Losing with logic, throw it to someone else!

[Ceth]

Note Prior to Viewing: I wouldn't bring this here under normal circumstances, yet it seemed pretty skiddish to lay down the "law" and then close it to avoid any disagreement and/or possible humiliation for being a mess up as a moderator. So my rebuttal to the thread in Alternative lifestyles is as follows:

Mr Redundant Man, i warned you simply because you used a homophobic slur. as far as your intent in using that word, it didn't help your case to sarcastically theorize gay men get cranky when they don't have something up their ass -- a derogatory remark that just isn't appropriate. any further complaints you have on the matter belong in gw court, not here. continued complaints about it in this forum and the horrors of "mod abuse" will be regarded as SPAM and treated accordingly. and, as you have made this thread a pulpit from which you repeatedly bitch about my judgement, it is knee-deep in SPAM and now closed.

I'll list this out for you, since your reading comprehension skills are what got me here to begin with:

1. I didn't use a homophobic slur.
--A. I used the word "homo" (which, coincidentally is the commonly accepted shortened version of the term "homosexual", the politically correct term for a person who has an attraction to a member of the same sex.)
--B. To slur is "To talk about disparagingly or insultingly." Meaning that the overall tone in which the word was used was derogatory and in an instance of high bitterness or disgust towards the audience in which it's targeted.
----a. Strangely enough, I didn't insult one person in there. Also, it might startle you to notice that I didn't even insult the gay community as a whole. I know, your pre-emptive judgement of my post and intolerance towards me might have blurred your perception of my post, but there you have it. No insults made to any of the members at GW, or any group of people they are affiliated or grouped with. Unless you were to get offended about me calling heteros (gasp! another shortened version of a longer word used to define someone's sexual orientation!) butt-munches. But you wouldn't think to warn me for that, now would you...?
2. "Theorize gay men get cranky when they don't have something up their ass." Hmm...interesting theory...I wonder if I put down my findings anywhere for future documentation...
--A. With the general knowledge that my inquery involves my lack of understanding typical gay male behavior, it would be very easy to assess that I wouldn't make a theory concerning the entire gay male population.
--B. It was simply just a punny remark. A play on an over-used phrase meaning that someone's in a pissy mood. I was in no way trying to formulate a thesis on the idea that unless gay males constantly have something inside them they will be cranky.
3. SPAM? I wish everytime someone carried on a conversation concerning their disagreeance with my shoddy work, I could just shrug it off as SPAM...just because I can.
--A. It was completely on subject after your post which happened to add nothing to the thread. In fact, being as how a conversation went on regarding your misjudgement, I would say that the original inquery you mocked (good moderating attributes) was more off-topic.
----a. Funny how you consider a conversation we carried on SPAM, yet your inability to provide anything to the thread as a whole was a-ok. Must be another one of those benefits you get for having enough of a fan-base in the mod forum to convince someone with power that you should join them.

I'd really like to point out all the other reasons why your "judgement" was lax at best, but anyone who read the thread (http://forums.gamewinners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=428635) already has read them.

[tworow2]

That forum is almost as annoying as Console Combat...

[jackenape]

That forum is almost as annoying as Console Combat...
ur just sayn taht cuz ur a gamecubr fan boy!!!11

[tworow2]

Gamecube doesn't have a fan, it's not powerful enough to need it.

[Beowulf X]

While I don't think the violation was that bad, it was a violation. Homosexual slurs are enforced here on GW pretty strictly, and MrRedundantMan, you should have known that by now. Homo, as far as I know, is a derogitory term for homosexuals, so I would think this warning should stand.

[snakebite]

Derogatory means "Disparaging; belittling" or "with intent to cause harm". MRM had no intent on making his thread title offensive in any way. The word "homosexual" can be used as a slur just as easily as "homo". The word "gay" is used to disparage almost anything by high school kids, yet it is in many of the thread titles in that forum. But now, with bubba's rules, the wordwide abbreviation for "homosexual" is a derogatory slur. This warning is ridiculous.

[tworow2]

It's a failure on the part of the moderators. Nowhere in the rules (Which are from November 3rd 2003, the new mods haven't even touched them) does it define what terms may be used, which is very important in that specific forum.

MRM had no way of knowing.

