| |
The issue of profanity on LUGNET has raised many hackles, and I can’t say I
blame most of the people who have expressed unhappiness. The rules are vague,
the punishments appear somewhat arbitrary, the entire reason for having language
guidelines isn’t clear. How do you express yourself when you don’t know when
it’s going “too far”? Bear with me, maybe I can illuminate the issue. (Warning:
I’m going to take some analogies and really work ‘em.) This may not tell you
exactly where “the line” is, but it might give some understanding of what the
language rules are meant to do.
Profanity per se is not a bad thing when used in appropriate context. None of
the admins are exactly prudes - we all enjoy off-color language as the situation
calls for. For example, one of my blog entries uses profanity to what I’d like
to think is good effect. So it’s not that we’re trying to shove our own beliefs
down anyone’s throat. Quite the contrary, in fact.
What we’re trying to get across is that, in most cases, LUGNET isn’t the
appropriate context. By design.
First, let’s start with why there are rules about language. What are they
meant to achieve? As Larry pointed out[1], a large part of “profane” word
usage (i.e. commonly-accepted words used for cussing) is as epithets hurled
between members. Good-natured smack is one thing, but serious insults and
namecalling between people indicates a serious lack of respect and civility in
the community. The words aren’t always profane, and some people have a knack for
slipping in sly comments and subtle put-downs that are frankly far worse than
calling somebody a dirty word. But the increase in profanity during these
flareups is a symptom, not the cause. The best option to date to deal with this
ill has been to treat the symptom - in this case not allowing certain words.
No, that doesn’t address the real problem - which is the overall decrease in
fun.
The use of Carlin’s 7 words is the closest we can come to define when the
symptoms are getting severe. It’s arbitrary. Low-level profanity usually isn’t
indicative of a serious problem. But the more emotionally charged a word is, the
bigger the problem it represents by being used. (This is a gross generality, but
one that I think is accurate more often than not.) So when one of the top
“naughty” words/triggers is used, it indicates a bigger problem that needs to be
addressed. Rather than banning use of certain words, for instance, maybe we
could simply have people request context checking before posting a particular
message. But that’s a pain in the ask. For everyone. Not really feasible, and a
bit insulting to boot. We’ve found it better to leave the decision to the
individual person, and provide a loose set of guidelines and admins to help
determine whether a line has been crossed.
I think Calum had a good analogy with grafitti[2], so I’ll borrow it and take
it further (blame the following on me, not Calum). Some grafitti is amusing,
it’s decorative, it can even be beautifully poetic in its depiction - gilding
the turd, as it were. There’s skill in getting your point across with it.
But you don’t want grafitti covering the walls of your house.
LUGNET is our house. Todd and Suzanne opened the door and let everyone come in.
It’s a nice place, I think. Lots of rooms to explore. Lots of stuff on the walls
to look at and comment on. And in a few places, some taggers got in and started
scrawling. I’m not saying the grafitti isn’t creative or clever or even
particularly offensive (it takes a fair amount to offend me, personally) - but
it’s just not something that makes you want to stick around. And you certainly
don’t want to show it to guests.
Speaking of guests, let’s broaden the analogy. Right now LUGNET’s a nice little
house on the end of a cozy, tree-lined cul-de-sac (sorry, I’ve typed way too
many real estate ads in my time). It’s open to all, but there’s a fairly limited
number of people who wander in. Almost everyone haunting LUGNET (that we know
about) are those who are into LEGO in a big way. But it’s still open to all who
wander by, including people who are looking into joining the ranks of AFOL.
(This would be an entirely different conversation if LUGNET was a closed or
limited admittance community.) At the risk of laying an unintended guilt trip, I
would like to remind everyone here that, regardless of their own personal
feelings about the LEGO Group, their public participation in this hobby (online
and IRL) effectively puts them in the position of unofficial spokespeople for
TLG, and represents all AFOLs. People who aren’t LEGO enthusiasts will see the
actions and behavior of those who are, and judge the hobby, the company, and all
AFOLs by the AFOLs they see.
LUGNET is pretty much the de facto center of the English-speaking AFOL
community. Its posts are all public and searchable. We are creating our own
reputation and legacy with what goes on here. We can choose to show the outside
world (and each other) what we find important about being an AFOL/TFOL/KFOL...
or we can squabble and bicker and toss petty insults at each other over
inconsequentialities. Sure, there’s a lot to discuss and a lot of important
things we disagree about - but the way we disagree tells a lot about us as a
whole. Please, please please do continue to disagree - not a single LUGNET
admin would have the hubris to tell you otherwise. But we very much would like
to have the disagreements retain a semblance of civility and respect. Foul
language, while colorful, quickly destroys that carefully built atmosphere of
respect. (Other things, like non-profane snide remarks meant to be hurtful, are
just as bad, but harder to define. But they’re just as much a problem.)
Back to the immediate subject, use of profanity. The house of LUGNET can be a
comfortable place - Todd has worked his tailfeathers off trying to accomodate
the needs of a diverse, eclectic, and demanding lot. But it’s still his house,
and I firmly believe we, as guests, should all make an effort to follow his
guidelines. Etiquette suggests we don’t decorate the walls with dayglo orange
limericks, or whittle personal slurs into the woodwork with a pocket knife. That
we knock the horseapples off our shoes before walking on the rug. That we bring
in more than we take out. And at the very least clean up after ourselves.
Todd, Larry, Frank, Lenny, and I (among others) can’t manage everything. We
don’t want to. Our job is wiping down the counters and escorting out the
occasional inebriated guest until he sobers up. The ToS is merely the mechanism
by which we’re trying to maintain a peaceful house. But it’s really up to
everyone here. We can’t force anyone to behave politely, nor would we want to.
We’re merely asking, for everyone’s sake, to respect the other person, as well
as the house of LUGNET.
I’d like to think that, if you invited us to your place, we’d behave well enough
to be invited back.
Your use of language remains your choice. If you have a problem with LUGNET
administrators making rules for what may appear to be arbitrary reasons, I hope
this explains why these rules are in place. If you’d prefer to think of the
“please no heavy-duty cussing” as a polite request, it’s essentially the same.
If the disagreements between members could be handled with more respect and less
acrimony, I don’t think language would be an issue.
We’d like to ask for your respect of the atmosphere Todd began and the rest of
the admins are trying to foster. Please help us make LUGNET into a place that
you can be proud of. Remember, it’s not up to the admins - it’s in your hands.
Very sincerely,
Kelly McKiernan
AFOL and LUGNET supporter
Oh yeah, and admin
[1] http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=12236
[2] http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=12229
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Language Choices and LUGNET
|
| Well stated! Cheers Oliver Play Well! "Kelly J. McKiernan" <kelly.mckiernan@lugnet.com> wrote in message news:IAwGCA.13Iw@lugnet.com... <snip> The house of LUGNET can be a (...) (19 years ago, 26-Jan-05, to lugnet.general)
| | | highlighting
|
| I have three questions on highlighting. 1. Can one highlight one's own post? (I’m not a member, so I do not know). 2. Can Admin-A highlight Admin-B's Admin post? (should they be able to?) 3. Should Admins be able to highlight any post in any group? (...) (19 years ago, 27-Jan-05, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
