| |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Orion Pobursky wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Mark Jordan wrote: I'd prefer to
> > > see a black and white list of offensive words which aren't acceptable on Lugnet.
> > > That way people can easily avoid these ugly situations.
> >
> > By what standard do you create this list?
>
> This is exactly why Lugnet has not published a list of no-no words. But really,
> is there anyone here who doesn't know that f**k is a bad word?
You missed the point of my post Lenny. I contend that not everyone thinks that
the word you mentioned above is "bad" in every context. There shouldn't be a
silver bullet policy that put you into "bad" territory just for writing a word.
In other words the standard should not be "everything you write will be taken in
context except when you use this list of words in which case we will apply this
zero tolerence policy" and should be "we take everything in context regardless
of what words were used." It's been proven that so called "zero-tolerence"
policies do more harm than good (have at look here: http://zerointelligence.net
).
-Orion
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| (...) I'd prefer to (...) This is exactly why Lugnet has not published a list of no-no words. But really, is there anyone here who doesn't know that f**k is a bad word? I think the only two words that would get you an email from an admin are f**k (...) (20 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.general)
|
29 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