[Klowny]

--A. I used the word "homo" (which, coincidentally is the commonly accepted shortened version of the term "homosexual", the politically correct term for a person who has an attraction to a member of the same sex.)
"Homo" is a slur, and NOT 'the commonly accepted shortened version of the term "homosexual"'

Just as "Jap" is a slur, and NOT the commonly accepted shortened version of the term "Japanese."

[snakebite]

And "Hetero" is a slur, rather than the shortened version of "heterosexual"? I think you'll find it's not. I'm not denying that "homo" can be used as a slur, but in this instance, it wasn't.

[Beowulf X]

I'm not denying that "homo" can be used as a slur, but in this instance, it wasn't.

Even if it wasn't meant as one, it still is one. There are plenty of acceptable synonyms that MRM could have used.

[snakebite]

Even if it wasn't meant as one, it still is one. There are plenty of acceptable synonyms that MRM could have used.Like "gay" for example, which is routinely used to insult homosexuals? It appears in many of the thread titles in that forum.

[tworow2]

I didn't word that well enough.

MRM is wrong, but the rules still don't give any proper guidelines. Were they properly written, his ignorance would have been prevented.

I'm not denying that "homo" can be used as a slur, but in this instance, it wasn't.

It's a slur if it's used by someone not gay. Like that word, if you're black.

A black gay man gets a whole vocabulary nobody else can use.

[snakebite]

It's a slur if it's used by someone not gay. Like that word, if you're black.

A black gay man gets a whole vocabulary nobody else can use.OK, say a gay man posted a topic in there, and mentioned "heteros" in the title. Do you think he would receive a warning? Going by your logic, he couldn't use that term because he's gay.

[tworow2]

No, I think that whole forum and everyone in it should be scoured from the site.

Look, I don't want to insult you, but I couldn't make it any more obvious that part was a joke unless I put "LOLOLOL" at the end.

[Tom]

I've never considered Homo worse then gay. Anyway, shouldn't allowances be made in a forum where people are discussing homosexuals and are more likely to slip up?

[ifyoucare]

Well, unless bubbamax is willing to rescind the warning then it will probably stand.

There is no chance that I would warn him for it if I were in the same situation, but I am not the mod. It is a slang term, no more, no less.

[bojangles]

I've never considered Homo worse then gay. Anyway, shouldn't allowances be made in a forum where people are discussing homosexuals and are more likely to slip up?
I agree with Thomas here. There should be allowances in every forum unless strictly defined. Using another example, if we were to outlaw the use of the word "black" to describe a black man, what else would we call ourselves? African American? Please. If a "homosexual" takes offense at being called a homo, queer, or gay, perhaps they shouldn't refer to themselves as such, or at least stop naming TV shows with "derrogatory" terms.

That said, Bubbamax gave a warning based on her interpretation of the rule (which does, in fact, broadly define it as a "homosexual slur"). Therefore, the warning should stand because Bubbamax gave a warning based on HER DISCRETION, which he was trusted to use wisely when he was selected to be a moderator. So for all of you members who are constantly bitching, yes WE DO HAVE MORE POWER THAN YOU. With it, more responsibility. So back off. It's a warning, not a forum block, not a ban.

I can't forsee any member winning a case in Gamewinners Court if all they do is try to convince someone that they didn't actually break the rules when the rules are not clearly defined. At that point, the authority is given to the moderator to make the determination. In this particular case, the admins/smods might want to clearly define which terms are acceptable and unacceptable for the future because it seems to be unfair.

I'm not known for straddling fences on any issue, but in this case if I were Bubbamax, I'd rescind the warning and push for the rule to be amended. As moderator of that particular forum, he is free to more clearly define the rules, which should DEFINITELY be done, given the nature of that particular forum.

[snakebite]

Well said, but bubbamax is female.

[bojangles]

Well said, but bubbamax is female.
Edited above post. Dually noted about bubbamax's sex.

See that? I assumed bubbmax was a guy (go figure). In actuality, she's a she. Honest misunderstanding...something we should allow for as moderators, particularly when rules are not clearly defined.

[Tom]

F*ck that. That blatant disregard you just showed could have offended people! I shall personally lead the call for your demodding post-haste!

[Retrospect]

I'll just echo what other people are saying, seeing as I agree with them:

MRM- Just because "homo" is short for "homosexual" doesn't make it instantly okay to use. I'm not against you or anything, it's just that the whole undertone of your post came across as a little homophobic. I'm not by any means, saying that you are.

bubbamax- I would suggest altering those rules a little bit. Something like a list or guidelines that differentiate the slurs from the simple abbreviation that MRM claimed he had done, which is entirely possible.

