5,988
pages
ALL POSTSEndorsing "New LMBW"
<p>So over several disagreements, mainly over blocked words, I feel that now woild be a good time to bring this up. Now you may wonder, "why should we have an entire separate wiki for those swearers?" Well, in New LMBW, the users would be users from here who want to talk to each other with more freedom of speech then here, as the only major rule there is common sense. Even to those who won't go to the new wiki, this'll improve LMBW, where there will be fewer votes and less disagreement in general. So in summary, endorsing and joining NLMBW will be best for users of both wikis.
</p><p>Should we endorse New LMBW?
</p><p>A) Yes 7 votes
</p><p>B) No 21 votes
</p><p>C) Neutral 3 votes
</p>
<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Consensus">Consensus</span></h2>
<p>No
</p>
(Edited by administrators)
0
<div class="quote">
<p>Brick425 wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">Purplebrick333 wrote:
<div class="quote">Brick425 wrote:
<div class="quote">Purplebrick333 wrote:
Honestly I think if someone has a problem with LMBW they can grab their friends and find or make another community to have fun on - preferably not one with the label "LMBW" on it. <p>For instance, friends of mine are welcome to hang out on my wiki. </p> </div>Is LMBW a trademark? I don't see the problem.</div>No, but I don't think it should be connected. And it's confusing, like Loney said. </div> <p>I've already disproved Loney's point. </p><p>Why shouldn't it be connected? It's the same thing as here, but more focused on chatting with friends instead of editing articles. </p> </div> <p>...I didn't make a point? I just told why, in my opinion, this would be a bad idea. You can't disprove an opinion, nor is it your job to. </p><p>Let people vote the way they want to. </p>
<div class="quote">Brick425 wrote:
<div class="quote">Purplebrick333 wrote:
Honestly I think if someone has a problem with LMBW they can grab their friends and find or make another community to have fun on - preferably not one with the label "LMBW" on it. <p>For instance, friends of mine are welcome to hang out on my wiki. </p> </div>Is LMBW a trademark? I don't see the problem.</div>No, but I don't think it should be connected. And it's confusing, like Loney said. </div> <p>I've already disproved Loney's point. </p><p>Why shouldn't it be connected? It's the same thing as here, but more focused on chatting with friends instead of editing articles. </p> </div> <p>...I didn't make a point? I just told why, in my opinion, this would be a bad idea. You can't disprove an opinion, nor is it your job to. </p><p>Let people vote the way they want to. </p>
(Edited by Loney 97)
<div class="quote">HyperFlash Studios wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Dumbledore115 wrote: we can change our votes, correct? </p> </div>Yes </div> <p>I'm actually not changing my vote anyway. :P </p>
<div class="quote"> <p>Dumbledore115 wrote: we can change our votes, correct? </p> </div>Yes </div> <p>I'm actually not changing my vote anyway. :P </p>
(Edited by Dumbledore115)
0
<div class="quote">Loney 97 wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Purplebrick333 wrote:
<div class="quote">Brick425 wrote:
<div class="quote">Purplebrick333 wrote:
Honestly I think if someone has a problem with LMBW they can grab their friends and find or make another community to have fun on - preferably not one with the label "LMBW" on it. <p>For instance, friends of mine are welcome to hang out on my wiki. </p> </div>Is LMBW a trademark? I don't see the problem.</div>No, but I don't think it should be connected. And it's confusing, like Loney said.</div>I've already disproved Loney's point. <p>Why shouldn't it be connected? It's the same thing as here, but more focused on chatting with friends instead of editing articles. </p> </div>...I didn't make a point? I just told why, in my opinion, this would be a bad idea. You can't disprove an opinion, nor is it your job to. <p>Let people vote the way they want to. </p> </div> <p>1. You didn't reply to my response to you, so I assumed you forfieted. Forgive me. </p><p>2. Tell that to, like, everyone on this wiki. </p>
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Purplebrick333 wrote:
<div class="quote">Brick425 wrote:
<div class="quote">Purplebrick333 wrote:
