I appreciate you finally answering this guy at least.
u/Quickname There's no exhaustive list. Perhaps there is no list. I assume you mean to point out that the fact he's going to arbitrarily alter the list as he deems warranted as a gotcha, but that's an obvious fact. Moderation is inherently arbitrary. He has a mental heuristic that matches his intent behind the rules and decides on allowed/disallowed slurs in the moment. To be clear, I don't agree with all of his decisions either and think making a list is a good idea.
There's no list because I've never really had to enforce it. Worse, there is a question about how to add or remove things from the list, that I don't have as an answer to yet. It may have to be arbitrary for a while, I don't know.
At the moment, I'd rather keep it vague because it's more about abusing users than it is about the words themselves.
Why do you have to manage it? It’s a short list, and it shouldn’t change. You’ve already established that faggot, nigger, and retard are not actionable; how long can it be?
It's not possible for it to be short, and it will have to change. The level of offensiveness of a slur changes over time, some worsen, some lessen, entirely on how the word is used in the vernacular. Thus words would have to be lessened or increased.
The list should be thousands of words long, considering that there are many ingenious slurs that you've never hear that are fairly extreme. There's also going to be new ones all the time. It would become a strange and arbitrary process to add them.
Do you think that all of those would be actionable? In most people’s minds, nigger and faggot are more extreme than something like moon cricket or polesmoker. It’d be strange if enforcement of obscure slurs was more consistent than the common, original-strength slurs people actually care about.
Regarding the existence of new slurs, where do euphemisms fit in? Stuff like joggers, boat people, New Germans, basketball Americans, and so on. It’s not a slur just because it refers to someone by a “protected” characteristic, nor is it necessarily spoken in hate. And even if it were, we’re allowed to say bad things about minority groups.
In most people's minds. However, internet culture very clearly allows faggot and fag, due to how it is kind of normalized and it's offensiveness revoked like "new fag". Nigger is fairly extreme even in internet culture, so I don't have an answer on that yet.
Obscure slurs are actually more enforceable because they are so archaic, the only purpose for using them would be towards offense.
Euphemisms have to be taken on a case by case basis. Joggers, Boat People, New Germans, Basketball Americans; are all cases of very low-offense terms, or in some cases, non-offense like "boat people".
Because if I add a list, then I also have to figure out how to manage it.
I appreciate you finally answering this guy at least.
u/Quickname There's no exhaustive list. Perhaps there is no list. I assume you mean to point out that the fact he's going to arbitrarily alter the list as he deems warranted as a gotcha, but that's an obvious fact. Moderation is inherently arbitrary. He has a mental heuristic that matches his intent behind the rules and decides on allowed/disallowed slurs in the moment. To be clear, I don't agree with all of his decisions either and think making a list is a good idea.
There's no list because I've never really had to enforce it. Worse, there is a question about how to add or remove things from the list, that I don't have as an answer to yet. It may have to be arbitrary for a while, I don't know.
At the moment, I'd rather keep it vague because it's more about abusing users than it is about the words themselves.
Why do you have to manage it? It’s a short list, and it shouldn’t change. You’ve already established that faggot, nigger, and retard are not actionable; how long can it be?
It's not possible for it to be short, and it will have to change. The level of offensiveness of a slur changes over time, some worsen, some lessen, entirely on how the word is used in the vernacular. Thus words would have to be lessened or increased.
The list should be thousands of words long, considering that there are many ingenious slurs that you've never hear that are fairly extreme. There's also going to be new ones all the time. It would become a strange and arbitrary process to add them.
Do you think that all of those would be actionable? In most people’s minds, nigger and faggot are more extreme than something like moon cricket or polesmoker. It’d be strange if enforcement of obscure slurs was more consistent than the common, original-strength slurs people actually care about.
Regarding the existence of new slurs, where do euphemisms fit in? Stuff like joggers, boat people, New Germans, basketball Americans, and so on. It’s not a slur just because it refers to someone by a “protected” characteristic, nor is it necessarily spoken in hate. And even if it were, we’re allowed to say bad things about minority groups.
In most people's minds. However, internet culture very clearly allows faggot and fag, due to how it is kind of normalized and it's offensiveness revoked like "new fag". Nigger is fairly extreme even in internet culture, so I don't have an answer on that yet.
Obscure slurs are actually more enforceable because they are so archaic, the only purpose for using them would be towards offense.
Euphemisms have to be taken on a case by case basis. Joggers, Boat People, New Germans, Basketball Americans; are all cases of very low-offense terms, or in some cases, non-offense like "boat people".