[Crazy Jamie]

I just knew as soon as I saw bubbamax's warning in that thread that a court case was going to come of this......

That said, Bubbamax gave a warning based on her interpretation of the rule (which does, in fact, broadly define it as a "homosexual slur"). Therefore, the warning should stand because Bubbamax gave a warning based on HER DISCRETION, which he was trusted to use wisely when he was selected to be a moderator. So for all of you members who are constantly bitching, yes WE DO HAVE MORE POWER THAN YOU. With it, more responsibility. So back off. It's a warning, not a forum block, not a ban.
That would have been my first paragraph, but I really can't put it better than that. So I'm not going to try.

Personally, and having read the thread over a couple of times in advance, I do consider bubbamax's warning to be harsh. As MRM has pointed out he didn't mean any offence by the term at all, and although many people have been warned for using such terms in ignorance in the past this does seem to be a much milder case than usual. Having said that, the warning was harsh. It wasn't wrong. It's up to bubbamax whether she wants to rescind it or not- I'll PM her about it now.

With regards to the rules in that forum, I do agree that they are too vague. However, the subject of updating the rules has been an ongoing issue for a number of months now. It's not as easy as it looks. In fact when bubbamax went to enforce some new rules before actually writing them I believe it sparked quite bit of controversy amongst the regulars. She therefore (quite wisely) thought it best to wait until poj returned from LOA (which she recently has) to actually go further with updating the rules. In other words it's on the list and will happen soon.

Having said that, it should be noted that the chances that MRM read the rules before posting are slim, regardless of the state of the rules ;)

[Ceth]

Having said that, it should be noted that the chances that MRM read the rules before posting are slim, regardless of the state of the rules ;)

That's crazy talk.

I guess the next thread I make in Alternative lifestyles will question why gays (or at least the ones running the forum) prefer to be categorized under a term used world-over to express disgust rather than a shortened version of "homosexual."

And secondly, that I will from this point forward take offense to any mentioning of heterosexuality through terms other than "heterosexual" or "not gay." "Hetero" and "straight" are just too derogatory as they come off the gay tongue. Furthermore, I suppose I'll start the petition to ban the use of the word "bi" to describe "bi-sexual" members of our forum who are constantly plagued by the slurs put forth by their peers.

Or wait...maybe that's just a silly excuse to be offended over terms free of harsh tones. Can't take any chances, though...the feelings of our heterosexual and bisexual members are at stake, and I for one am not going to stand idly by as we pollute our communication systems with such outlandish slurs.

:roll:

Fine, the warning stands. Just know it's illogical, and her bitterness shows me only that she did it out of some prior spite she held for me or something I said. I sincerely doubt I would've been warned otherwise...

[tworow2]

HER DISCRETION, which he was trusted to use wisely when he was selected to be a moderator.

I wonder if I was ever that naive.

Eh, that's not the issue today.

At that point, the authority is given to the moderator to make the determination.

Not when the problem exists because of the moderator(s).

This forum exists because it was believed moderator discretion wasn't always good enough. That's not a defense.

With regards to the rules in that forum, I do agree that they are too vague

They're not too vague, they're non-existant. The forum doesn't have it's rules, it has a repost of the main forum rules.

Also, she should forget poj. The LOA is bullsh*t, poj has been on LOA for years.

[Crazy Jamie]

The forum doesn't have it's rules, it has a repost of the main forum rules.
Yes, which are too vague for a forum like AL.

The LOA is bullsh*t, poj has been on LOA for years. Trust me- the LOA she's been on for the past few months is anything but bullsh*t.

[tworow2]

But it shouldn't be an issue because she should have been demodded the first time. Plus, our opinions of bullsh*t may differ greatly.

[Tommy Boy]

I can't forsee any member winning a case in Gamewinners Court if all they do is try to convince someone that they didn't actually break the rules when the rules are not clearly defined.
I believe I accomplished that.

On another note, it's lucky that MRM got off easy with just a warning. Especially if it's only his first or second.

[shortkut]

Just as "Jap" is a slur, and NOT the commonly accepted shortened version of the term "Japanese."
i thought it stood for Jewish American Princess…:-\

[Rabid]

Trust me- the LOA she's been on for the past few months is anything but bullsh*t.
My guess is either cronic constipation, she's having a baby, or she's getting married to I/O Error.

