The DERP! thread

[kchusker_chris]

^ is it ok to say douche?

Probably best to spell it "dousche" if you do.

not as familiar w/ the spelling as a regular user such as yourself.... (burn!)

 

[kchusker_chris]

I get that everyone is stepping back their comments now. However, we you are arguing on the board and use sexual orientation to attack someone, there is the line. Our board rules state we do not allow others to offend based on race, creed, national origin, sexual orientation or other discriminatory or racial basis. Hopefully, that clears up the issue.

Nobody is stepping back anything. Nobody attacked anyone using sexual orientation, and nobody crossed any line. I know the board rules very well, and helped clarify or construct many of them.

I would prefer not to be told that I'm attacking someone, especially in a way that violates board rules, when that is in no way what I did. Especially when the person who was "attacked" doesn't feel they were attacked, either.

It would be great to see you make these statements when you were arguing, but instead, you used sexual orientation to insult someone. If you are bothered by that or, more aptly, someone calling you out for it, then maybe don't degrade the sexual orientation of others.
You all want to make all of these shades of grey. "It's the Woodshed". "I'm not offended". "Why do we have to be inclusive". Well, the rules are there as clear guides for how the board is run. If you don't like us telling you to be inclusive, then don't be racist, sexist, homophobic, or prejudice.

This is a question directed at my character. I will 100% deny the bold. That's bullsh#t.

My response in bold. That's facts.

it was directed at me, and not in any way degrading to my heterosexuality.

 

[Thanks_Tom RR]

I get that everyone is stepping back their comments now. However, we you are arguing on the board and use sexual orientation to attack someone, there is the line. Our board rules state we do not allow others to offend based on race, creed, national origin, sexual orientation or other discriminatory or racial basis. Hopefully, that clears up the issue.

Nobody is stepping back anything. Nobody attacked anyone using sexual orientation, and nobody crossed any line. I know the board rules very well, and helped clarify or construct many of them.

I would prefer not to be told that I'm attacking someone, especially in a way that violates board rules, when that is in no way what I did. Especially when the person who was "attacked" doesn't feel they were attacked, either.

It would be great to see you make these statements when you were arguing, but instead, you used sexual orientation to insult someone. If you are bothered by that or, more aptly, someone calling you out for it, then maybe don't degrade the sexual orientation of others.
You all want to make all of these shades of grey. "It's the Woodshed". "I'm not offended". "Why do we have to be inclusive". Well, the rules are there as clear guides for how the board is run. If you don't like us telling you to be inclusive, then don't be racist, sexist, homophobic, or prejudice.

This is a question directed at my character. I will 100% deny the bold. That's bullsh#t.

My response in bold. That's facts.

it was directed at me, and not in any way degrading to my heterosexuality.

It is a challenging concept to understand, but if offense was meant and offense was taken (verified by the fact others reported the post), then it is offensive.

 

[knapplc]

I get that everyone is stepping back their comments now. However, we you are arguing on the board and use sexual orientation to attack someone, there is the line. Our board rules state we do not allow others to offend based on race, creed, national origin, sexual orientation or other discriminatory or racial basis. Hopefully, that clears up the issue.

Nobody is stepping back anything. Nobody attacked anyone using sexual orientation, and nobody crossed any line. I know the board rules very well, and helped clarify or construct many of them.

I would prefer not to be told that I'm attacking someone, especially in a way that violates board rules, when that is in no way what I did. Especially when the person who was "attacked" doesn't feel they were attacked, either.

It would be great to see you make these statements when you were arguing, but instead, you used sexual orientation to insult someone. If you are bothered by that or, more aptly, someone calling you out for it, then maybe don't degrade the sexual orientation of others.
You all want to make all of these shades of grey. "It's the Woodshed". "I'm not offended". "Why do we have to be inclusive". Well, the rules are there as clear guides for how the board is run. If you don't like us telling you to be inclusive, then don't be racist, sexist, homophobic, or prejudice.

This is a question directed at my character. I will 100% deny the bold. That's bullsh#t.

My response in bold. That's facts.

It's not a fact. You're implying something about the intent of something I did. You can have an opinion on why I did it, but the fact of why I did it is MY explanation. Everything not my explanation is someone else's opinion.

I did not in any way use sexual orientation to insult someone. Claiming that as a fact is wrong. Stop being wrong.

 

[knapplc]

It is a challenging concept to understand, but if offense was meant and offense was taken (verified by the fact others reported the post), then it is offensive.

What's clear is that you don't understand what was going on.

 

[kchusker_chris]

This is an ignorant stance and one that is easily made by mid-age white men in America (a demographic that does not exclude myself). Nothing is offensive until it offends you. Well, there are other perspectives than your own.

 

[Thanks_Tom RR]

I get that everyone is stepping back their comments now. However, we you are arguing on the board and use sexual orientation to attack someone, there is the line. Our board rules state we do not allow others to offend based on race, creed, national origin, sexual orientation or other discriminatory or racial basis. Hopefully, that clears up the issue.

Nobody is stepping back anything. Nobody attacked anyone using sexual orientation, and nobody crossed any line. I know the board rules very well, and helped clarify or construct many of them.

I would prefer not to be told that I'm attacking someone, especially in a way that violates board rules, when that is in no way what I did. Especially when the person who was "attacked" doesn't feel they were attacked, either.

