Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Why can't this word get auto-edited by the system when it's used.
It's as offensive as the "N" word, or any other race or religion based slur, yet it's allowed to be thrown around with disregard.

Any chances of getting it put on the auto-edit list?


Eric

MagickalMemories wrote:Why can't this word get auto-edited by the system when it's used.
It's as offensive as the "N" word, or any other race or religion based slur, yet it's allowed to be thrown around with disregard.

Any chances of getting it put on the auto-edit list?


Eric

Yeah I don't get that either, that word is an insult to all people with mental disabilities and it also assumes people with mental disorders are somehow dumber and/or inferior to other people. The only time I use the word is to refer to non mentally-

handicapped people doing stupid things or being stupid.

It seems like under some unseen forum rule , rude gestures are allowed to go through
aslong as they add after it. Anyone else see this pattern?

The only time I use the word is to refer to non mentally-handicapped people doing stupid things or being stupid.

You gotta be frigging Trolling me.

MagickalMemories wrote:

The only time I use the word is to refer to non mentally-handicapped people doing stupid things or being stupid.

You gotta be frigging Trolling me.

Um hows that trolling? And really I don't use the word often, I usually use idiot or bigot instead. Also I said I agree that the word is too offensive for DakkaDakka how is agreeing with someone trolling?

I know, lets have every word that could possibly be used in any derogatory fashion auto-edited. Along with slow we should get rid of silly, dumb, intelligence (as in lack of), poor, weird, the list goes on.

Soon we'll only be talking on dakka in gibberish and auto-edited words.

Or we can thicken our skins, and quit being so easily offended by every single slight against our ego's.

Get over yourself.

It might be as offensive to you. I won't argue that, but I think community standards aren't quite in step with your view.

And not to be trite, but you'd run into issues with things like "flow retarder."

I agree that slow should be autofiltered into something nicer, but polonius has the reason why we have not done so after discussing this in the past - it is a term used in painting (albeit uncommon) and is a general word as well as an insult. eg; to slow progress.

As there is no suitable all-round substitute that would work in context and sentence structure, we moderate on a case by case basis. If you see any that are especially offensive then use the mod alert button and we'll edit it away at least.

My $0.02 are that the word is becoming diluted now from overuse, and is generally just a harsher term for 'very ignorant' instead of 'mentally disabled'. I see it phased out more and more and in fact it seems practically extinct in the UK for talking about disabled people (at least in the media I consume and circles I socialise in).

Beerfart wrote:I know, lets have every word that could possibly be used in any derogatory fashion auto-edited. Along with slow we should get rid of silly, dumb, intelligence (as in lack of), poor, weird, the list goes on.

Soon we'll only be talking on dakka in gibberish and auto-edited words.

Or we can thicken our skins, and quit being so easily offended by every single slight against our ego's.

Get over yourself.

Just wow...

The word has other meanings.

Cheesecat wrote:Yeah I don't get that either, that word is an insult to all people with mental disabilities and it also assumes people with mental disorders are somehow dumber and/or inferior to other people.

Er... it's a word meaning "someone of subnormal intelligence". If you're not dumber and/or inferior to other people, you're not someone of subnormal intelligence, are you?

AlexHolker wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:Yeah I don't get that either, that word is an insult to all people with mental disabilities and it also assumes people with mental disorders are somehow dumber and/or inferior to other people.

Er... it's a word meaning "someone of subnormal intelligence". If you're not dumber and/or inferior to other people, you're not someone of subnormal intelligence, are you?

No, actually. It's a word meaning:

re·tard   [ri-tahrd, for 1–3, 5; ree-tahrd for 4] Show IPA
–verb (used with object)
1.
to make slow; delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.); hinder or impede.
–verb (used without object)
2.
to be delayed.
–noun
3.
a slowing down, diminution, or hindrance, as in a machine.
4.
Slang: Disparaging .
a.
a mentally slowed person.
b.
a person who is stupid, obtuse, or ineffective in some way: a hopeless social slow.
5.
Automotive, Machinery . an adjustment made in the setting of the distributor of an internal-combustion engine so that the spark for ignition in each cylinder is generated later in the cycle.

And it doesn't need to be censored because some people are overly touchy.

I think George Carlin said it best...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kh0Uu1yD-v0&feature=related

The world can't always be sanitized for your sensitive ears.

If someone is using a term offensively/repeatedly/trollingly, then Moderator action could certainly be warranted.

Or, perhaps, you can make use of the "Ignore User" function for people that offend you.

There's use for that word beyond its slang meaning. Trying to get a word 'banned' because one of it's meanings is offensive to you is, well... you know. Are we going to start auto-editing the word 'head' because of its slang meaning? That would make modeling discussions pretty bizarre.