As for this, personally I don't think it was a slur, but no one cares about what I think :tease:

[Commander Cool]

You know what the thing is?

Since everyone associates the the term "homo" as a sexual slur, saying that in AL will get you in hot water. However, MRM did not mean it as a slur.

The least he could have done was use the term "Homosexual", so he wouldn't get in trouble...however, homo could also mean "homosapien", but, Science & alternate lifestyles don't mix..

Yes, amends for the AL forum need to be made, but people should use common sense as well (Midniteklown's example).

The warning should stand, but it should not have that much severity. However, things need to be changed.

[bubbamax]

alrighty, then.

I'll list this out for you, since your reading comprehension skills are what got me here to begin with:
it's charming little tidbits like this one that didn't inspire me to show leniency. you're trying to convince me to rescind a warning by insulting me. good plan.

Considering your intolerance and quick-drawn attitude involving a straight man's inqueries regarding insight from gay males about gay males and common behavior, perhaps you have no business replying within the inquery and should stick to doing your job?
hint: warning members for breaking rules is my job. "homo" is a slur. and poj's remark about t-dome regulars indicated you, which makes me wonder how you couldn't have visited that forum often enough to not notice klown's zero tolerance announcement....which lists the word "homo" among those that are unacceptable. hmm. just a thought.

I'm not sorry that an over anxious moderator jumped the gun on a post that is deemed correct by the rules put in place and the lack of offense taken by the members of this forum.

I do believe the only one offended was the maxed out bubba. And probably not even her.
here's where you're confused. it actually doesn't matter if someone says "f*g" in a post, for example, and absolutely no one posting in that thread gives a good goddamn. it doesn't mean it doesn't break the rules of the forum.

It's not a moderator's place to let personal bias get in the way of logic. They're here to enforce the rules, not make a fool of themself when they've got nothing to go on. I'm fairly sure that had I had a completely different title, I would've recieved a similar response from her.
another example of your choice to jump to conclusions about my opinion and use it as a defense. people post crap in a.l. from time to time that i personally think is so devoid of any intelligent thought a comatose monkey could put together a better argument. but if they aren't breaking a rule, funny thing -- i don't warn them. and yes, boy-howdy, you hit upon the whole point, backwards: had you titled it something completely different, i wouldn't have warned you. i likely would have said choose more appropriate jokes, due to who you were trying to attract to answer your question, but that would have been it.

Strangely enough, I didn't insult one person in there. Also, it might startle you to notice that I didn't even insult the gay community as a whole. I know, your pre-emptive judgement of my post and intolerance towards me might have blurred your perception of my post, but there you have it. No insults made to any of the members at GW, or any group of people they are affiliated or grouped with. Unless you were to get offended about me calling heteros (gasp! another shortened version of a longer word used to define someone's sexual orientation!) butt-munches. But you wouldn't think to warn me for that, now would you...?
here's an experiment you can try at home -- go up to your neighbors in question and very politely say you wanted to welcome them to the block, and out of genuine curiosity as a straight male you were hoping they could explain something to you about 'homos in general.' i'll betcha a dollar they don't give you a hug.

your continued cries of "but i can say hetero!" is a false analogy. straight people are the majority, and don't suffer the discrimination gay people do. there is less sensitivity among heterosexuals about being labeled because it isn't associated with oppression in its many forms -- physical assaults, denial of rights, hate crimes. same with white people. (there are of course exceptions to every rule, yes, this is a general assessment.) so no, "hetero" is not a slur. "homo" is, whether or not you think it should be. you can put away the "fake-aghast" bit now.

SPAM? I wish everytime someone carried on a conversation concerning their disagreeance with my shoddy work, I could just shrug it off as SPAM...just because I can.
yes, SPAM. it's the "alternative lifestyles" forum, not the "you're such a crappy mod" forum. disagree, fine. but it was not the appropriate place to launch into your ill-tempered woe-is-me rants. that's what this gw court forum is for, not to mention you could have avoided all this trouble had you addressed them more calmly to begin with. you could have pm'd me as well. you turned your own thread into a huge argument that i didn't think belonged there, as it left behind your question long ago. --that doesn't mean i think you shouldn't get to discuss your initial question. by all means, start another thread. i don't think the issue itself is inappropriate, nor SPAM. just your behavior.

all that being said: the rules are not as specific as i would like them to be, but i haven't been comfortable changing them without poj's input. while i think it should be obvious whether or not a word is a slur, i think it would help prevent such debates in the future were there a specific list, making the responsibility following them clearly the members'. for this reason (and only this reason) i'll rescind your warning, mrm.

i'm off to take a page from klown's book and see about putting up a very specific zero tolerance rule.

