I just noticed in another thread that a mod steps in every time some one uses the word slowed. Several times it was noted that slowed is not a synonym of stupid. Isn't this exactly and literally what slowed means? Is this some kind of new PC that I haven't heard of? What's the deal?

You really can't figure out why the mods wouldn't want you using a term that is usually used insultingly, and frequently causes offence, as a substitute for "stupid"?

Many people find the word used in a derogatory fashion very offensive. Usually these people have a child or a sibling who suffers from a disability that causes mental retardation. In the 90's the use of the word retardation to describe someone who had a specific mental disability almost stopped completely because the word had become used frequently as an insult. Believe me if you had a child with Down's Syndrome, you would not want some ignorant and rude person calling other people the same name as your child's disability. It is highly offensive.

Think about it with a different and more publicized word, Autistic.

Tell your friend "Quit being Autistic" when he does something idiotic and you are using it in a fashion that makes fun of him. Try using that in school next to a a teacher and you butt will wind up on suspension if the school has any sense. Different word, but it has the same effect.

Lord Scythican wrote:Many people find the word used in a derogatory fashion very offensive. Usually these people have a child or a sibling who suffers from a disability that causes mental retardation. In the 90's the use of the word retardation to describe someone who had a specific mental disability almost stopped completely because the word had become used frequently as an insult. Believe me if you had a child with Down's Syndrome, you would not want some ignorant and rude person calling other people the same name as your child's disability. It is highly offensive.

Think about it with a different and more publicized word, Autistic.

Tell your friend "Quit being Autistic" when he does something idiotic and you are using it in a fashion that makes fun of him. Try using that in school next to a SPED classroom and you butt will wind up on suspension if the school has any sense.

Mental retardation isn't really comparable to autism tbh.

and there were those who kept using "retart"...

x: thats slowed

me: wha?

asmith wrote:I just noticed in another thread that a mod steps in every time some one uses the word slowed. ?

Thankfully.

As someone who has worked with special needs populations for many years I find the use of the term offensive, as do many of my clients, associates, and professionals.

CT GAMER wrote:

asmith wrote:I just noticed in another thread that a mod steps in every time some one uses the word slowed. ?

Thankfully.

As someone who has worked with special needs populations for many years I find the use of the term offensive, as do many of my clients, associates, and professionals.

Then why aren't the words filtered by the forum? I can't say gak but I can say slowed? Yet I can't actually say it without being censored? Seems like a hole in the bucket.

ShumaGorath wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

asmith wrote:I just noticed in another thread that a mod steps in every time some one uses the word slowed. ?

Thankfully.

As someone who has worked with special needs populations for many years I find the use of the term offensive, as do many of my clients, associates, and professionals.

Then why aren't the words filtered by the forum? I can't say gak but I can say slowed? Yet I can't actually say it without being censored? Seems like a hole in the bucket.

maybe Frazzled will get on that as soon as he stops posting weiner dog pics...

Then how would you describe how pressing the brakes in your car retards your velocity?

The Dreadnote wrote:Then how would you describe how pressing the brakes in your car retards your velocity?

It has plenty of synonyms.

"studies show that smoking retards growth"

"Debt robs Africa of Social Spending, retards growth"

edit:

testing: gay

i guess the point is we shouldnt be filtering words just because people use them in a bad way. If so inclined, anyone can make any word really offensive if it catches on quickly or pervasively enough

i for one would like to see the word "emo" get the same treatment as other more controversial words...hehehe

How are often are people gonna use the other meanings for slow?

Most people are going use the word for a insult not in the meanings describe above.

I think you can subsitute other words just fine rather then having to use slow in sentences.

hobby related: "Drying Retarder"

can be substituted with "Drying Set-er-backer" i think?

Yak9UT wrote:I think you can subsitute other words just fine rather then having to use slow in sentences.

While we're in the business of substituting words why not just switch over to Newspeak entirely?

Bakerofish wrote:hobby related: "Drying Retarder"

can be substituted with "Drying Set-er-backer" i think?

Well Retarder is a word with no similar meaning to have mental disablitie so I think that won't need a subsitute.

slow on the other hand does.

i need to go to the gakker

The Dreadnote wrote:

Yak9UT wrote:I think you can subsitute other words just fine rather then having to use slow in sentences.

While we're in the business of substituting words why not just switch over to Newspeak entirely?

Well go for it.

But don't be suprised if some people won't understand it

Yak9UT wrote:How are often are people gonna use the other meanings for slow?

Most people are going use the word for a insult not in the meanings describe above.

I think you can subsitute other words just fine rather then having to use slow in sentences.

People have just about stopped using it because it is used frequently as an insult. The word also shouldn't filtered because it still has a legitimate use. The school system is already using it again on IEPs and other important documents. People really need to lay off using words like that as an insult. It is the reason why Special Education has been switched to Exceptional Education, because people have been using "Special Ed" as an insult.

Lord Scythican wrote:

Yak9UT wrote:How are often are people gonna use the other meanings for slow?

Most people are going use the word for a insult not in the meanings describe above.

I think you can subsitute other words just fine rather then having to use slow in sentences.

People have just about stopped using it because it is used frequently as an insult. The word also shouldn't filtered because it still has a legitimate use. The school system is already using it again on IEPs and other important documents. People really need to lay off using words like that as an insult. It is the reason why Special Education has been switched to Exceptional Education, because people have been using "Special Ed" as an insult.

Yes and I agree. But lets be honest how many dakkites are going to use it in those terms?

corpsesarefun wrote:

Lord Scythican wrote:Many people find the word used in a derogatory fashion very offensive. Usually these people have a child or a sibling who suffers from a disability that causes mental retardation. In the 90's the use of the word retardation to describe someone who had a specific mental disability almost stopped completely because the word had become used frequently as an insult. Believe me if you had a child with Down's Syndrome, you would not want some ignorant and rude person calling other people the same name as your child's disability. It is highly offensive.

Think about it with a different and more publicized word, Autistic.

Tell your friend "Quit being Autistic" when he does something idiotic and you are using it in a fashion that makes fun of him. Try using that in school next to a SPED classroom and you butt will wind up on suspension if the school has any sense.

Mental retardation isn't really comparable to autism tbh.

Way to go man. I put up a post trying to explain the situation and you pick that out of it?

Explain how you don't think they are comparable by the way? Half the time the kids are placed in the same classes. They both have Special Education Environment on their IEPS. Do you want a list?

Yak9UT wrote:Yes and I agree. But lets be honest how many dakkites are going to use it in those terms?

Why should that matter? I would much rather the mods continue punishing the offensive misuse of language, than having my vocabulary restricted slowed.

Yak9UT wrote:

Lord Scythican wrote:

Yak9UT wrote:How are often are people gonna use the other meanings for slow?

Most people are going use the word for a insult not in the meanings describe above.

I think you can subsitute other words just fine rather then having to use slow in sentences.

People have just about stopped using it because it is used frequently as an insult. The word also shouldn't filtered because it still has a legitimate use. The school system is already using it again on IEPs and other important documents. People really need to lay off using words like that as an insult. It is the reason why Special Education has been switched to Exceptional Education, because people have been using "Special Ed" as an insult.

Yes and I agree. But lets be honest how many dakkites are going to use it in those terms?

Hey it would happen if someone needed to discuss something with people here. I have seen plenty of topics that are comparable to a discussion regarding mental disabilities on these forums. People post some pretty serious discussions in the Off Topic forum sometimes. Granted there isn't many discussions, but that isn't a reason to filter it out. heck we are all trying to have a serious discussion regarding the word right now. Imagine if retardation was filtered out to say Hamfisted. Nobody would have a clue as to what we were referring too.

Dude grow a sense of decency and tact. Ninety Nine point TEN times out of a hundred that antiquated word is gonna be used to insult...

You have a Valid point thier Scythican.

Maybe just having the Mods look to whether its offensive or not is good enough.

And I suppose people can report the post if it is offensive.

Ok then I agree in certain circumstances I think you should be alowed to use the word.

Yak9UT wrote:You have a Valid point thier Scythican.

Maybe just having the Mods look to whether its offensive or not is good enough.

And I suppose people can report the post if it is offensive.

