- yes 16
- no 13
- neutral 3
5,988
pages
ALL POSTS"douche" 
<p>after talking with Spy, I don't really think this term should be allowed. much like "retard", it's never really used in a non-insulting context (there is one that can be used, but I've never seen it used here.) I'm fine with "idiot" being used in a non-serious context, but I've always viewed this one as a word where (joking or not) it's still offensive.
</p>
<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Current_vote">Current vote</span></h2>
(Edited by administrators)
<center></center>
<p>
warning swears I think the word has no need to be blocked. It's a word with little offencive meaning; it's not like "***hole" or "b*tch" which would be taken offencively. </p>
warning swears I think the word has no need to be blocked. It's a word with little offencive meaning; it's not like "***hole" or "b*tch" which would be taken offencively. </p>
(Edited by Salvatore Calzone)
<p>I vote no. There's really no point in having these words blocked. Having retard blocked is already...well, completely stupid. I'd rather have douche blocked than retard, having that blocked is silly. Jesus Christ, how many ulta-sensitive people do we have on here....? O_o -_- =P
</p>
(Edited by Skully Of House Lannister)
<div class="quote">Skully Of House Lannister wrote:
I vote no. There's really no point in having these words blocked. Having retard blocked is already...well, completely stupid. I'd rather have douche blocked than retard, having that blocked is silly. Jesus Christ, how many ulta-sensitive people do we have on here....? O_o -_- =P</div> <p>"The content on this wiki should be suitable to all" Either we keep this up, or we really need to change that statement.
</p><noscript>
</noscript>
I vote no. There's really no point in having these words blocked. Having retard blocked is already...well, completely stupid. I'd rather have douche blocked than retard, having that blocked is silly. Jesus Christ, how many ulta-sensitive people do we have on here....? O_o -_- =P</div> <p>"The content on this wiki should be suitable to all" Either we keep this up, or we really need to change that statement.
</p><noscript></noscript>
(Edited by CptSteveRogers)
1
<p>I couldn't give a crap either way, but I suppose I'll just vote yes.... :P
</p>
(Edited by Jdude420)
1
Yes.
(Edited by Alemas2005)
<div class="quote">LegoSuperBowser wrote:
"Justin Beiber is an Idiot." is fine, but "Justin Beiber is a douchebag" isn't? Idiot is never used in a postive landmark, either. So even if I was joking saying I think "Sannse" is a douche bag, that wouldn't be okay, but if I called her an idiot in a joking way, that's fine? I'm sorry, but the two are parallel.</div> <p>I agree with LSB. </p><p><span style="background-color:Red; ; border:4px ridge blue;">SkySSundee</span> </p>
"Justin Beiber is an Idiot." is fine, but "Justin Beiber is a douchebag" isn't? Idiot is never used in a postive landmark, either. So even if I was joking saying I think "Sannse" is a douche bag, that wouldn't be okay, but if I called her an idiot in a joking way, that's fine? I'm sorry, but the two are parallel.</div> <p>I agree with LSB. </p><p><span style="background-color:Red; ; border:4px ridge blue;">SkySSundee</span> </p>
(Edited by SkySSundee)
<div class="quote">LegoSuperBowser wrote:
<div class="quote">Skully Of House Lannister wrote:
I vote no. There's really no point in having these words blocked. Having retard blocked is already...well, completely stupid. I'd rather have douche blocked than retard, having that blocked is silly. Jesus Christ, how many ulta-sensitive people do we have on here....? O_o -_- =P</div>"The content on this wiki should be suitable to all" Either we keep this up, or we really need to change that statement.
</div>
<p>It is suitable for all, unless people are being total idiots. If people feel the need to break down if they read the word retarded, then they probably need to get off the internet, go to their rooms, and hit their head on the wall. A lot.
</p>
<div class="quote">Skully Of House Lannister wrote:
I vote no. There's really no point in having these words blocked. Having retard blocked is already...well, completely stupid. I'd rather have douche blocked than retard, having that blocked is silly. Jesus Christ, how many ulta-sensitive people do we have on here....? O_o -_- =P</div>"The content on this wiki should be suitable to all" Either we keep this up, or we really need to change that statement.
</div>
<p>It is suitable for all, unless people are being total idiots. If people feel the need to break down if they read the word retarded, then they probably need to get off the internet, go to their rooms, and hit their head on the wall. A lot.
</p>
(Edited by Skully Of House Lannister)
0
<div class="quote">
<p>Skully Of House Lannister wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">LegoSuperBowser wrote:
<div class="quote">Skully Of House Lannister wrote:
I vote no. There's really no point in having these words blocked. Having retard blocked is already...well, completely stupid. I'd rather have douche blocked than retard, having that blocked is silly. Jesus Christ, how many ulta-sensitive people do we have on here....? O_o -_- =P</div>"The content on this wiki should be suitable to all" Either we keep this up, or we really need to change that statement.
</div>
<p>It is suitable for all, unless people are being total idiots. If people feel the need to break down if they read the word retarded, then they probably need to get off the internet, go to their rooms, and hit their head on the wall. A lot.
</p>
</div>
<p>Per Skul (Never thought I'd be saying that </p><noscript></noscript>)
<div class="quote">Skully Of House Lannister wrote:
I vote no. There's really no point in having these words blocked. Having retard blocked is already...well, completely stupid. I'd rather have douche blocked than retard, having that blocked is silly. Jesus Christ, how many ulta-sensitive people do we have on here....? O_o -_- =P</div>"The content on this wiki should be suitable to all" Either we keep this up, or we really need to change that statement.
</div>
<p>It is suitable for all, unless people are being total idiots. If people feel the need to break down if they read the word retarded, then they probably need to get off the internet, go to their rooms, and hit their head on the wall. A lot.
</p>
</div>
<p>Per Skul (Never thought I'd be saying that </p><noscript></noscript>)
(Edited by Vonness11`)
<p>I personally don't find it that offensive but I'm sure other people do, so just for the sake of accommodating everyone, I'm neutral.
</p>
(Edited by Aravis Tarkheena)
2
<div class="quote">
<p>Madkatmaximus wrote:
I still really don't see the need for it to be blocked, if someone's abusing it, kick them.
</p>
</div>
<p>And this is the solution. If someone uses a word in a bad way, kick/ban them as necessary. The wiki could function perfectly fine without any blocked words at all. Blocking more words is only going to limit us, not help.
</p><p>I vote no.
</p>
(Edited by TwistedAlpha)