User blog comment:Obi the LEGO Fan/Clarification of UCS/@comment-30952134-20161220175959/@comment-4845243-20161222062955

Clearly, you don't know what interpret means then. All language has to be interpreted. The policy in question does not "literally" say anything except what it actually says, so unless you are quoting verbatim (you are not) then you are interpreting.

My basic point is that saying abusive, bigoted things is never okay - and that it's automatically a problem if someone makes such comments. Are you disagreeing with this? If so, why?

People don't say anything because they are afraid of being mocked and attacked if they do. That says a lot about the group of people using these kinds of words and phrases and how unsafe they are to the rest of the wiki.

Also, as to your free speech argument. Free speech does not exist on the internet, certainly not on wikia. There are countless things you cannot do or say because of various rules in place, such as Wikia's ToU and our wiki's policies. Freedom of speech means freedom from government persecution, it means freedom from coercion. People have the freedom to be bigots in America without being locked up, but there is no such freedom from being banned or blocked.

You have no right to free speech on the wiki except as dictated by policy. If you think the policy should allow bigotry, please start a vote to change the rules.

As far as an admin monopoly — there is no such thing, and I would never stand for such a thing. I personally have fought for having our wiki be a quasi-democracy for years before my retirement. It was my efforts that brought about things like Requests for Rights and Community Voting. If you think I would, for a moment, defend an oligarchy in which admins rule, you have fundamentally misunderstood me and are willfully ignoring my history as an admin. The people still have the right to set policy, so go and hold a vote. You still have that right.