Ok then I agree in certain circumstances I think you should be alowed to use the word.

I am glad we could have a rational discussion regarding the issue. The thing is, some people think it is demeaning only if you are talking about those with disabilities. They give out their sympathies but continue to use the word to describe their friends, Bush, etc. What they do not realize is that even if they are not referring to those with disabilities they are reinforcing stereotypes of people with disabilities as being stupid, even if it is not used against them.

Some people believe it is a minor thing to complain about the word being used in such a way and believe that those who are concerned with the wellbeing of those with disabilities should be concerned with more important issues than the use of one word. Even though there may be lots of important issues, if it matters to one person, a parent of a special needs child for instance, people should be respectful to them. I know that is a lot to ask for on the internet, but I should warn you: No matter what your beliefs are Karma is a bitch. People get God Smacked everyday. My wife's father used to make fun of a girl when he was a teenager when she had seizures. They laughed and said she was possessed by the devil and made a joke of it. Guess what, the guy's daughters (my wife and her sister) were both diagnosed with epilepsy when they were teenagers.

The Dreadnote wrote:You really can't figure out why the mods wouldn't want you using a term that is usually used insultingly, and frequently causes offence, as a substitute for "stupid"?

I always thought they were calling the person mentally handicap.

Lord Scythican wrote:Many people find the word used in a derogatory fashion very offensive. Usually these people have a child or a sibling who suffers from a disability that causes mental retardation. In the 90's the use of the word retardation to describe someone who had a specific mental disability almost stopped completely because the word had become used frequently as an insult. Believe me if you had a child with Down's Syndrome, you would not want some ignorant and rude person calling other people the same name as your child's disability. It is highly offensive.

Think about it with a different and more publicized word, Autistic.

Tell your friend "Quit being Autistic" when he does something idiotic and you are using it in a fashion that makes fun of him. Try using that in school next to a a teacher and you butt will wind up on suspension if the school has any sense. Different word, but it has the same effect.

This.

ShumaGorath wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

asmith wrote:I just noticed in another thread that a mod steps in every time some one uses the word slowed. ?

Thankfully.

As someone who has worked with special needs populations for many years I find the use of the term offensive, as do many of my clients, associates, and professionals.

Then why aren't the words filtered by the forum? I can't say gak but I can say slowed? Yet I can't actually say it without being censored? Seems like a hole in the bucket.

Why not filter the pathway between your brain and mouth/fingers? Why should Mods be held responsible for your actions and inappropriate use of a term?

This also goes for people incorrectly labelling something that they disapprove of or disagree with as being 'gay'. I am not personally homosexual, but many of my friends and colleagues are and I respect them enough not to label things as such.

Bakerofish wrote:
testing: gay

i guess the point is we shouldnt be filtering words just because people use them in a bad way. If so inclined, anyone can make any word really offensive if it catches on quickly or pervasively enough

i for one would like to see the word "emo" get the same treatment as other more controversial words...hehehe

@avatar form

i can think of a number of pop-culture terms for a social demographic that would get me banned if i use them right now

Bakerofish wrote:"studies show that smoking retards growth"

"Debt robs Africa of Social Spending, retards growth"

edit:

testing: gay

i guess the point is we shouldnt be filtering words just because people use them in a bad way. If so inclined, anyone can make any word really offensive if it catches on quickly or pervasively enough

i for one would like to see the word "emo" get the same treatment as other more controversial words...hehehe

The issue being slow and slowed isn't a bad word, it's subject sensitive in consideration only and the PC police don't like it's use in reference to people despite the alternatives (handicapped for instance) meaning the same thing. The descriptive definition doesn't really change when it becomes applied to people, yet it somehow becomes a "bad word". If it's a "bad word" then the board should censor it as such, if not then whats the big deal? If it's describing a situation through definition that is not immoral or taboo to describe then why is it somehow special? How did it become "their word" to dislike. I mean, gay has always been a taboo term since it's only ever really meant homosexual in a taboo way. It's not a word with that definition by design. The same holds true for most forms of racial slur. slow and slowed are dictionary definitions correctly applied, yet because of the stigma of the subject matter the word itself became unusable despite the descriptive term simply changing to something else.

Never mind. I think I explained it already...

Bakerofish wrote:@avatar form

i can think of a number of pop-culture terms for a social demographic that would get me banned if i use them right now

Baker o fish - are they really? For sake of arguement, please list your 'pop-culture' references...

ShumaGorath wrote:

Bakerofish wrote:"studies show that smoking retards growth"

"Debt robs Africa of Social Spending, retards growth"

edit:

testing: gay

i guess the point is we shouldnt be filtering words just because people use them in a bad way. If so inclined, anyone can make any word really offensive if it catches on quickly or pervasively enough

i for one would like to see the word "emo" get the same treatment as other more controversial words...hehehe

The issue being slow and slowed isn't a bad word, it's subject sensitive in consideration only and the PC police don't like it's use in reference to people despite the alternatives (handicapped for instance) meaning the same thing. The descriptive definition doesn't really change when it becomes applied to people, yet it somehow becomes a "bad word". If it's a "bad word" then the board should censor it as such, if not then whats the big deal? If it's describing a situation through definition that is not immoral or taboo to describe then why is it somehow special? How did it become "their word" to dislike. I mean, gay has always been a taboo term since it's only ever really meant homosexual in a taboo way. It's not a word with that definition by design. The same holds true for most forms of racial slur. slow and slowed are dictionary definitions correctly applied, yet because of the stigma of the subject matter the word itself became unusable despite the descriptive term simply changing to something else.

You are incorrect on so many levels here.

Your arguement has already been put down in previous posts, which I recommend that you read and understand.

As for your 'dictionary definitions' I would appreciate you explaining how 'slow' and its expansions derive the same meaning as 'bad', 'poor' and the like.

Also, 'gay' can also mean joyous and happy...

You are obviously limited in your understanding of the english vocabulary.

Please educate yourself before commenting on this issue further.

*Edit for spelling.

asmith wrote:I just noticed in another thread that a mod steps in every time some one uses the word slowed. Several times it was noted that slowed is not a synonym of stupid. Isn't this exactly and literally what slowed means? Is this some kind of new PC that I haven't heard of? What's the deal?

You're making the fairly common mistake of confusing good manners and political correctness.

corpsesarefun wrote:Mental retardation isn't really comparable to autism tbh.

No, but for the purposes of the analogy the comparison works fine. The point is that you shouldn't use a clinical term that describes real people to describe someone screwing something up. Because to anyone that suffers that condition or knows someone who suffers that condition it is offensive.

ShumaGorath wrote:The issue being slow and slowed isn't a bad word, it's subject sensitive in consideration only and the PC police don't like it's use in reference to people despite the alternatives (handicapped for instance) meaning the same thing.

No, the word can still be used to describe someone who is developmentally slowed. The only use which is not allowed is to refer to something which is generally stupid.

It is alright to describe the guy in your class as developmentally slowed. It is not alright to describe your mate's bad move in a 40k game as slowed.

You are incorrect on so many levels here.

Your arguement has already been put down in previous posts, which I recommend that you read and understand.

As for your 'dictionary definitions' I would appreciate you explaining how 'slow' and its expansions derive the same meaning as 'bad', 'poor' and the like.

–verb (used with object)
1.
to make slow; delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.); hinder or impede.

Insofar as the concepts of delays and or impediments are considered "bad", the terminology of "slowed" can be used synonymous with "Bad". People don't generally use slowed to describe things that are "bad" though. Usually its used in the sense of undeveloped or comparably unequal.

Also, 'gay' can also mean joyous and happy...

Yes. I know. That was the entire point of why I brought it up. Gay didn't start out meaning homosexual, it was adopted. slowed is a descriptive term that can be correctly utilized in describing the mentally handicapped.

You are obviously limited in your understanding of the english vocabulary.

Or someone is "bad" at reading (you).

Please educate yourself before commenting on this issue further.

Please attain some level of reading comprehension before basing a post entirely on misreadings I would expect from a child.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

sebster wrote:

asmith wrote:I just noticed in another thread that a mod steps in every time some one uses the word slowed. Several times it was noted that slowed is not a synonym of stupid. Isn't this exactly and literally what slowed means? Is this some kind of new PC that I haven't heard of? What's the deal?