Honestly I think if someone has a problem with LMBW they can grab their friends and find or make another community to have fun on - preferably not one with the label "LMBW" on it. <p>For instance, friends of mine are welcome to hang out on my wiki. </p> </div>Is LMBW a trademark? I don't see the problem.</div>No, but I don't think it should be connected. And it's confusing, like Loney said.</div>I've already disproved Loney's point. <p>Why shouldn't it be connected? It's the same thing as here, but more focused on chatting with friends instead of editing articles. </p> </div>...I didn't make a point? I just told why, in my opinion, this would be a bad idea. You can't disprove an opinion, nor is it your job to. <p>Let people vote the way they want to. </p> </div> <p>1. You didn't reply to my response to you, so I assumed you forfieted. Forgive me. </p><p>2. Tell that to, like, everyone on this wiki. </p>
(Edited by Brick425)
<div class="quote">
<p>Brick425 wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
B) This shouldn't be an issue? Like if people want to swear they can make a vote and if the general community doesn't want them to say whatever word they're saying then move on? Or learn to accept that majority rules?? :P I mean I really don't get why this is even something we're entertaining.</div>That's how it was going until damn and piss were unblocked, but "ass" stayed blocked for some reason. People were fed up with the community's attitude towards mild swears, and rightfully so.</div>Brick, that's just how democracy works. :P Like, this is literally democracy. If the majority of the community doesn't want "ass" unblocked, then it stays blocked.</div>Where did I say if the majority votes to keep it blocked, it should therefore be unblocked? I'm saying some people didn't like the outcome of the vote, then they absolutely have the right to rebel. </div>Look, people are free to make what wikis they want if they don't like LMBW, but there is absolutely NO reason why LMBW should be endorsing such a place that is specifically made to undermine the rules of LMBW. :P </div> <p>How is it made to undermine it? Nobody is saying that NLMBW was made for the purpose of ripping apart what the LMBW is about. That's not what the wiki is for. </p> </div> <p>What is it for then? :P I mean the idea is that our rules aren't free enough and that democracy holds things back, right? That's literally against the wiki. :P </p>
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
B) This shouldn't be an issue? Like if people want to swear they can make a vote and if the general community doesn't want them to say whatever word they're saying then move on? Or learn to accept that majority rules?? :P I mean I really don't get why this is even something we're entertaining.</div>That's how it was going until damn and piss were unblocked, but "ass" stayed blocked for some reason. People were fed up with the community's attitude towards mild swears, and rightfully so.</div>Brick, that's just how democracy works. :P Like, this is literally democracy. If the majority of the community doesn't want "ass" unblocked, then it stays blocked.</div>Where did I say if the majority votes to keep it blocked, it should therefore be unblocked? I'm saying some people didn't like the outcome of the vote, then they absolutely have the right to rebel. </div>Look, people are free to make what wikis they want if they don't like LMBW, but there is absolutely NO reason why LMBW should be endorsing such a place that is specifically made to undermine the rules of LMBW. :P </div> <p>How is it made to undermine it? Nobody is saying that NLMBW was made for the purpose of ripping apart what the LMBW is about. That's not what the wiki is for. </p> </div> <p>What is it for then? :P I mean the idea is that our rules aren't free enough and that democracy holds things back, right? That's literally against the wiki. :P </p>
(Edited by Assassin Swipe)
<div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
B) This shouldn't be an issue? Like if people want to swear they can make a vote and if the general community doesn't want them to say whatever word they're saying then move on? Or learn to accept that majority rules?? :P I mean I really don't get why this is even something we're entertaining.</div>That's how it was going until damn and piss were unblocked, but "ass" stayed blocked for some reason. People were fed up with the community's attitude towards mild swears, and rightfully so.</div>Brick, that's just how democracy works. :P Like, this is literally democracy. If the majority of the community doesn't want "ass" unblocked, then it stays blocked.</div>Where did I say if the majority votes to keep it blocked, it should therefore be unblocked? I'm saying some people didn't like the outcome of the vote, then they absolutely have the right to rebel.</div>Look, people are free to make what wikis they want if they don't like LMBW, but there is absolutely NO reason why LMBW should be endorsing such a place that is specifically made to undermine the rules of LMBW. :P</div>How is it made to undermine it? Nobody is saying that NLMBW was made for the purpose of ripping apart what the LMBW is about. That's not what the wiki is for. </div> <p>What is it for then? :P I mean the idea is that our rules aren't free enough and that democracy holds things back, right? That's literally against the wiki. :P </p> </div> <p>youre making it sound like were going to use nlmbw to plan a coupe here are something, the actions are going to be seperate, just endorsed </p>
