Slicer Vorzakh wrote: BBB sixth try's a charm
looks like he still wants to take advantage of it
d
next time ill read the thread and then vote
- me, 04:23, October 16, 2016
lol, neutral again, because this will also be reversed in less than a year
"Who are you voting for in 2020?"
"lol neutral again, because we'll have the opposite party member as president in the next election."
the point was that this wiki is very reactive and finicky
"I think that whatever is chosen will end up being reversed in the next year or two, so I'm neutral."
- me, 04:23, October 16, 2016
lol, neutral again, because this will also be reversed in less than a year
three votes are enough? and this is just an excuse for you to not vote, Alemas, I see you.
I don't see why we need to this be blocked anymore. It's a yellowx, I've heard from many that they want it unblocked, and as always if it's used to attack someone that would be handled by moderators on at the time. I want to be able to say that some guy I saw the other day was a "douchenozzle" and whatnot. Or be able to call a certain hairstyle "douchey." Doesn't seem like a bad word to me. Let's vote on it. (I vote unblock.)
Unblock: 5
Keep blocked:
Neutral: 1
Unblock
Riolu777 wrote: I'm in favor of scrapping this vote and having an entire overhaul of the closure rules. I've had to ask people on chat and get different answers in the past when wanting to find out when to close RfRs.
AP could just close this and then we figure out a new system for RfR closures and put forth a vote on it.
I expect to see "I am a Muslim" allowed, but not "All Muslims blow up stuff"
But that means holding a vote on every sentence with the word "Muslim" in it, and the level of offensiveness of said sentences, right? You'd be kidding yourself if that didn't sound cumbersome. Common sense and admin involvement has to be here to some degree, I would think...
Just curious, what's the safeguard for people who want to say that words such as "Christian" or "Muslim" or "communism" are not offensive words to them? Is it safe to assume they're trolling or would we have to seriously cater to those requests? Or does common sense fill in the gaps and apply in those cases? Because I do want everyone to contribute to such a list but there would have to be some arbiter, whether that be the admins or common sense or both, to be able to determine whether or not the requested words to be added are of a legitimately offensive or inappropriate nature or not.
And I vote A, but I agree with Roddy, and Rome's offer is a good one too. Roddy's right in that if people abuse the existence of a list by going to every length to say words on chat that aren't yet on the list, that should be punishable as trolling. Common sense should still exist in that sense. And I also think the list should be a group effort, and Rome and others should be able to help with that.
Loney 97 wrote: B) Implementation of this would be a nightmare as others have said, and I personally trust our CMs and admin's situation-by-situation digression in this type of thing - this is why we have real people moderating and not just a bot.
That was one mod acting on their own, and we made sure that the ban was reversed shortly after.