You're making the fairly common mistake of confusing good manners and political correctness.

corpsesarefun wrote:Mental retardation isn't really comparable to autism tbh.

No, but for the purposes of the analogy the comparison works fine. The point is that you shouldn't use a clinical term that describes real people to describe someone screwing something up. Because to anyone that suffers that condition or knows someone who suffers that condition it is offensive.

ShumaGorath wrote:The issue being slow and slowed isn't a bad word, it's subject sensitive in consideration only and the PC police don't like it's use in reference to people despite the alternatives (handicapped for instance) meaning the same thing.

No, the word can still be used to describe someone who is developmentally slowed. The only use which is not allowed is to refer to something which is generally stupid.

It is alright to describe the guy in your class as developmentally slowed. It is not alright to describe your mate's bad move in a 40k game as slowed.

Why is this synonym use taboo when comparable ones such as black meaning "bad or evil" considered ok? Why is foreign made a synonym for poor quality and wellfare queen a term used to describe poor mothers? Why exactly is the line drawn in the sand here when such anti taboo campaigns do little but stigmatize and empower the offensive term while doing nothing to decrease it's usage? Its bad enough that slow and stupid are actually synonyms that can grammatically correctly mean the same thing in regards to the handicapped. Both have been removed by social engineering from such use to somehow lesson the impact of insults utilizing them. Have the terms gone away? Has their descriptive use been curtailed in these situations? Or is this just another situation where a special interest attempts to whorang language to control the way they are regarded by peers, ignorant of the actual effect of such efforts?

Some things are just wrong. some things don't really need this much debate. it's a derogatory term when used that way. people using it give no thought
to how it would effect them if they or someone they cared about was suffering with any developmental problems.

alarmingrick wrote:Some things are just wrong. some things don't really need this much debate. it's a derogatory term when used that way. people using it give no thought
to how it would effect them if they or someone they cared about was suffering with any developmental problems.

You can't remove insults from language. You can attempt to curtail the use of words with authority, but the words just change to something else. Hence why stupid became slow which became slowed which became disabled, which became handicapped. Once people begin to dislike the stigma attached to the word handicapped in a generation or so it'll switch again. Languages don't work in a way that can be authoritatively controlled. To remove unkind lingual comparisons between the handicapped and the stupid you would have to remove one of the groups from existence. Until then people will just use new words to mean the same bad things.

ShumaGorath wrote:
Insofar as the concepts of delays and or impediments are considered "bad", the terminology of "slowed" can be used synonymous with "Bad". People don't generally use slowed to describe things that are "bad" though. Usually its used in the sense of undeveloped or comparably unequal.?

Refer to sebster's post above to answer this one.

On all other parts of your arguement, /backpedal much?

Your initial arguements are simply arrogance dressed up as something superior. You are basically trying to push the envelope with the Mods, "thumbing your nose" at them, when yourself and those with the same viewpoints should simply filter themselves without it being the requirement of others.

If you wish to be considered and treated as an adult, please act in a way that deserves it.

I do not believe you need the rest explained to you.

As for the correct usage of terms, please continue to do so. However, using slowed in a deliberately incorrect and offensive manner will conclude with the appropriate Mod response.

This should not have even begun a thread, nor required such explanation to you or others.

On all other parts of your arguement, /backpedal much?

How is restating my first post and insulting you backpedaling?

Your initial arguements are simply arrogance dressed up as something superior. You are basically trying to push the envelope with the Mods, "thumbing your nose" at them, when yourself and those with the same viewpoints should simply filter themselves without it being the requirement of others.

No, I would have to call someone slowed to do that. Discussion of the term and language theory only pushes Frazzleds envelope because he was born in 1854.

If you wish to be considered and treated as an adult, please act in a way that deserves it.

Uhuh.

I do not believe you need the rest explained to you.

The rest of what? You misread my first post and now you're basically just exiting the conversation with a big "feth you grow up" instead of trying to actually interface with the opinions of others. Thats not exactly something I need explained.

As for the correct usage of terms, please continue to do so. However, using slowed in a deliberately incorrect and offensive manner will conclude with the appropriate Mod response.

Are you a mod? Have you seen me use slowed in that way previously? If the answer to both of these questions is no then I would humbly request that you click the little X on your browser.

This should not have even begun a thread, nor required such explanation to you or others.

And this is how ignorance breeds more ignorance. Not with intentional hate, but with misguided efforts to make better.

ShumaGorath wrote:Why is this synonym use taboo when comparable ones such as black meaning "bad or evil" considered ok? Why is foreign made a synonym for poor quality and wellfare queen a term used to describe poor mothers? Why exactly is the line drawn in the sand here when such anti taboo campaigns do little but stigmatize and empower the offensive term while doing nothing to decrease it's usage?

Those are, in most contexts, also unacceptable.

And you're wrong that the taboo campaign hasn't decreased the useage of the term. Here on Dakka use of the term has dropped to almost zero, from the near constant use a year or so ago.

Mind you, there's another reason use of the term should be discouraged. It's use makes you sound like the most horrible kind of teenager.

ShumaGorath wrote:

alarmingrick wrote:Some things are just wrong. some things don't really need this much debate. it's a derogatory term when used that way. people using it give no thought
to how it would effect them if they or someone they cared about was suffering with any developmental problems.

You can't remove insults from language. You can attempt to curtail the use of words with authority, but the words just change to something else. Hence why stupid became slow which became slowed which became disabled, which became handicapped. Once people begin to dislike the stigma attached to the word handicapped in a generation or so it'll switch again. Languages don't work in a way that can be authoritatively controlled. To remove unkind lingual comparisons between the handicapped and the stupid you would have to remove one of the groups from existence. Until then people will just use new words to mean the same bad things.

You have simply answered your own question here as to why the Mods do not censor the word, instead policing its usage.

ShumaGorath wrote:

On all other parts of your arguement, /backpedal much?

How is restating my first post and insulting you backpedaling?

Your initial arguements are simply arrogance dressed up as something superior. You are basically trying to push the envelope with the Mods, "thumbing your nose" at them, when yourself and those with the same viewpoints should simply filter themselves without it being the requirement of others.

No, I would have to call someone slowed to do that. Discussion of the term and language theory only pushes Frazzleds envelope because he was born in 1854.

If you wish to be considered and treated as an adult, please act in a way that deserves it.

Uhuh.

I do not believe you need the rest explained to you.

The rest of what? You misread my first post and now you're basically just exiting the conversation with a big "feth you grow up" instead of trying to actually interface with the opinions of others. Thats not exactly something I need explained.

As for the correct usage of terms, please continue to do so. However, using slowed in a deliberately incorrect and offensive manner will conclude with the appropriate Mod response.

Are you a mod? Have you seen me use slowed in that way previously? If the answer to both of these questions is no then I would humbly request that you click the little X on your browser.

This should not have even begun a thread, nor required such explanation to you or others.

And this is how ignorance breeds more ignorance. Not with intentional hate, but with misguided efforts to make better.

Isnt it lovely how you believe admitting to insulting another forum member is somehow superior? You must be a genius.

You then make offensive posturing concerning a Mod's age group, albeit exagerrated.

Simply because I am not a Mod, does not mean that I cannot point out simple civil courtesy and behaviour to you, as you seem to be lacking this in your efforts to circumvent the Mod team's decisions.

Your arguement continues to be more long-winded and contain less actual, valid content the longer this continues.

Multiple members have attempted to explain their views to you and yet you continue to fail to 'interface' with these opinions. Misguided or not, once something has been explained to you, you wish to argue the point further.

AvatarForm wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

alarmingrick wrote:Some things are just wrong. some things don't really need this much debate. it's a derogatory term when used that way. people using it give no thought
to how it would effect them if they or someone they cared about was suffering with any developmental problems.

You can't remove insults from language. You can attempt to curtail the use of words with authority, but the words just change to something else. Hence why stupid became slow which became slowed which became disabled, which became handicapped. Once people begin to dislike the stigma attached to the word handicapped in a generation or so it'll switch again. Languages don't work in a way that can be authoritatively controlled. To remove unkind lingual comparisons between the handicapped and the stupid you would have to remove one of the groups from existence. Until then people will just use new words to mean the same bad things.

