I believe as this community is essentially a parliamentary session, any vulgar or obscene commentary should be strongly discouraged. Much like the speaker of the house, moderators should consistently remind those who break the above guideline to refrain. Repeat offenders / extreme examples should be subject to a temporary ban. Thoughts?
edit: I wonder what people think is the purpose of downvotes? Do you not want to have the discussion?

  • Contextual IdiotEnglish
    10·
    2 years ago

    I have to agree with the others that this rule is unnecessary. @[email protected] said it best:

    The main rule should be civility, as in, criticize ideas, not people. If that’s effectively enforced, vulgarity shouldn’t really be an issue.

    And besides, I want to be able to say “Ban that fucking Nazi piece of shit!” or “Send that fucking gulag loving tankie to Bantown!”

    • sweetholymosiahOPEnglish
      25·
      2 years ago

      I would argue that the language you have just employed in your example is not appropriate for the Agora as it detracts from the purpose of the community. Take it to main street.

      • Contextual IdiotEnglish
        3·
        2 years ago

        And in my over-exaggerated examples, you’d be right, since they fail the Be Civil rule.

        But how about this one?

        This user’s intent was to be an asshole and a troll, and we should adjust the rules to disallow that type of conduct.

        • sweetholymosiahOPEnglish
          1·
          2 years ago

          I’m not sure what’s more subjective to judge a person’s intent or to judge their use of certain words. Anyways point well taken.

      • SocsaEnglish
        1·
        2 years ago

        Rule of law should derive from main street. Not ivory towers, noble titles, or watery tarts handing out scimitars