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
B) This shouldn't be an issue? Like if people want to swear they can make a vote and if the general community doesn't want them to say whatever word they're saying then move on? Or learn to accept that majority rules?? :P I mean I really don't get why this is even something we're entertaining.</div>That's how it was going until damn and piss were unblocked, but "ass" stayed blocked for some reason. People were fed up with the community's attitude towards mild swears, and rightfully so.</div>Brick, that's just how democracy works. :P Like, this is literally democracy. If the majority of the community doesn't want "ass" unblocked, then it stays blocked.</div>Where did I say if the majority votes to keep it blocked, it should therefore be unblocked? I'm saying some people didn't like the outcome of the vote, then they absolutely have the right to rebel.</div>Look, people are free to make what wikis they want if they don't like LMBW, but there is absolutely NO reason why LMBW should be endorsing such a place that is specifically made to undermine the rules of LMBW. :P</div>How is it made to undermine it? Nobody is saying that NLMBW was made for the purpose of ripping apart what the LMBW is about. That's not what the wiki is for. </div> <p>What is it for then? :P I mean the idea is that our rules aren't free enough and that democracy holds things back, right? That's literally against the wiki. :P </p> </div> <p>youre making it sound like were going to use nlmbw to plan a coupe here are something, the actions are going to be seperate, just endorsed </p>
(Edited by Slicer Vorzakh)
3
<div class="quote">Slicer Vorzakh wrote:
<div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
B) This shouldn't be an issue? Like if people want to swear they can make a vote and if the general community doesn't want them to say whatever word they're saying then move on? Or learn to accept that majority rules?? :P I mean I really don't get why this is even something we're entertaining.</div>That's how it was going until damn and piss were unblocked, but "ass" stayed blocked for some reason. People were fed up with the community's attitude towards mild swears, and rightfully so.</div>Brick, that's just how democracy works. :P Like, this is literally democracy. If the majority of the community doesn't want "ass" unblocked, then it stays blocked.</div>Where did I say if the majority votes to keep it blocked, it should therefore be unblocked? I'm saying some people didn't like the outcome of the vote, then they absolutely have the right to rebel.</div>Look, people are free to make what wikis they want if they don't like LMBW, but there is absolutely NO reason why LMBW should be endorsing such a place that is specifically made to undermine the rules of LMBW. :P</div>How is it made to undermine it? Nobody is saying that NLMBW was made for the purpose of ripping apart what the LMBW is about. That's not what the wiki is for.</div>What is it for then? :P I mean the idea is that our rules aren't free enough and that democracy holds things back, right? That's literally against the wiki. :P</div>youre making it sound like were going to use nlmbw to plan a coupe here are something, the actions are going to be seperate, just endorsed</div> <p>I agree with you, but: </p> <figure class="article-thumb tleft show-info-icon" style="width: 180px">
<figcaption> <p class="caption">Coupe</p> </figcaption></figure><figure class="article-thumb tleft show-info-icon" style="width: 180px">
<figcaption> <p class="caption">Coup</p> </figcaption></figure>
<div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