You have simply answered your own question here as to why the Mods do not censor the word, instead policing its usage.

ShumaGorath wrote:

On all other parts of your arguement, /backpedal much?

How is restating my first post and insulting you backpedaling?

Your initial arguements are simply arrogance dressed up as something superior. You are basically trying to push the envelope with the Mods, "thumbing your nose" at them, when yourself and those with the same viewpoints should simply filter themselves without it being the requirement of others.

No, I would have to call someone slowed to do that. Discussion of the term and language theory only pushes Frazzleds envelope because he was born in 1854.

If you wish to be considered and treated as an adult, please act in a way that deserves it.

Uhuh.

I do not believe you need the rest explained to you.

The rest of what? You misread my first post and now you're basically just exiting the conversation with a big "feth you grow up" instead of trying to actually interface with the opinions of others. Thats not exactly something I need explained.

As for the correct usage of terms, please continue to do so. However, using slowed in a deliberately incorrect and offensive manner will conclude with the appropriate Mod response.

Are you a mod? Have you seen me use slowed in that way previously? If the answer to both of these questions is no then I would humbly request that you click the little X on your browser.

This should not have even begun a thread, nor required such explanation to you or others.

And this is how ignorance breeds more ignorance. Not with intentional hate, but with misguided efforts to make better.

Isnt it lovely how you believe admitting to insulting another forum member is somehow superior? You must be a genius.

You then make offensive posturing concerning a Mod's age group, albeit exagerrated.

Simply because I am not a Mod, does not mean that I cannot point out simple civil courtesy and behaviour to you, as you seem to be lacking this in your efforts to circumvent the Mod team's decisions.

Your arguement continues to be more long-winded and contain less actual, valid content the longer this continues.

Multiple members have attempted to explain their views to you and yet you continue to fail to 'interface' with these opinions. Misguided or not, once something has been explained to you, you wish to argue the point further.

Hush, adults are talking.

ShumaGorath wrote:You can't remove insults from language. You can attempt to curtail the use of words with authority, but the words just change to something else.

No-one is trying to control language.

In terms of this place, specifically, they're trying to enforce a minimum level of decorum on Dakka, which is of course the rights of the owners.

In a greater context, they're trying to get people to be more polite. Manners are not, in fact, anything to do with political correctness, and everything to do with not being a thoughtless jerk.

sebster wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Why is this synonym use taboo when comparable ones such as black meaning "bad or evil" considered ok? Why is foreign made a synonym for poor quality and wellfare queen a term used to describe poor mothers? Why exactly is the line drawn in the sand here when such anti taboo campaigns do little but stigmatize and empower the offensive term while doing nothing to decrease it's usage?

Those are, in most contexts, also unacceptable.

And you're wrong that the taboo campaign hasn't decreased the useage of the term. Here on Dakka use of the term has dropped to almost zero, from the near constant use a year or so ago.

Mind you, there's another reason use of the term should be discouraged. It's use makes you sound like the most horrible kind of teenager.

Which brings back to light my wondering why it wasn't simply censored? I don't think I've ever seen the term used outside of insult and the forum has quite a few terms placed under wordfilter. I can see the issues inherent to replacing the word, if slowed word filtered to stupid then that would reinforce the perceived issue, but doesn't this end up as an unwritten special case when in general the mods are incredibly lax with pejorative descriptions of people? I mean, the number of disparaging remarks I've seen people drop on this forum concerning religous and ethnic groups is mind boggling and the moderators do nothing, citing the word filter. Why do they take special care here when I've seen numerous and far worse comparisons between muslims and murderers or liberals and drug addicts. Hell, I've seen mods themselves repeatedly do so. It seems to me that this is essentially the only recurring instance of pejorative taboo insult being used and moderated without a wordfilter automating the process. It creates an annoying false freedom when something is disallowed by special case yet is given free reign outside of the automated system.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

sebster wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:You can't remove insults from language. You can attempt to curtail the use of words with authority, but the words just change to something else.

No-one is trying to control language.

In terms of this place, specifically, they're trying to enforce a minimum level of decorum on Dakka, which is of course the rights of the owners.

In a greater context, they're trying to get people to be more polite. Manners are not, in fact, anything to do with political correctness, and everything to do with not being a thoughtless jerk.

Manners and political correctness are interchangeable.

sebster wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:You can't remove insults from language. You can attempt to curtail the use of words with authority, but the words just change to something else.

No-one is trying to control language.

In terms of this place, specifically, they're trying to enforce a minimum level of decorum on Dakka, which is of course the rights of the owners.

In a greater context, they're trying to get people to be more polite. Manners are not, in fact, anything to do with political correctness, and everything to do with not being a thoughtless jerk.

While this is correct, his points are completely valid when taken in a broader context. Almost without fail, any term for a minority disliked or looked down upon by the majority becomes stigmatized as obscene over time, and the ones whom it describes begin to rankle at its use, even if they were the ones who coined it in the first place. So they come up with a euphemism for it, which undergoes exactly the same process, and so on, sometimes even coming full circle to the point where terms that were earlier considered offensive are embraced again, simply because they've fallen out of popular use. The whole process is patently ridiculous, especially in this day and age of unhinged advocate groups that scream bloody murder about any perceived slight, real or more frequently imagined.

We should start a list of offensive words that need to get filtered, starting with the worst of all: homeslice.

ShumaGorath wrote:
Which brings back to light my wondering why it wasn't simply censored? I don't think I've ever seen the term used outside of insult and the forum has quite a few terms placed under wordfilter. I can see the issues inherent to replacing the word, if slowed word filtered to stupid then that would reinforce the perceived issue, but doesn't this end up as an unwritten special case when in general the mods are incredibly lax with pejorative descriptions of people? I mean, the number of disparaging remarks I've seen people drop on this forum concerning religous and ethnic groups is mind boggling and the moderators do nothing, citing the word filter. Why do they take special care here when I've seen numerous and far worse comparisons between muslims and murderers or liberals and drug addicts. Hell, I've seen mods themselves repeatedly do so. It seems to me that this is essentially the only recurring instance of pejorative taboo insult being used and moderated without a wordfilter automating the process. It creates an annoying false freedom when something is disallowed by special case yet is given free reign outside of the automated system.

You continue to wonder, when this has already been explained to you by myself and others.

Your posts are going around and around... and around...

...and when distilled, are nothing more than verbose waffling on... and on... and you get the gist.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:We should start a list of offensive words that need to get filtered, starting with the worst of all: homeslice.

Word!

AvatarForm wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:
Which brings back to light my wondering why it wasn't simply censored? I don't think I've ever seen the term used outside of insult and the forum has quite a few terms placed under wordfilter. I can see the issues inherent to replacing the word, if slowed word filtered to stupid then that would reinforce the perceived issue, but doesn't this end up as an unwritten special case when in general the mods are incredibly lax with pejorative descriptions of people? I mean, the number of disparaging remarks I've seen people drop on this forum concerning religous and ethnic groups is mind boggling and the moderators do nothing, citing the word filter. Why do they take special care here when I've seen numerous and far worse comparisons between muslims and murderers or liberals and drug addicts. Hell, I've seen mods themselves repeatedly do so. It seems to me that this is essentially the only recurring instance of pejorative taboo insult being used and moderated without a wordfilter automating the process. It creates an annoying false freedom when something is disallowed by special case yet is given free reign outside of the automated system.

You continue to wonder, when this has already been explained to you by myself and others.

Your posts are going around and around... and around...

...and when distilled, are nothing more than verbose waffling on... and on... and you get the gist.

Are you trolling or are you seriously unable to understand my posts? In either case I'm not speaking with you any more.

ShumaGorath wrote:Which brings back to light my wondering why it wasn't simply censored?

Because the word has uses which are legitimate.

I don't think I've ever seen the term used outside of insult and the forum has quite a few terms placed under wordfilter.

I'm not sure I've seen it either. Being a bunch of nerds, we tend to talk about geopolitics and war and other nerd stuff, instead of childhood development and the like. But the possibility is still there, and so it remains the best option to let it remain as it is, and have the mods act in the event of inappropriate use.

