homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Is 'whateverist' speech off limits, or not?

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.    
Source: (consider it) Thread: Is 'whateverist' speech off limits, or not?
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In Hell, Sioni Sais has stated uniquivocally that racist or sexist or homophobic remarks are not allowed.

quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I have already replied to your earlier complaint of this nature and hoped you would have been bright enough to work out that while we do not tolerate racist, sexist and homophobic remarks we specifically do not worry about people giving offence on grounds of faith (or lack thereof) because these matters can be debated.

The Hell Guidelines, however, would seem to indicate that they are allowed, and that dealing with them will be taken care of by the denizens ripping one to shreds:

quote:
Hell Guidelines Say:
1. Racism, sexism, etc. – while you have a right to hold whatever opinion you like, if you post racist, sexist, disable-ist, or whateverist drivel here, may God have mercy on your soul.

I'm sensing a disconnect. Which is it? If things have changed in this regard, then perhaps the Hell Guidelines should be updated to reflect the change.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
RooK

1 of 6
# 1852

 - Posted      Profile for RooK   Author's homepage   Email RooK   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's a good question. Let me consult with my peers for our current take on the issue.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sorry about the wait, we were discussing our answer.

Direct personal attacks based on a poster's race, sex, sexual orientation etc. are off limits because people can't change those characteristics and in some jurisdictions such attacks may be illegal. Whatever-ist language is not strictly off-limits for Hell in a general sense, but it is less tolerated and may be considered a Commandment 1 violation if done systematically as it's disruptive.

Religious beliefs are up for debate and always have been. We don't - and never have - call posters for blasphemy. It would be a bit dishonest for a site that ran a competition to explore the fine line between humour and offence, comedy and blasphemy to do that. RooK's remark may be offensive to some, but it was made in right place and he wasn't acting as an Admin when he made it.

Marvin
Admin

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Sorry about the wait, we were discussing our answer.

Direct personal attacks based on a poster's race, sex, sexual orientation etc. are off limits because people can't change those characteristics and in some jurisdictions such attacks may be illegal. Whatever-ist language is not strictly off-limits for Hell in a general sense, but it is less tolerated and may be considered a Commandment 1 violation if done systematically as it's disruptive.

Religious beliefs are up for debate and always have been. We don't - and never have - call posters for blasphemy. It would be a bit dishonest for a site that ran a competition to explore the fine line between humour and offence, comedy and blasphemy to do that. RooK's remark may be offensive to some, but it was made in right place and he wasn't acting as an Admin when he made it.

Marvin
Admin

My thanks to the admins for clarifying this.

More importantly, my apologies to Mousethief and others. My ruling, in Hell, was wrong. I was trying to be too definite, possibly too soon in my term as host, although by way of a lousy excuse, my ruling was coloured by UK legislation and the "diversity" training everyone in the civil service has to do!

Sioni Sais
Hellhost

[eta: name and role, to indicate that I'm taking it on officially ]

[ 05. December 2012, 13:22: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This post had nothing whatsoever to do with RooK's colorful metaphor, and I'm not sure why it was brought up. It seems an unwarranted poke in the eye.

---

Thank you Sioni. You didn't sin against me, just confuse me, and if that's a sin then the whole world is hell-bound. It was gracious of you to apologize.

[ 05. December 2012, 16:45: Message edited by: mousethief ]

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
This post had nothing whatsoever to do with RooK's colorful metaphor, and I'm not sure why it was brought up. It seems an unwarranted poke in the eye.

We took the opportunity to clarify all aspects of the current "what's allowed and what isn't" arguments in one go.

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged


 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools