being boys.
t0tem,
glad you agree. in all fairness though, woodstock didn't push, he just gave lizvis the alternative to the ban and accepted his answer. but i'm wary if that may turn to bullying in the future.
This is Christer lane. He decides when the line is crossed, and when it's just boys being boys.
t0tem,
glad you agree. in all fairness though, woodstock didn't push, he just gave lizvis the alternative to the ban and accepted his answer. but i'm wary if that may turn to bullying in the future.
Posted by PurpleChest on 2011-04-02 22:05:30
i find myself agreeing with calcium.
Of course there is a line, and policing it and defining ti is a tough job. But show me a developed country that doesnt have laws about disability prejudice, just like racism, sexism, homophobia, and i will show you a society i dont want to live in.
Certainly under uk law it is a 'protected characteristic' and subject to the same policing as racism. I persoanlly struggle to understand why FUMBBL tollerates the level of dissability 'humour' it does.
But i am also glad i am not an admin/mod.
Of course there is a line, and policing it and defining ti is a tough job. But show me a developed country that doesnt have laws about disability prejudice, just like racism, sexism, homophobia, and i will show you a society i dont want to live in.
Certainly under uk law it is a 'protected characteristic' and subject to the same policing as racism. I persoanlly struggle to understand why FUMBBL tollerates the level of dissability 'humour' it does.
But i am also glad i am not an admin/mod.
Posted by Jeffro on 2011-04-02 23:00:48
What about jokes involving sex with people with down's syndrome?!? Jokes that end with the punchline "Well... despite the random flailing, it's still better than sex with lizvis."
... and where's the pie, for Jeebus sake?
... and where's the pie, for Jeebus sake?
Posted by Chewie on 2011-04-02 23:22:19
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
/me gives Shadow a hug out of sympathy.
/me gives Shadow a hug out of sympathy.
Posted by pythrr on 2011-04-02 23:39:16
jesus, this is so funny I'm passing it on to a psychologist friend of mine who spends her time analyzing the "screwedup-ness" (my word, she has more expensive ones) of interwebz arguments. Moar! Moar!
Posted by shadow46x2 on 2011-04-03 01:29:51
Congratulations on Arktoris actually getting the point....Nighteye got it on Ken's blog also...
to the rest of you...please feel free to continue completely missing the point...
to the rest of you...please feel free to continue completely missing the point...
Posted by gjopie on 2011-04-03 02:14:05
Did Arktoris really get the point an Admin was trying to make? When he said:
"This is exactly why censorship has no place on the internet. what is considered offensive to a nation full of liberal metrosexuals isn't offensive to a nation that has real men. What is not offensive to a country full of agnostics and atheists, may be considered an act of war by someone who lives in a hardcore Muslim country.
so if we cater to this lowest common denominator and censor everything that might upset someone what eventually happens..."
So Muslims and metrosexuals are the lowest common denominators? Really? Is that the official admin view?
"This is exactly why censorship has no place on the internet. what is considered offensive to a nation full of liberal metrosexuals isn't offensive to a nation that has real men. What is not offensive to a country full of agnostics and atheists, may be considered an act of war by someone who lives in a hardcore Muslim country.
so if we cater to this lowest common denominator and censor everything that might upset someone what eventually happens..."
So Muslims and metrosexuals are the lowest common denominators? Really? Is that the official admin view?
Posted by shadow46x2 on 2011-04-03 02:24:01
yes, gjopie...that is exactly what i said....i exactly said that muslims and metrosexuals are the lowest common denominator...
pull your head out of your rear end, and actually listen to the content of what's being said, instead of gleaning whatever the hell you want....
pull your head out of your rear end, and actually listen to the content of what's being said, instead of gleaning whatever the hell you want....
Posted by koadah on 2011-04-03 04:41:47
Nothing like a good Koran burning to liven up a boring weekend.
Are there any metrosexuals on Fumbbl?
Tell you what Shadow. You can call me a fat old bald geezer whenever you like if that's what is worrying you. (Just you mind, none of them skinny fellers).
But IMO not covering disabilities makes the site look bad and is causing a certain amount of bad feeling.
Are there any metrosexuals on Fumbbl?
Tell you what Shadow. You can call me a fat old bald geezer whenever you like if that's what is worrying you. (Just you mind, none of them skinny fellers).
But IMO not covering disabilities makes the site look bad and is causing a certain amount of bad feeling.
Posted by Carnis on 2011-04-04 19:00:32
Really? Accepting 'downz' because you are not offended by it, and making the assumption that nobody else is? What? I mean, Really?
What if you had children with 21-trisomy? Born with a heart defect (40% of down-children are), dead at say .. age 2? Would you then possibly get offended by Emos & Downz? Possibly?
Imo it's blatant ignorance by admins to not only approve 'the downz' jokes, but at the same time disallow farts jokes (which are, to my knowledge, harmless).
What if you had children with 21-trisomy? Born with a heart defect (40% of down-children are), dead at say .. age 2? Would you then possibly get offended by Emos & Downz? Possibly?
Imo it's blatant ignorance by admins to not only approve 'the downz' jokes, but at the same time disallow farts jokes (which are, to my knowledge, harmless).
Posted by Naru1981 on 2011-04-05 11:43:32
totally agree.
If YOUR family was affected by this would you allow these jokes to continue?
If Cancer jokes started would that be allowed allowed?
Even Child abuse is found funny by people but you won't (i hope) find it used on here. All these subjects are sick and have no right to be made into long standing jokes on what is meant to be a family friendly place
If YOUR family was affected by this would you allow these jokes to continue?
If Cancer jokes started would that be allowed allowed?
Even Child abuse is found funny by people but you won't (i hope) find it used on here. All these subjects are sick and have no right to be made into long standing jokes on what is meant to be a family friendly place
Posted by Naru1981 on 2011-04-05 11:44:32
BUT i think it should be Christer that must sort this not admins. As someone has already said, He is basically GOD here.
Posted by deCotte on 2011-10-25 19:31:43
Well I write this quite late, as a doctor who works a lot with people with handicap I am indeed quite shocked and the behaivor of shadow is a reason for me to quit fummble. There are always trolls and people who think it's open minded to insult the mentally ill and all that jazz and one has to deal with that. But when an admin defends that with far-fetched arguments and not even his co-admins say: Hey, this goes to far, mate, then this is really not a community I want to participate.