I mean, the number of disparaging remarks I've seen people drop on this forum concerning religous and ethnic groups is mind boggling and the moderators do nothing, citing the word filter.

The moderators are very lax on a lot of disparaging religious and ethnic attacks, I agree. The answer isn't to get more lax on other offensive thoughts.

Manners and political correctness are interchangeable.

Only if one strips away the greater meaning from one term, the other, or most likely both.

Manners and political correctness are interchangeable.

Why is it that so many politically correct people are so rude then?

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:While this is correct, his points are completely valid when taken in a broader context. Almost without fail, any term for a minority disliked or looked down upon by the majority becomes stigmatized as obscene over time, and the ones whom it describes begin to rankle at its use, even if they were the ones who coined it in the first place. So they come up with a euphemism for it, which undergoes exactly the same process, and so on, sometimes even coming full circle to the point where terms that were earlier considered offensive are embraced again, simply because they've fallen out of popular use. The whole process is patently ridiculous, especially in this day and age of unhinged advocate groups that scream bloody murder about any perceived slight, real or more frequently imagined.

I agree with that. I just don't agree that letting people use slowed to describe general behaviour somehow makes the situation any better.

And while groups do often make a lot of noise about the most trivial of offences, we also see efforts by people to be as offensive as possible, in an effort to appear edgy, or to defy the political correctness police that exist almost entirely in their own heads.

Because the word has uses which are legitimate.

Don't feth gak or [see forum posting rules]? I mean, when the only use for a term is pejorative and moderated shouldn't it realistically be filtered? Few words are inherently taboo outside of the same process that would make slow a pejorative insult.

I'm not sure I've seen it either. Being a bunch of nerds, we tend to talk about geopolitics and war and other nerd stuff, instead of childhood development and the like. But the possibility is still there, and so it remains the best option to let it remain as it is, and have the mods act in the event of inappropriate use.

Can't you make that same argument for most swear words?

The moderators are very lax on a lot of disparaging religious and ethnic attacks, I agree. The answer isn't to get more lax on other offensive thoughts.

My opinion on the issue is pro wordfilter given the moderations laxity concerning this exact subject. slow is one of those cases where It's little more then a swear at this point and with this community so why don't we just treat it as such.

Only if one strips away the greater meaning from one term, the other, or most likely both.

Manners are a direct expression of political correctness. Manners require knowledge of political correctness to inform behavior and manners are the method by which political correctness becomes realized.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:

Manners and political correctness are interchangeable.

Why is it that so many politically correct people are so rude then?

Because manners are a subjective personality trait thats an expression of social views.

for what its worth:

applying a word filter for words never designed to be insults can be very difficult to enforce as you have to keep adding new filters every few years

and sometimes you could be referring to something benign and be punished for it

like Acrylic Drying Retarder

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:We should start a list of offensive words that need to get filtered, starting with the worst of all: homeslice.

Does anyone actually use that term in an unironic sense?

Because manners are a subjective personality trait thats an expression of social views.

So you mean they aren't interchangeable?

Melissia wrote:

Because manners are a subjective personality trait thats an expression of social views.

So you mean they aren't interchangeable?

That doesn't mean PC and manners aren't interchangeable. They are subjective terms, you're disagreement on the value scale that they describe doesn't invalidate the word itself.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bakerofish wrote:for what its worth:

applying a word filter for words never designed to be insults can be very difficult to enforce as you have to keep adding new filters every few years

and sometimes you could be referring to something benign and be punished for it

like Acrylic Drying Retarder

Few words are created with the intention of being insults. Most become such by the process I've described.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:We should start a list of offensive words that need to get filtered, starting with the worst of all: homeslice.

Har-dee-har

sebster wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:You can't remove insults from language. You can attempt to curtail the use of words with authority, but the words just change to something else.

No-one is trying to control language.

In terms of this place, specifically, they're trying to enforce a minimum level of decorum on Dakka, which is of course the rights of the owners.

In a greater context, they're trying to get people to be more polite. Manners are not, in fact, anything to do with political correctness, and everything to do with not being a thoughtless jerk.

This is the goal.

The use of the word slow is not prohibited because it has many meanings that can be used in different contexts, many of which are not insulting, whereas certain words only tend to have derogatory connotations (mainly 'curse' words) and are therefore filtered.

So it can be acceptable to use 'slow' or 'gay' or many other words if the discussion is polite and friendly, but when used as insults, even unintentionally, they create an impolite atmosphere which results in arguments, which results in ruined discussions, which results in locked threads, which results in a poorer site overall for everyone.


We ask that all users try to remain polite and friendly at all times. When speaking with someone in person you can use non-verbal cues to express meaning. Hell, even talking over the phone verbal inflections give a tremendous amount of input to what you're actually saying. But when writing online, you have none of that. We do have emoticons available, but people don't always use them, and even when they are used, someone can easily misinterpret a 'wink' as a snide gesture instead of denoting sarcasm (for example).

What that means is that on Dakka where we ask for politeness, you need to strive to be overly polite and friendly...like you're talking to your dear old grandmother, or your father-in-law, or anyone else whose opinion of yourself you greatly care about. That means going the extra mile to double-check what you're writing to make clear what your intentions are and not being short and rude with others. It means saying things like "in my opinion" or "I strongly disagree with your point" instead of things like "that's just stupid" or "you're being slowed".

Being polite does not impact the overall topics you discuss in any way. I strive to be polite and friendly at all times, and while this sometimes means it takes me a little longer to go back and re-write some of initial posts, in the end I still get across exactly the same point I was trying to make...just not in a way that will incite others.

So please, make the effort to be overly polite and you will help to not only make the site better for everyone, but you will also find that you end up having more meaningful discussions instead of heated flame-fests.

"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." - Philip K. Dick.


So we should self censor ourselves because someone out there utilizing the internet may have a child or work with children who have... let me see here.. uh what's a safe word.. uh I guess "special needs"?

I think calling someone with special needs or another forum member a slow is horrible and childish, with that said I personally use the word "slowed" all the time. For example "what the republicans just did in wisconsin is slowed".

The internet and the easily offended should remain 500 feet away from each other at all times.


Restricting the use of language is sooooooo gay

ShumaGorath wrote:Don't feth gak or [see forum posting rules]? I mean, when the only use for a term is pejorative and moderated shouldn't it realistically be filtered? Few words are inherently taboo outside of the same process that would make slow a pejorative insult.

No, because there's no context in which those words are best used, as opposed to some other term. There are multiple contexts in which slowed is the most appropriate term.

Can't you make that same argument for most swear words?

feth doesn't have particular meaning in which it is the most appropriate term, unlike slowed.

My opinion on the issue is pro wordfilter given the moderations laxity concerning this exact subject. slow is one of those cases where It's little more then a swear at this point and with this community so why don't we just treat it as such.

Because all we'd be doing is cutting out the option to use the term properly. As it is the mods are still free to edit posts using the term offensively, and punish those who act on it.

Manners are a direct expression of political correctness. Manners require knowledge of political correctness to inform behavior and manners are the method by which political correctness becomes realized.

Only if you ignore the wide range of manners that have nothing to do with your choice of words. And ignore the wide range of areas of political correctness that have nothing to do with manners. And you ignore the number of people who like to pretend they're resisting some kind of political correctness police when all they're doing is being an ill-mannered jerk.

All of which is doing nothing but stripping meaning away from both concepts.

ShumaGorath wrote:Few words are created with the intention of being insults. Most become such by the process I've described.

exactly and should you really filter all of them as they become insults?

how is one supposed to redeem a word then if it isnt given a chance to be used in the proper context?

No, because there's no context in which those words are best used, as opposed to some other term. There are multiple contexts in which slowed is the most appropriate term.

They don't now just as within a generation slow likely won't. I just want to expedite the process to remove the double standard of oxymoronic situational taboos. After that I won't have to deal with it again for another 30 years.

Because all we'd be doing is cutting out the option to use the term properly. As it is the mods are still free to edit posts using the term offensively, and punish those who act on it.

You admitted yourself that they aren't particularly good at that exist act.

Only if you ignore the wide range of manners that have nothing to do with your choice of words. And ignore the wide range of areas of political correctness that have nothing to do with manners. And you ignore the number of people who like to pretend they're resisting some kind of political correctness police when all they're doing is being an ill-mannered jerk.