It would be great to see you make these statements when you were arguing, but instead, you used sexual orientation to insult someone. If you are bothered by that or, more aptly, someone calling you out for it, then maybe don't degrade the sexual orientation of others.
You all want to make all of these shades of grey. "It's the Woodshed". "I'm not offended". "Why do we have to be inclusive". Well, the rules are there as clear guides for how the board is run. If you don't like us telling you to be inclusive, then don't be racist, sexist, homophobic, or prejudice.

This is a question directed at my character. I will 100% deny the bold. That's bullsh#t.

My response in bold. That's facts.

It's not a fact. You're implying something about the intent of something I did. You can have an opinion on why I did it, but the fact of why I did it is MY explanation. Everything not my explanation is someone else's opinion.

I did not in any way use sexual orientation to insult someone. Claiming that as a fact is wrong. Stop being wrong.

Okay. Well, you did not mean it to be offensive. However, when you are in an argument and insulting one another, it is a lot to ask someone to read your comment and decide this was not meant to be offensive. knapplc, I am not calling you a homophobe. I am saying you posted a comment that offended others because it implied that being gay can be used as an insult.

 

[kchusker_chris]

It is a challenging concept to understand, but if offense was meant and offense was taken (verified by the fact others reported the post), then it is offensive.

i'll report every one of your damn posts and it doesn't mean sh#t in regards to the level of offensiveness within them...keep swinging, maybe you'll eventually get a hit here but at this point you're batting .000 - and if it wasn't for your mod muscle you'd likely have given up by now.

 

[JJ Husker]

Well, so I can't possibly be misconstrued as the turd in the punchbowl, I'm not stepping back anything I've said either. It's a ridiculous, misplaced ruling. Nobody was attacked. Sexual orientation wasn't under fire here. It was in the shed. Hell, a comment as innocuous as that should've flown outside the shed. Claiming "inclusivity" or some protected status from offense based on sexual orientation is about the stupidest thing I've heard this week.

The slippery slope of our head in a$$ PC culture.

This is an ignorant stance and one that is easily made by mid-age white men in America (a demographic that does not exclude myself). Nothing is offensive until it offends you. Well, there are other perspectives than your own.

Well now I'm offended. Seriously. Seems my mental capacity (ignorant), race (white) and age (mid-age) are under attack here. Two or all three of those things qualify for protected status. Should I report this egregious attack and infraction of the rules?

 

[knapplc]

Okay. Well, you did not mean it to be offensive. However, when you are in an argument and insulting one another, it is a lot to ask someone to read your comment and decide this was not meant to be offensive. knapplc, I am not calling you a homophobe. I am saying you posted a comment that offended others because it implied that being gay can be used as an insult.

You understand that implying someone, or the situation, is "gay" is entirely the point of "NTTAWWT," right? And that this has been used dozens of times on this board without someone reporting it, most frequently by NUance, right?

If whatever I wrote is to be taken as a gay slur, that quote needs to be banned.

 

[Thanks_Tom RR]

It is a challenging concept to understand, but if offense was meant and offense was taken (verified by the fact others reported the post), then it is offensive.

i'll report every one of your damn posts and it doesn't mean sh#t in regards to the level of offensiveness within them...keep swinging, maybe you'll eventually get a hit here but at this point you're batting .000 - and if it wasn't for your mod muscle you'd likely have given up by now.

I will not ban/suspend you or anyone else for disagreeing with me. That is ridiculous. You all are asking for context to why the post was removed, and I am giving it to you. You two were debating a topic, things got heated, insults were made, being gay was used as one of those insults, some reported the rule violation, and you each got a message about the issue. The argument right now is whether this was (1) meant to be offensive and (2) a rule violation. You all can debate if it was meant to be offensive all you want. To that I will say, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". However, it is up to the mods to decide if it was a rule violation. We determined "yes". Rather than giving suspensions, we simply sent PM to say keep it clean.

 

[kchusker_chris]

If whatever I wrote is to be taken as a gay slur, that quote needs to be banned.

we're gonna need a spreadsheet for all the quotes banned if this one makes it on there...

 

[knapplc]

However, it is up to the mods to decide if it was a rule violation. We determined "yes". Rather than giving suspensions, we simply sent PM to say keep it clean.

While I disagree with the Mods' decision in this situation, I do want to express my gratitude for the way it was handled. The PM was very polite and not heavy-handed at all, and the choice not to give anyone suspensions or warnings is appreciated.

 

[kchusker_chris]

I will not ban/suspend you or anyone else for disagreeing with me. That is ridiculous. You all are asking for context to why the post was removed, and I am giving it to you. You two were debating a topic, things got heated, insults were made, being gay was used as one of those insults, some reported the rule violation, and you each good a message about the issue. The argument right now is whether this was (1) meant to be offensive and (2) a rule violation. You all can debate if was meant to be offensive all you want. To that I will say, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". However, it is up to the mods to decide if it was a rule violation. We determined "yes". Rather than giving suspensions, we simply sent PM to say keep it clean.

soo...which of the rules do or don't apply to the Shed? Or is it a situational, pick and choose kind of thing based on whatever agenda may or may not be present. Can you further explain the role the "new" Shed has within the forum? Do we need to get rid of the skin thread? Or maybe do away w/ all the versus threads? Or maybe create a "Defcon 1 Woodshed" since this one has been sissified?

 

[JJ Husker]

All I know is, anyone who thinks NTTAWWT is offensive or an "attack" on sexual orientation, must feel deep down that there is in fact something wrong with being gay. I don't think that way so pardon me if I struggle with how that it is considered offensive. Must just be my ignorant, middle aged, white guy rationale.