A Question of Context

[Beskar]

The entire Backroom is full of people making the other out for gay or pretending to be gay themselves. We not only allow it, we daily practise it. Everywhere you look it's gay this, poofter that. ('I bet the he's making Dave's my nipples hard')

Let's not get carried away here into thinking we are dealing with some sort of singularly unique event. We're talking common daily practise.

No Louis, No.

[Louis VI the Fat]

No Louis, No.

One need not look further than the very thread we're most closely focused on here. Here's the rundown of the posts not by me:
Strike is called a transgender.
Cutewolf is said to have a gender identity crisis.
Strike is called a slug.
Lemur is described as a homosexual with certain...'preferences'
There are risky picture of a naked bear
Cutewofl is described as 'ambiguous'
CuteWolf and Hax are said to resemble girls in real life pictures
Kralizec is called a leather gay bear

It is common daily Backroom practise to call each other all sorts of gender and orientation based 'slurs'. We have always allowed it. The question is whether we need to change that to take today's sensitivities into closer account.

[Drunk Clown]

One need not look further than the very thread we're most closely focused on here. Here's the rundown of the posts not by me:
Strike is called a transgender.
Cutewolf is said to have a gender identity crisis.
Strike is called a slug.
Lemur is described as a homosexual with certain...'preferences'
There are risky picture of a naked bear
Cutewofl is described as 'ambiguous'
CuteWolf and Hax are said to resemble girls in real life pictures
Kralizec is called a leather gay bear

It is common daily Backroom practise to call each other all sorts of gender and orientation based 'slurs'. We have always allowed it. The question is whether we need to change that to take today's sensitivities into closer account.

There's a difference between "... is a muslim fag" and "... is a leather gay bear".

[Zim]

A few quick thoughts.

1. What a terribly done poll. Can anyone possibly think it's a good start to a serious discussion, or that the leading poll choices allow for anything like an accurate reading of people's opinions?

2. Related to the above, why is using the word in the pejorative sense but only joking in the same category as using it as a slang term for cigarette? From the discussion that prompted this it's obvious that the criticism was focused on the former usage.

3. I imagine both Louis and Andres may be right about pass usage. That is, that the word used in a joking manner may not have been infracted by some backroom mods (either going unnoticed or not seeming severe enough to them) and that more generally the word has not been allowed here.

If I had been asked before all this came up I would likely have said "no way that could be allowed", and I think that's the way it should be. "I'm joking" is not an excuse for using the word in the pejorative sense.

[Beskar]

One need not look further than the very thread we're most closely focused on here. Here's the rundown of the posts not by me:
Strike is called a transgender. Never seen this before, possible referencing to wearing a dress, either way, I don't see 'fag' being thrown around.
Strike is called a slug. Never seen this before.
Kralizec is called a leather gay bear Never seen this before.
Lemur is described as a homosexual with certain...'preferences' Lemur is a happily married man with kids, his homosexuality isn't real neither is being a homosexual a bad thing, but going around calling people fags as it is akin to using the n-word (in reference to darker skin) and not acceptable and in any context, where I have seen Lemur make possible homosexual references, he has always done so respectfully.
There are risky picture of a naked bear ???
Cutewolf is said to have a gender identity crisis. This may be a fact
Cutewofl is described as 'ambiguous' This is a fact, but being called 'ambiguous' is not the same as calling him a 'fag'.
CuteWolf and Hax are said to resemble girls in real life pictures They do, but still calling them 'fags' would be unacceptable and there is nothing wrong with their feminine choices.

It is common daily Backroom practise to call each other all sorts of gender and orientation based 'slurs'. We have always allowed it. The question is whether we need to change that to take today's sensitivities into closer account.

Only 'gender related' or sexual orientation that occurs if either when Devastation Dave decides to post, or when you and Strike are flooding topics with your fantasy internet homoerotic relationship. Even then, you and Strike doing your fake homosexual relationship isn't the backroom patrons going around calling eachother 'fags'.

If I said the word 'fags' in the context you used it, I would expect a minimum of a 1 point infraction and nothing less. It is an utter embarrassment to the mod team that you are keeping up this charade. It is bad enough when the Moderators have to handle these sensitive issues without one of their own trolling them in the watchtower.