All of which is doing nothing but stripping meaning away from both concepts.

So political and social correctness are disparate concepts then? I was under the assumption that political correctness encompassed the spectrum of behavior and views as seen within the socio political environment we exist in. How can manners exist if not as an extension of the politics of society? Doesn't separating the two deny them of their inherent traits?

Crablezworth wrote:"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." - Philip K. Dick.

An excellent quote.

And utterly inapplicable to the policy on Dakka regarding the use of the terms "slow" and "slowed."

Scythian, Sebster, and Yakface (among others) have well-explained the policy, the reasoning behind it, and the benefits of it and of courtesy and politeness in general.

Anyone still unable to comprehend the concept would be well-advised to step away from the computer for a while and contemplate the subject, maybe re-read those three people's posts in this thread (particularly the site owner's, which as usual is expressed in a detailed, courteous, respectful manner, and explains the benefits to you), and think about them a little more.

If you still don't get it, you may want to reconsider any form of social interaction with strangers. Much less trying to use the Internet.

Bakerofish wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Few words are created with the intention of being insults. Most become such by the process I've described.

exactly and should you really filter all of them as they become insults?

how is one supposed to redeem a word then if it isnt given a chance to be used in the proper context?

Words don't get redeemed, they just become disused and rejuvenated or suppressed and altered.

Crablezworth wrote:"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." - Philip K. Dick.

If people have such poor use of the language that they are incapable of describing a foolish decision or clumsy effort without using the word slowed, I'd say that there'd be no need or point to attempting to control them, for they have already made themselves idiots.

But go ahead and fight the power. You ain't gonna be controlled the man.

So we should self censor ourselves because someone out there utilizing the internet may have a child or work with children who have... let me see here.. uh what's a safe word.. uh I guess "special needs"?

Despite it being explained several times, you've completely missed the point that using the word slowed to describe a child that is developmentally slowed is perfectly legitimate use of the term, and the very reason the word is not limited under the word filter.

In future, please read the thread before you unleash your canned opinions.

I think calling someone with special needs or another forum member a slow is horrible and childish, with that said I personally use the word "slowed" all the time. For example "what the republicans just did in wisconsin is slowed".

Ummm, calling certain special needs children slowed is the actual, correct use of the term. Using it as a general term of abuse for stupid actions is not.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Bakerofish wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Few words are created with the intention of being insults. Most become such by the process I've described.

exactly and should you really filter all of them as they become insults?

how is one supposed to redeem a word then if it isnt given a chance to be used in the proper context?

Words don't get redeemed, they just become disused and rejuvenated or suppressed and altered.

so instead of answering my question you just chose to nitpick my vocabulary

great

okay ill play your game

how is one supposed to rejuvenate a word then if it isnt given a chance to be used in the proper context?

"You ain't gonna be controlled the man."

?

Please lecture me some more.

Crablezworth, please follow my advice and re-read Yakface's post. The site owner has taken the time to very patiently and politely explain it to you, for your benefit.

If you still do not get it, please take some time away from the computer to think about it.

ShumaGorath wrote:They don't now just as within a generation slow likely won't. I just want to expedite the process to remove the double standard of oxymoronic situational taboos. After that I won't have to deal with it again for another 30 years.

Then all you do is increase the cycle in which new words are adopted as the old one is surrendered.

Meanwhile there's more people being pointlessly offended. It's not exactly the good fight, is it?

You admitted yourself that they aren't particularly good at that exist act.

And pointed out that the answer isn't to put words with legitimate meanings into the word filter.

So political and social correctness are disparate concepts then? I was under the assumption that political correctness encompassed the spectrum of behavior and views as seen within the socio political environment we exist in. How can manners exist if not as an extension of the politics of society? Doesn't separating the two deny them of their inherent traits?

That has nothing to do with the point I was making.

To give a simple example, a scientific study can be accused of political correctness when it fails to properly consider evidence that goes against popular thinking. For instance, failing to publish or minimising findings that show IQ differences between ethnic groups. This is not manners, and describing it as such makes no sense.

To give an example the other way, looking at someone when they're talking to you is good manners, but has nothing to do with political correctness.

As such, pretending manners and political correctness are interchangeable strips meaning away from both terms.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Crablezworth wrote:Please lecture me some more.

If you keep making posts of the quality of that one above, you're going to keep getting lectured about basic concepts.

If you don't want to get lectured, spend the time to understand a topic properly before posting. Or at least, you know, read the thread.

I've received a warning, I don't recall making a personal attack on anyone, perhaps lecturing isn't viewed as polite discourse but I guess that's for the moderators to decide. I have read John's post and I think it's great to strive for polite discourse but I think there's a difference between flaming each other and expressing an opinion in a less than cromulent fashion. I'm still confused about a few issues so allow me to ask.

#1 If I use the word gay to insinuate I am of the opinion that something is lame will I be reprimanded?

#2 How is insinuating that I am of a lower moral character because of my use of words in anyway resembling the polite discourse that is being encouraged?

#3 How will overly polite discourse not be mistaken for passive agression?

Crablezworth wrote:So we should self censor ourselves because someone out there utilizing the internet may have a child or work with children who have... let me see here.. uh what's a safe word.. uh I guess "special needs"?

Is that really such a crazy idea?

Conforming to the social standard of a community is a very large part of being an accepted member of that community. Yes, that means that you should sometimes consider your potential audience before engaging your mouth. Or your fingers, in this particular case.

It's sad that basic courtesy would be seen as such a silly goal to strive for.

Crablezworth wrote:#1 If I use the word gay to insinuate I am of the opinion that something is lame will I be reprimanded?

Yes, as long as we see it. It's a closely-related thing. Using a term for a group of people as a pejorative, thus equating them with an insult.

Crablezworth wrote:#2 How is insinuating that I am of a lower moral character because of my use of words in anyway resembling the polite discourse that is being encouraged?

If someone insinuated that you are of lower moral character, be sure to hit the Alert Moderator button on that post, so we can deal with it.

Crablezworth wrote:#3 How will overly polite discourse not be mistaken for passive agression?

Did you perceive passive aggression in Yakface's post? I encourage you to follow his example. He normally strives to make his posts an example of the ideal tone.

This whole debate is not something I really need to worry about, as the term 'slowed' is regarded as completely offensive here in the UK. We generally use 'special educational needs' or ' learning difficulties' to describe the various conditions to which 'mentally slowed' could apply. Either that, or we just use the correct clinical term for the condition. That term would never be used in the SEN field over here. I wouldn't have a problem with the word being filtered out - there's literally zero reason to ever use it, unless, of course, you are referring to the word itself for some reason. We don't generally use the word 'handicapped' either - it's a bit old-fashioned and kind of trivialises disability.

If there is broad agreement that a word is unpleasant, why use it? That's the beauty of the English language - it's malleable.

The only thing that does bother me with regard to the word filter is the slang term for homosexual that rhymes with 'bag'. Yeah, that one. It's fairly widely used over here to refer to cigarettes. That reminds me, I must nip outside for a cigarette.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ha! it changed it for me. That's new!

Use the word in regards to something 'stupid' or 'lame' - and hope you are on the Net and not face to face with me.

My brother is a top dude, and can play Basketball like a champion, and I would jump in front of a Bus to save him.

It's as bad as the 'N' word, and beneath contempt when used inappropriately.

And normally, I'm a laid back, easy going guy.

Crablezworth - I've received a warning, I don't recall making a personal attack on anyone, perhaps lecturing isn't viewed as polite discourse but I guess that's for the moderators to decide. I have read John's post and I think it's great to strive for polite discourse but I think there's a difference between flaming each other and expressing an opinion in a less than cromulent fashion. I'm still confused about a few issues so allow me to ask.

#1 If I use the word gay to insinuate I am of the opinion that something is lame will I be reprimanded?

#2 How is insinuating that I am of a lower moral character because of my use of words in anyway resembling the polite discourse that is being encouraged?

#3 How will overly polite discourse not be mistaken for passive agression?

A wee bit OTT here. Stay cool please. Ta.

