User blog comment:Obi the LEGO Fan/Clarification of UCS/@comment-30952134-20161220175959/@comment-26944420-20161222055204

@Obi:

You keep throwing around the word "interpret." There's nothing to interpret. At all. It clearly says if nobody finds it offensive, it isn't offensive. Also, in a way, it does give you the right to say possibly offensive things, if nobody finds it offensive. Which is 99% of the time the case on chat.

"And finally, your third mistake is that you overlook what "disruptive" means and you also ignore what "don't create a problem where none exists" means. Some actions are inherently disruptive to our community. It is quite clear that the bigoted comments of the users mentioned in the blog were disruptive, and caused many problems. Moreover, some actions and words are inherently a "problem" without moderators needing to take action. It is a serious problem when people think they can make racist jokes, use transphobic slurs, mock queer people, and make fun of people with disabilities. That is a problem regardless of what mods do - in fact mods make it worse by not acting."

If somebody is offended, they should tell the person/people saying these things. Apparently a lot of people have complained but I never see anyone telling anyone to stop, so you can't blame anyone for it. Are we supposed to assume at least one person will be offended? I won't. Why?

Because my freedom of speech is just as important as someone else's freedom not to be offended. I'll stop saying offensive things if someone is legitimately offended, of course. But to automatically submit to the possibility of someone maybe getting offended is ridiculous and unfair.

And I'm sick and tired of this most basic, yet most important right we have, being violated time and time again on this wiki by ignorant, thoughtless, morons who have no knowledge of how lucky we were to be able to vote on issues here. Now we have to trust it to our admins without having a guaranteed voice at all. Good going. Yes, I'm blaming everyone who voted for that damn vote for the current situation. What it's done is created an admin monopoly on the wiki, so now they can rule alone without any sort of interference from any one of us. And now, they're making it so we can't have an edgy and/or satirical laugh on chat because someone may get offended. The slippery slope may not be such a bad argument after all. It would have been true in this case.

And @EED: Things have changed here. Either adapt or go back to inactivity, for the sake of all of us.