B) This shouldn't be an issue? Like if people want to swear they can make a vote and if the general community doesn't want them to say whatever word they're saying then move on? Or learn to accept that majority rules?? :P I mean I really don't get why this is even something we're entertaining.</div>That's how it was going until damn and piss were unblocked, but "ass" stayed blocked for some reason. People were fed up with the community's attitude towards mild swears, and rightfully so.</div>Brick, that's just how democracy works. :P Like, this is literally democracy. If the majority of the community doesn't want "ass" unblocked, then it stays blocked.</div>Where did I say if the majority votes to keep it blocked, it should therefore be unblocked? I'm saying some people didn't like the outcome of the vote, then they absolutely have the right to rebel.</div>Look, people are free to make what wikis they want if they don't like LMBW, but there is absolutely NO reason why LMBW should be endorsing such a place that is specifically made to undermine the rules of LMBW. :P</div>How is it made to undermine it? Nobody is saying that NLMBW was made for the purpose of ripping apart what the LMBW is about. That's not what the wiki is for.</div>What is it for then? :P I mean the idea is that our rules aren't free enough and that democracy holds things back, right? That's literally against the wiki. :P</div>youre making it sound like were going to use nlmbw to plan a coupe here are something, the actions are going to be seperate, just endorsed</div> <p>I agree with you, but: </p> <figure class="article-thumb tleft show-info-icon" style="width: 180px">
<figcaption> <p class="caption">Coupe</p> </figcaption></figure><figure class="article-thumb tleft show-info-icon" style="width: 180px">
<figcaption> <p class="caption">Coup</p> </figcaption></figure>
(Edited by Brick425)
<div class="quote">Keplers wrote:
Regarding the gun control analogy -- <p>If there were people who wanted all guns banned/unbanned in America, and a country existed where those ideologies existed, wouldn't you <i>want</i> all of your opposition to move to that country so that your country's stance remains how you like it? Consider that. </p> </div> <p>No one here would "move" in this instance.
</p>
Regarding the gun control analogy -- <p>If there were people who wanted all guns banned/unbanned in America, and a country existed where those ideologies existed, wouldn't you <i>want</i> all of your opposition to move to that country so that your country's stance remains how you like it? Consider that. </p> </div> <p>No one here would "move" in this instance.
</p>
(Edited by Michaelyoda)
<div class="quote">Slicer Vorzakh wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Rapmilo wrote: </p> <div class="quote"> <p>Slicer Vorzakh wrote: </p> <div class="quote">BubseyBrick wrote:
<div class="quote">HyperFlash Studios wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>BubseyBrick wrote: B (duh) </p> </div>By saying duh you are assuming your reasoning is obvious, and yet as you haven't stated your reasoning it is not obvious, so would you care to elaborate?
</div>Why would we endorse a wiki against our wiki's values? Seems counter-intuitive.</div>How so? If anything, it would strengthen the values on this wiki.
</div>No it won't strengthen it, nor will it weaken it. The only thing this will do is redirect a portion of the community from here to the other wiki.
</div>Yes, those who would oppose the wiki's current values, and therefore strengthen them.
</div>
<p>Like I just mentioned to Keplers, edorsement does not move anyone to the other wiki. We are incapable of moving people from one wiki to another. We can only remove people from wikis via blocks or wiki deletion.
</p>
<div class="quote"> <p>Rapmilo wrote: </p> <div class="quote"> <p>Slicer Vorzakh wrote: </p> <div class="quote">BubseyBrick wrote:
<div class="quote">HyperFlash Studios wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>BubseyBrick wrote: B (duh) </p> </div>By saying duh you are assuming your reasoning is obvious, and yet as you haven't stated your reasoning it is not obvious, so would you care to elaborate?
</div>Why would we endorse a wiki against our wiki's values? Seems counter-intuitive.</div>How so? If anything, it would strengthen the values on this wiki.
</div>No it won't strengthen it, nor will it weaken it. The only thing this will do is redirect a portion of the community from here to the other wiki.
</div>Yes, those who would oppose the wiki's current values, and therefore strengthen them.
</div>
<p>Like I just mentioned to Keplers, edorsement does not move anyone to the other wiki. We are incapable of moving people from one wiki to another. We can only remove people from wikis via blocks or wiki deletion.</p>
(Edited by Michaelyoda)
0
<div class="quote">
<p>Michaelyoda wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">Keplers wrote:
Regarding the gun control analogy -- <p>If there were people who wanted all guns banned/unbanned in America, and a country existed where those ideologies existed, wouldn't you <i>want</i> all of your opposition to move to that country so that your country's stance remains how you like it? Consider that. </p> </div> <p>No one here would "move" in this instance.