Why are terms like idiot, jerk, and stupid allowed? They have been used frequently on this thread. If you call some one who is mentally handicapped stupid is that less of an insult than slowed? really?

Politeness is all well and good but it is very selectively enforced on this issue. I'm trying to figure out why. From the answers so far there must be some kind of international PC movement I have been unaware of up until now.

"Ummm, calling certain special needs children slowed is the actual, correct use of the term." - actually this is the very worst way to use is isn't it? it's like using the f word to a homosexual or the n word to a black person.

Idiot is an interesting case, because it's original defintion was actually replaced by slowed, as was (IIRC) moron.

Dakka has a very superficial view of politiness, but it's still Rule #1. Enough people are offended by the term "slow" to make most uses of it impolite, and a violaion of the rule.

Mental Retardation is still a medical term, althouh used less in educaiton and treatement and more for disability. I have, today, read psychologists reports discussing a persons's mental retardation. It's what the government calls it, and it's what doctors that want to help people get benefits call it.

slow, as a term, is generally frowned upon, as part of the "people first" movement in disability. The idea is to not define people by their disability: "person with parapalegia" isntead of "parapalegic" or "cripple."

So, yes, there is an international PC movement you've been unaware of.

Yes I was aware it is bad form to call a slow person a slow, but I was unaware that this somehow was extended to include phrases like "these rules are slowed". I really don't get how someone other than the rules writer can be offended by that. Oh well...

Can we drop the internet tough-guy stuff, akira5665? It's daft.

I'm a daft person and I am offended that you use the term to apply to such behavior.

Really though I feel like the scene from the Shawshank redemption where he says the warden is being obtuse and then is completely mystified when the warden starts going crazy about it. It'd be one thing if the mods were equally policing all offensive words, but there is such an irrational response to the word slow that it's mystifying to me.

OK, I'll use the more politically correct term 'differently sensible'.

Better?

asmith wrote:I'm a daft person and I am offended that you use the term to apply to such behavior.

Really though I feel like the scene from the Shawshank redemption where he says the warden is being obtuse and then is completely mystified when the warden starts going crazy about it. It'd be one thing if the mods were equally policing all offensive words, but there is such an irrational response to the word slow that it's mystifying to me.

A lot of social constructs are mystifying. A lot of people find using the term casuallly and incorrectly offensive. I don't, but it's still polite to respect people's sensibilities.

There are a lot of reasons why it's offensive to people, and I'm sure they can be explained if you're actually curious.

http://www.r-word.org/

I haven't reviewed it, but I'm imagining they'll explain it.

Well this is one way to get slow posted all over the place

Steu wrote:Well this is one way to get slow posted all over the place

Well, it's not the word by itself though. Or even it's usage. Its misuage, particualry as an insult, that people find offensive.

I mean, I'm no fan of the euphamism treadmill myself, but part of being polite is respecting people, and so I do so.

Well this is one way to get slow posted all over the place

It's funny how attitudes change over time isn't it? slow means 'to diminish the velocity of; to render more late' and Retardation is 'the act of retarding; hindrance; delay' - but now everyone equates it to mental illness?
This reminds me of an old book I bought from a charity shop 'The Universal Home Lawyer' - I read and I like old books for some reason. If you'll all humour me I'll quote how they used to class Lunatics, leaving out all the lawful ramifications of how they ought to be treated:

(a) Idiots and imbeciles...
(b) Mental defectives (idiot, imbecile, feeble-minded person or moral imbecile)
(c) Dangerous persons...

Of course this is before psychiatry and before we knew much about mental illness, but it's pretty funny to me how we change and obscure words, distort their original meaning so much the the original meaning becomes void, even forgotten
So next time you want to call someone slow, just say they're "mentally defective".

Are people really that shocked that words have connotations and meanings that surpass original definitions?

warspawned wrote:So next time you want to call someone slow, just say they're "mentally defective".

Not on Dakka. Courtest and politeness, rule 1, is at the heart here. Any insult toward a person on here is usually going to be a violation of the rules.

Enforcement of Rule 1 is not perfect or omnipresent. 585 registered users are logged on right now (I'm not counting 3,772 guests, as they're not posting), and 5 Mods or Admins. We can't see everything. This is part of why the Alert Moderator button is important.

Enforcement can never be 100% consistent on everything we do see, either. The moderators have varying opinions on some stuff. Sometimes we have the time to read an entire thread and get the context of an argument, and sometimes we don't. Some posters may have existing histories which everyone else is likely unaware of which we take into account in adjudicating their disciplinary action. And sometimes we just make mistakes.

There's also a tradition on Dakka of allowing relatively heated debate, including to at least some extent the practice Centurian99 quotes in his sig from Starship Troopers- heaping scorn on an idea, if you don't attack the person. The line between those two can be a bit subjective, though, so opinions will legitimately differ. Most of the time we err on the side of caution.

I think that everyone on the moderator team is making a sincere effort, and that all of us are pretty decent at it, though some are still learning. There's little training. This is largely a pretty informal labor of love for us. But I think overall the results, in terms of the tone of the forum and the openness of discussion, are better than most places.

asmith wrote:I'm a daft person and I am offended that you use the term to apply to such behavior.

Really though I feel like the scene from the Shawshank redemption where he says the warden is being obtuse and then is completely mystified when the warden starts going crazy about it. It'd be one thing if the mods were equally policing all offensive words, but there is such an irrational response to the word slow that it's mystifying to me.

Dude, just accept it. Many of us find it offensive. It's the same with rape.

It is possible to discuss wargames without using the word slow to mean idiot.

Kilkrazy wrote:It is possible to discuss wargames without using the word slow to mean idiot.

Even if the two terms at various points meant the exact same thing. Which is why context matters.

Look at the word lame: it means the same thing as cripple, but nobody cares how you use the word lame, because no person has been called that in quite a while.

they still mean the exact same thing!

Kilkrazy wrote:
Dude, just accept it. Many of us find it offensive. It's the same with rape.

It is possible to discuss wargames without using the word slow to mean idiot.

This is where I am at, I actually find the second word you mention there KK much more offensive when used in a 'light' way, and will never find it acceptable.

Glad to see I'm not alone.

Sorry all, just to clarify my position.

I will never call anyone slowed or a slow, or even stupid (unless I know them really well & they do something that is really stupid). If I think it, I certainly will not type it. I recognise people are easily offended, although I am not (in fact I offend myself more than others do me).

I am not surprised how words lose ther original meaning at all, I just find it odd how it gradually happens and regret how many people might not know the original meaning of the word, for it implies a level of ignorance (I do not mean this as an insult - we are all ignorant of many things).

I was joking when implying you could call somone "mentally deficient" instead, using it in reference to how the Law used to view the mentally ill, which, again, I find funny/odd given to how we have developed our understanding of mental illness.

As a rule, it's best not to take anything I write on here too serously. I apologise but I find forums can't communicate my expression or tone or, most importantly, character.
Perhaps I should be more careful what I write in future?

Anyway I would like to thank the MODS for their labour of love, for it is something I would not have the patience/dedication for, and for giving us wargamers a place to post our thoughts/feelings - as insignificant, humorous, misguided or silly as they are

asmith wrote:they still mean the exact same thing!

Nope. Nope by any modern technical definition. If you mean they genearlly both mean "mentally deficient," that's fine, but that's not exact.

Idiot originally referred only to what is now the most profound examples of mental retardation.

akira5665 wrote:Use the word in regards to something 'stupid' or 'lame' - and hope you are on the Net and not face to face with me.

My brother is a top dude, and can play Basketball like a champion, and I would jump in front of a Bus to save him.

It's as bad as the 'N' word, and beneath contempt when used inappropriately.

And normally, I'm a laid back, easy going guy.

Crablezworth - I've received a warning, I don't recall making a personal attack on anyone, perhaps lecturing isn't viewed as polite discourse but I guess that's for the moderators to decide. I have read John's post and I think it's great to strive for polite discourse but I think there's a difference between flaming each other and expressing an opinion in a less than cromulent fashion. I'm still confused about a few issues so allow me to ask.

#1 If I use the word gay to insinuate I am of the opinion that something is lame will I be reprimanded?

#2 How is insinuating that I am of a lower moral character because of my use of words in anyway resembling the polite discourse that is being encouraged?