Also this prolonged charade is making it worse for you, everytime you try to worm out of it and instead of simply admittedly your error just frustrates people and starts turning that little molehill which was so easy simply to say "Sorry" into something far grander and more serious like questioning your ability as a moderator.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Beskar, I do not feel strongly either way. If people take offense, then they take offense and I shall refrain from such wording. There is no need for me to cause needless offense or disruption.

It is all rather inconsequential. I think we differ mostly in a sense of emotional investment, urgency in this. It is just not a big deal.

[Monk]

It is all rather inconsequential. I think we differ mostly in a sense of emotional investment, urgency in this. It is just not a big deal.

Then stop.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Then stop.

I suppose I will. I think this thread reads very differently to many others than to me, and I obviously fail to convey a sense of relaxed, good-natured exploration of the subject. When people think this is about 'worming out' or 'charades', then something has gone horribly wrong in our communication.

I shall bow out and leave you all to it.

[Beskar]

I suppose I will. I think this thread reads very differently to many others than to me, and I obviously fail to convey a sense of relaxed, good-natured exploration of the subject. When people think this is about 'worming out' or 'charades', then something has gone horribly wrong in our communication.

I shall bow out and leave you all to it.

I apologise for the nature of my post, I was overly harsh.

But yes, there was a feeling that you was simply stringing along a 'charade' in attempt to trying to 'worm/weasel' out of the situation opposed to simply commenting that you meant it as a good-natured joke and apologise for the lapse in error.

We are all human Louis, even moderators, making mistakes is fine, but sometimes even though you feel really bad about how you didn't mean to intend it, sometimes just taking a step back and go "I only meant it in a good-natured jab, perhaps I should have worded it better, my apologises". That is all what people ever wanted, we have a good idea you meant it as a good-natured jab and we can easily forgive it, it was just the way you seemed to continue it as a 'charade' or a 'farse' which got underneath peoples skin, including my own. Similar to how another poster in another thread brought up about a highly inappropriate comment on 9/11 was "okay" as 'a joke' even at the very end, you came across as doing the exact same thing.

So I hope you forgive me for my harsh tone, I do like you as a poster/moderator, even voted you as "Best Member" in a few of those yearly polls.

[InsaneApache]

It's farce.

Apt I s'pose

[Rhyfelwyr]

It's farce.

Apt I s'pose

It's just about manners.

[InsaneApache]

Maketh man.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Louis has now successfully gotten his way out of apologizing. Be absurd, then claim miscommunication and "bow out". Well done.

[Beskar]

Louis has now successfully gotten his way out of apologizing. Be absurd, then claim miscommunication and "bow out". Well done.

Don't be vindictive or even deceitful.

I think you are easily aware that Louis is no longer even a moderator (for reasons unannounced, but the timing is well... 1+1), so he hasn't successfully "gotten out" of anything. If you are referring to my post where I apologised for being overly-aggressive, then you clearly misread it . I only apologised for the tone of my post since I was pushing the boundary with it, I simply reworded that post and put forward what I already said in a different format, the idea being, I am being sympathetic towards Louis to show him that I am not simply "Out to get him", which I am not doing, and trying to explain to him how he is coming across so he has a better grasp and understanding of it.

I have known Louis for a long time, him saying an ill-taste joke isn't going to make me or anyone else hate him universally for it, people were more upset with the so called 'charade' resulting from it than the event itself. Wanting universal condemnation of Louis is ludicrous and defies any common sense of society in large that we live in (except of that found in trashy tabloid press and Fox News).

If you want me to defend Louis's ill-taste joke and his reaction to it being highlighted, then you are not going to get it, I don't agree with those actions and Louis didn't show the best side of his character. If you are simply calling for arbitrary and total condemnation of Louis, you will not get this either, because he has posted many good posts on this forum, even at a far greater ratio than your own contributions, so simply wanting "Louis = Scum" branded about will not occur and I will defend Louis myself from any such malignant attacks upon his character.

tl;dr version: Don't bother to troll.

[Ser Clegane]

I think the thread has run its course and the discussion seems to shift focus rather on the person athn on the issue.

Closed