</p> </div> <p>If everyone interested were to join both, why would they repeal the rules of LMBW? All their similarly interested friends would be at NLMBW. </p>
Regarding the gun control analogy -- <p>If there were people who wanted all guns banned/unbanned in America, and a country existed where those ideologies existed, wouldn't you <i>want</i> all of your opposition to move to that country so that your country's stance remains how you like it? Consider that. </p> </div> <p>No one here would "move" in this instance.
</p> </div> <p>If everyone interested were to join both, why would they repeal the rules of LMBW? All their similarly interested friends would be at NLMBW. </p>
(Edited by Keplers)
<div class="quote">
<p>Slicer Vorzakh wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
B) This shouldn't be an issue? Like if people want to swear they can make a vote and if the general community doesn't want them to say whatever word they're saying then move on? Or learn to accept that majority rules?? :P I mean I really don't get why this is even something we're entertaining.</div>That's how it was going until damn and piss were unblocked, but "ass" stayed blocked for some reason. People were fed up with the community's attitude towards mild swears, and rightfully so.</div>Brick, that's just how democracy works. :P Like, this is literally democracy. If the majority of the community doesn't want "ass" unblocked, then it stays blocked.</div>Where did I say if the majority votes to keep it blocked, it should therefore be unblocked? I'm saying some people didn't like the outcome of the vote, then they absolutely have the right to rebel.</div>Look, people are free to make what wikis they want if they don't like LMBW, but there is absolutely NO reason why LMBW should be endorsing such a place that is specifically made to undermine the rules of LMBW. :P</div>How is it made to undermine it? Nobody is saying that NLMBW was made for the purpose of ripping apart what the LMBW is about. That's not what the wiki is for. </div> <p>What is it for then? :P I mean the idea is that our rules aren't free enough and that democracy holds things back, right? That's literally against the wiki. :P </p> </div> <p>youre making it sound like were going to use nlmbw to plan a coupe here are something, the actions are going to be seperate, just endorsed </p> </div> <p>That's really not what I mean? :P I just mean that the whole reason for NLMBW existence is because LMBW doesn't fit a section of the community's needs. Which means that LMBW has its own set of values that you disagree with. So why would we endorse a site that doesn't align with the majority's opinions? </p>
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Brick425 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Assassin Swipe wrote:
B) This shouldn't be an issue? Like if people want to swear they can make a vote and if the general community doesn't want them to say whatever word they're saying then move on? Or learn to accept that majority rules?? :P I mean I really don't get why this is even something we're entertaining.</div>That's how it was going until damn and piss were unblocked, but "ass" stayed blocked for some reason. People were fed up with the community's attitude towards mild swears, and rightfully so.</div>Brick, that's just how democracy works. :P Like, this is literally democracy. If the majority of the community doesn't want "ass" unblocked, then it stays blocked.</div>Where did I say if the majority votes to keep it blocked, it should therefore be unblocked? I'm saying some people didn't like the outcome of the vote, then they absolutely have the right to rebel.</div>Look, people are free to make what wikis they want if they don't like LMBW, but there is absolutely NO reason why LMBW should be endorsing such a place that is specifically made to undermine the rules of LMBW. :P</div>How is it made to undermine it? Nobody is saying that NLMBW was made for the purpose of ripping apart what the LMBW is about. That's not what the wiki is for. </div> <p>What is it for then? :P I mean the idea is that our rules aren't free enough and that democracy holds things back, right? That's literally against the wiki. :P </p> </div> <p>youre making it sound like were going to use nlmbw to plan a coupe here are something, the actions are going to be seperate, just endorsed </p> </div> <p>That's really not what I mean? :P I just mean that the whole reason for NLMBW existence is because LMBW doesn't fit a section of the community's needs. Which means that LMBW has its own set of values that you disagree with. So why would we endorse a site that doesn't align with the majority's opinions? </p>
(Edited by Assassin Swipe)