#3 How will overly polite discourse not be mistaken for passive agression?

Just be thankful that there is an ocean between us Sirrah.

I'm sorry if asking a question offended you. I would like to note that I enjoy using the word gay in place of lame because I find it absurdly hilarious. I have many friends who are homosexual and I'm a very open minded person in general so if you perceive me as being a bigot or puritanical I can assure you I am not. With that said I will respect what the moderators have said and attempt not to use the word as a synonym for lame.

I think it is fine to try and keep everything as polite as possible but what's the next step? If I post an opinion and a single forum member finds my opinion offensive will that be considered an attack on the decorum and thus the polite environment you're attempting to create?

Crablezworth wrote:I'm sorry if asking a question offended you. I would like to note that I enjoy using the word gay in place of lame because I find it absurdly hilarious. I have many friends who are homosexual and I'm a very open minded person in general so if you perceive me as being a bigot or puritanical I can assure you I am not.

Sure, and in real life, among friends who KNOW you and KNOW you're not a bigot, that's fine. But on Dakka you're functionally speaking in public, in mixed company. There are over 5600 people reading Dakka RIGHT NOW. Most of whom have no idea whom you are and no way to know that you're not actually a bigot.

Crablezworth wrote: With that said I will respect what the moderators have said and attempt not to use the word as a synonym for lame.

Thanks.

Crablezworth wrote:I think it is fine to try and keep everything as polite as possible but what's the next step? If I post an opinion and a single forum member finds my opinion offensive will that be considered an attack on the decorum and thus the polite environment you're attempting to create?

Not at all. It's really not that hard.

You just need to (as Yak explained) recognize that you are speaking in mixed company. Imagine that you are talking in front of a crowd of people, including men, women, 12 year old kids, soldiers presently in a war zone, members of religious and ethnic minorities, gay people, grandparents, people whose children suffer from developmental disabilities, etc.

Because you ARE.

Crablezworth wrote:I think it is fine to try and keep everything as polite as possible but what's the next step? If I post an opinion and a single forum member finds my opinion offensive will that be considered an attack on the decorum and thus the polite environment you're attempting to create?

No, at least not if the opinion wasn't insulting. Even then, if the opinion is based on facts and stated as politely as possible, it's still an opinion.

Misusing a word isn't really an opinion, now, is it?

Polonius wrote:

Nope. Nope by any modern technical definition. If you mean they genearlly both mean "mentally deficient," that's fine, but that's not exact.

Idiot originally referred only to what is now the most profound examples of mental retardation.

Webster disagrees with you. So does my thesaurus. I'm not disagreeing you can probably find some hyperspecialized definition in a psychology textbook that doesn't mean the same thing, but we are talking about the word in common usage.

Sure webster disagrees with him. It disagrees because rude and ignorant people have changed the meaning of the word over time.

"The term slowed was used to replace terms like idiot, moron, and imbecile because slowed was not (then) a derogatory term. By the 1960s, however, the term had taken on a partially derogatory meaning as well. The noun slow is particularly seen as pejorative; as of 2010, the Special Olympics, Best Buddies and over 100 other organizations are striving to help eliminate the use of the "r-word" in everyday conversation."

So what's the next step? Instead of making fun of someone by calling them a slow, let's call them Special Ed?! Ha hilarious! Oh wait, crank yankers already did that. What do we call people now with a mental disability? Let's call the intellectually disabled people!

Sure it doesn't have the same ring to it, but give it 20 years and this might catch on: "You are acting just like that intellectuality disabled person in room 216! You are such a moron!"

Honestly are you still having trouble understanding this? You realize your first born has a chance of being born with a disability right?

The only way for the cycle to stop is for people to start being considerate of other people.

asmith wrote:

Polonius wrote:

Nope. Nope by any modern technical definition. If you mean they genearlly both mean "mentally deficient," that's fine, but that's not exact.

Idiot originally referred only to what is now the most profound examples of mental retardation.

Webster disagrees with you. So does my thesaurus. I'm not disagreeing you can probably find some hyperspecialized definition in a psychology textbook that doesn't mean the same thing, but we are talking about the word in common usage.

Wouldn't the hyper specialized definition from a psychology textbook be the most relevant to a claim that two terms, both of which arose as technical terms within psychology, mean exactly the same thing?

think of it this way: in common usage slander and libel mean the same thing, when in the legal field they are actually distinct.

Terms that arise from specialized fields may become very similar in common usage, but saying they mean the exact same thing is pretty sloppy.

BTW, miriam webster online produces this:

Definition of IDIOT
1
usually offensive : a person affected with extreme mental retardation
2
: a foolish or stupid person

Definition of slow
1
\ri-ˈtärd\ : a holding back or slowing down : retardation
2
\ˈrē-ˌtärd\ often offensive : a slowed person; also : a person held to resemble a slowed person in behavior

Doesn't seem exactly the same to me.

asmith wrote:I just noticed in another thread that a mod steps in every time some one uses the word slowed. Several times it was noted that slowed is not a synonym of stupid. Isn't this exactly and literally what slowed means? Is this some kind of new PC that I haven't heard of? What's the deal?

Say stupid or idiotic.

The r-word is just as bad as the n-word.

@ lord scythian: Irrationality carries the day again. Congrats.

asmith just got added to the ignore list.

If you think the r-word is ok, then there is nothing else I ever need to hear from you.

Polonius wrote:

Wouldn't the hyper specialized definition from a psychology textbook be the most relevant to a claim that two terms, both of which arose as technical terms within psychology, mean exactly the same thing?

think of it this way: in common usage slander and libel mean the same thing, when in the legal field they are actually distinct.

Terms that arise from specialized fields may become very similar in common usage, but saying they mean the exact same thing is pretty sloppy.

BTW, miriam webster online produces this:

Definition of IDIOT
1
usually offensive : a person affected with extreme mental retardation
2
: a foolish or stupid person

Definition of slow
1
\ri-ˈtärd\ : a holding back or slowing down : retardation
2
\ˈrē-ˌtärd\ often offensive : a slowed person; also : a person held to resemble a slowed person in behavior

Doesn't seem exactly the same to me.

Really? That's your arguement?

Edit: a person affected with retardation isn't the same as a slowed person?

That two words with different definitions, one of which specifically states that it is an extreme form of another, aren't the same thing?

I'm confused at what I need to be arguing at this point. I agree that the words are colloquially used for the same purpose, but you seem to be stating that somewhere those words are defined so that "they still mean the exact same thing"

The key word is extreme. All idiots are slowed. Not all slowed people are idiots.

It would be like saying that "genius" and "smart" meant the exact same thing.

no we are definately off on a tangent. you are never going to find dictionary definitions of two words that are closer than that.

edit: The only point in talking about this at all, is that slow and slowed have been hijacked by a marketing campaign unbeknownst to me. thanks for making me aware.

edit #2: It seems to be a very successful campaign. they are doing a nice job.

asmith wrote:no we are definately off on a tangent. you are never going to find dictionary definitions of two words that are closer than that.

Sure I can:

Definition of PUMA
: cougar 1; also : the fur or pelt of a cougar

Definition of MOUNTAIN LION
: cougar 1

you are right, you win... I congratulate you sir.

asmith wrote:you are right, you win... I congratulate you sir.

thanks. don't beat yourself up, you tried hard.

A helpful hint: when making an argument, don't rely claims that can readily be disproven by a google search.

I've learned to keep pounding at the same bogus arguments until the other guy gives up in frustration... That seems to be the number one take away from this thread. Also technicalities count.

kronk wrote:asmith just got added to the ignore list.

If you think the r-word is ok, then there is nothing else I ever need to hear from you.

Hey it worked. Polonius looks like he is talking to himself! Thanks kronk! I had never tried that before.

asmith wrote: Also technicalities count.

They do when you use the word exact.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lord Scythican wrote: Polonius looks like he is talking to himself!

Now you know what it's like to ride on the same bus with me.

Polonius wrote:

Lord Scythican wrote: Polonius looks like he is talking to himself!

Now you know what it's like to ride on the same bus with me.

It feels like this bus sometimes!

This has been a most interesting and intellectually stimulating debate, however the position is clear so I will now lock it.