: )
The ignorance of some amazes me.

Valuing the benefits of free speech over knee-jerk "ban-everythingism" is ignorance now?

When your talking points closely mirror that of the American Religious Right's stance on books in libraries, you might want to reevaluate your use of the term "ignorance."

Thats it, we need to ban "ignorance" now.....

ShumaGorath wrote:

AlexHolker wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:Yeah I don't get that either, that word is an insult to all people with mental disabilities and it also assumes people with mental disorders are somehow dumber and/or inferior to other people.

Er... it's a word meaning "someone of subnormal intelligence". If you're not dumber and/or inferior to other people, you're not someone of subnormal intelligence, are you?

No, actually. It's a word meaning:

re·tard   [ri-tahrd, for 1–3, 5; ree-tahrd for 4] Show IPA
–verb (used with object)
1.
to make slow; delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.); hinder or impede.
–verb (used without object)
2.
to be delayed.
–noun
3.
a slowing down, diminution, or hindrance, as in a machine.
4.
Slang: Disparaging .
a.
a mentally slowed person.
b.
a person who is stupid, obtuse, or ineffective in some way: a hopeless social slow.
5.
Automotive, Machinery . an adjustment made in the setting of the distributor of an internal-combustion engine so that the spark for ignition in each cylinder is generated later in the cycle.

And it doesn't need to be censored because some people are overly touchy.

Thanks Shuma. You saved me time having to explain.

So how long until we can't use the word slow? I mean it might be offensive to people that can't move quickly! Everything offends somebody, that doesn't mean you have to restrict other peoples rights. People like you would have us ban peanuts because less than 1% of the population is allergic.

Mental retardation is a medical term. The N-word isn't.

Now while I don't find the word itself offensive I do understand the objection when I see things like thishttp://encyclopediadramatica.com/slow

But just the word itself, no.

Might as well try to ban dork or geek because people take offense to that.

kartofelkopf wrote:Valuing the benefits of free speech over knee-jerk "ban-everythingism" is ignorance now?

Free speech is fine assuming the mods are going to let people who find the use of the word as a derogatory insult offensive to fire back with insulting replies in return.

And that's where your "free speech" diatribe breaks down: Despite the fact that the word IS offensive it's use is also commonly accepted and my guess is the mods will do little about it yet would sanction said person's insulting personal reply. So much for free speech...

Free speech is irrelevant. This is a private forum, these are legally closer to business establishments. Free speech laws do not apply here. Free speech protects you from the government, not the moderators.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Andrew1975 wrote:So how long until we can't use the word slow? I mean it might be offensive to people that can't move quickly! Everything offends somebody, that doesn't mean you have to restrict other peoples rights. People like you would have us ban peanuts because less than 1% of the population is allergic.

Mental retardation is a medical term. The N-word isn't.

Mental retardation is a medical term in the same way that "stubbed toe" is. Retardation as highlighted in my dictionary definition above combined with mental can be used in the medical field, but really only as a combination of two words. You can have retardation of bone structures, and really any other sort of developmental... Thing. "Mental slow" is just slang, the medical field is vastly more precise in it's lexicon and hasn't used such terms in a long time.

Oh lord.

Look at all the trouble that Jennifer Aniston has caused.

ShumaGorath wrote:Free speech is irrelevant. This is a private forum, these are legally closer to business establishments. Free speech laws do not apply here. Free speech protects you from the government, not the moderators.

Wrong- if I was trying to claim some sort of first amendment protections, your civics lesson would apply.

"Free speech" is a concept independent of legal frameworks. In the context of an online forum, one can value freedom of speech to a greater or lesser extent- for example, I think people should be given as much latitude as reasonably possible for the format, whereas some others (OP, for instance) think the speech of others should be sanitized of anything that is "offensive."

I understand that a lot of people whine about "free speech" in the sense that you assumed I did, but I meant it in the broader sense of "unhindered communication," as opposed to the (comparatively narrower) sense of "speech protected from government intrusion."

Free speech is fine assuming the mods are going to let people who find the use of the word as a derogatory insult offensive to fire back with insulting replies in return.

And that's where your "free speech" diatribe breaks down: Despite the fact that the word IS offensive it's use is also commonly accepted and my guess is the mods will do little about it yet would sanction said person's insulting personal reply. So much for free speech...

Eh, as for this- it's up to the mods to, you know, Moderate. If a user is being abusive-- report it. After that, my advice to you is to use the "Ignore User" feature if someone is offending you.

The world isn't always going to cater itself to your need to never see or hear anything that offends or challenges you. Trying to force a sanitized version of reality on others is only going to make them resent you and egg on the truly offensive to continue doing something that gets a rise out of you.

Monster Rain WINS.

ON a more serious note, it's not really a big deal. When people call something slowed, they aren't actually meaning to insult people who are actually slowed. It's like the word gay. It has lots of meanings but in common usage it's just something you don't like or you find stupid. Nothing more really. They aren't secretly trying to get you to relate Matt Ward's fluff to the kids in the special olympics.

Well, to be fair to OP, anytime someone uses Gay or slowed in a negative manner, it reinforces some deep-seated (and often, unconsciously held) views on the worth or value of gays and the mentally challenged/disabled (or whatever the PC term du jour is).

Wrong- if I was trying to claim some sort of first amendment protections, your civics lesson would apply.

"Free speech" is a concept independent of legal frameworks. In the context of an online forum, one can value freedom of speech to a greater or lesser extent- for example, I think people should be given as much latitude as reasonably possible for the format, whereas some others (OP, for instance) think the speech of others should be sanitized of anything that is "offensive."

I understand that a lot of people whine about "free speech" in the sense that you assumed I did, but I meant it in the broader sense of "unhindered communication," as opposed to the (comparatively narrower) sense of "speech protected from government intrusion."

Except the forum already has an established modus operandi concerning what are popularly considered insults or taboo forms of speech that do not give deference to the concept of free speech. It's a concept that exists independent of legal frameworks, but that concept still exists within legal frameworks. There is precedent here for violating the concept, thus your argument should lie with degrees and not with upholding the ideal itself.

Eh, as for this- it's up to the mods to, you know, Moderate. If a user is being abusive-- report it. After that, my advice to you is to use the "Ignore User" feature if someone is offending you.

The world isn't always going to cater itself to your need to never see or hear anything that offends or challenges you. Trying to force a sanitized version of reality on others is only going to make them resent you and egg on the truly offensive to continue doing something that gets a rise out of you.

Forum administration is capable of using automated features to repress forms of insulting speech without human intervention. This isn't a land of personal responsibility, its a semi anonymous forum. It's true that the world isn't always going to cater, but thats entirely irrelevant as this forum is more than capable of doing so at administrator preference. Your argument should be for why it's unnecessary, not why people should learn to man up. You're giving an ethics lesson to the wrong person, argue up the ladder, not down.

kartofelkopf wrote:Well, to be fair to OP, anytime someone uses Gay or slowed in a negative manner, it reinforces some deep-seated (and often, unconsciously held) views on the worth or value of gays and the mentally challenged/disabled (or whatever the PC term du jour is).

I think that would be more true for gay than slowed. Because no one really hates slowed people... except Nazis, but they don't count.

Well, it's unnecessary because there are avenues open for an easily-offended reader to protect themselves from being offended.

I've only had to block three posters who kept trolling various threads, and my dakka experience is all the more pleasant with them gone.

If someone is repeatedly using a term you find offensive, block them.
-------
Outside of offensive uses of the term, there are legitimate uses for the term that are relatively common, especially in terms of modeling/painting.
------

As for degrees of free speech, I thought that was pretty apparent from my point regarding latitude of speech. On one end of the spectrum is someone like me, who doesn't give two [offensive term]s what people post. On the opposite end, someone who wants a relatively common (if uncouth) term to be auto-replaced, in spite of the other measures they have available to them.

This isn't a land of personal responsibility

And people who whine about being offended are part of the problem there. If someone is using offensive speech to troll, then giving them attention is exactly what they want. If someone is using "offensive speech" inadvertently, then offering them a rational argument for why they shouldn't might be the way to go (and there are legitimate reasons that people should avoid terms like slow and gay).

Two or three people complaining about a word hardly seems like sufficient reason to auto-ban a word. It's roughly akin to having two or three angry moms complaining that their precious snowflakes have to read Tom Sawyer because it accurately represents dialogue from the time it depicts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SamplesoWoopass wrote:

kartofelkopf wrote:Well, to be fair to OP, anytime someone uses Gay or slowed in a negative manner, it reinforces some deep-seated (and often, unconsciously held) views on the worth or value of gays and the mentally challenged/disabled (or whatever the PC term du jour is).

I think that would be more true for gay than slowed. Because no one really hates slowed people... except Nazis, but they don't count.

Not saying there's necessarily hatred involved... but, definitely a negative value judgment. Otherwise, why would the term be used derogatorily in the first place?

ShumaGorath wrote: Free speech protects you from the government, not the moderators.

Only alcohol can protect you from the Moderators. Fact.

This has come up a few times before, and Mr. legoburner has, succinctly summarised the current "thinking" on the subject.