[Dantilus]

hint: warning members for breaking rules is my job.Your job is to maintain forum stability, not seek and destroy.

[jackenape]

hint: warning members for breaking rules is my job. "homo" is a slur. and poj's remark about t-dome regulars indicated you, which makes me wonder how you couldn't have visited that forum often enough to not notice klown's zero tolerance announcement....which lists the word "homo" among those that are unacceptable. hmm. just a thought.
You can't use rules specific to the Dome as a pretext for your warnings in AL. The Dome isn't a defacto support group for gays: the only way those words would be used there are as slurs.

To paraphrase: there's calling someone a homo, and then there's calling someone a homo.

[Crazy Jamie]

i'll rescind your warning, mrm.
Just going to pick this out- in case people don't bother to read the whole thing and miss it.

[Tom]

your continued cries of "but i can say hetero!" is a false analogy. straight people are the majority, and don't suffer the discrimination gay people do. there is less sensitivity among heterosexuals about being labeled because it isn't associated with oppression in its many forms -- physical assaults, denial of rights, hate crimes. same with white people. (there are of course exceptions to every rule, yes, this is a general assessment.) so no, "hetero" is not a slur. "homo" is, whether or not you think it should be. you can put away the "fake-aghast" bit now.

Bullsh*t. I can and will say 'Bi' without being warned. Further, your bit about labels conveniantly ignores that fact that 'gay' is for some reason acceptable, despite it being used in a far more derogatory sense that homo ever is.


all that being said: the rules are not as specific as i would like them to be, but i haven't been comfortable changing them without poj's input. while i think it should be obvious whether or not a word is a slur, i think it would help prevent such debates in the future were there a specific list, making the responsibility following them clearly the members'. for this reason (and only this reason) i'll rescind your warning, mrm.

What do you mean by 'Haven't been comfortable?'. It's one thing waiting for an active co-mod to approve rules, but if you feel a forum needs beetter defined rules but have to wait for someone to come back from LOA before you darest write them and put them up, what the f*ck are you doing moderating it in the first place?

Still, at least the warning was rescinded.

[jackenape]

All right, enough's enough. If any of you f*cking knuckle-draggers really can't see how calling someone "homo" can be construed as offensive, then maybe you should be using your keyboard to club down dinner rather than trying to type some bullsh*t semantical rant on the ins and outs of proper word abbreviation. When it was MRM vs. bubba, it was funny. 'Dundant knew exactly what he was doing, and watching bubba get tweaked out over the matter more than provided its fair share of chuckles, but that doesn't change the fact that the warning was completely legit, and that the rest of you have completely sucked out all of the humor in the subject. So seriously, shut the f*ck up already.

[bojangles]

F*ck that. That blatant disregard you just showed could have offended people! I shall personally lead the call for your demodding post-haste!
Awesome. And yes, I couldn't say that in my post, but God knows I was thinking it. De-mod away!!!

Not when the problem exists because of the moderator(s).
They're not too vague, they're non-existant. The forum doesn't have it's rules, it has a repost of the main forum rules.Didn't I say that?


All right, enough's enough. If any of you f*cking knuckle-draggers really can't see how calling someone "homo" can be construed as offensive, then maybe you should be using your keyboard to club down dinner rather than trying to type some bullsh*t semantical rant on the ins and outs of proper word abbreviation. Oh...that's right. I forgot. If your argument isn't consistent with jackenape's, you're automatically a neanderthal. Tolerance means elimination of contradicting viewpoints. Open wide and let jackenape shove it down your throat!When it was MRM vs. bubba, it was funny. 'Dundant knew exactly what he was doing, and watching bubba get tweaked out over the matter more than provided its fair share of chuckles, but that doesn't change the fact that the warning was completely legit, and that the rest of you have completely sucked out all of the humor in the subject. So seriously, shut the f*ck up already.How prententious. I think most people are quite aware that the warning was legit. It's the fact that it was unwarranted that is being argued here. And the fact is, bubbamax retracted it. I fail to see any humor in the situation. But maybe that's because my neanderthal brain isn't as developed as your (liberal) one.

[jackenape]

Oh...that's right. I forgot. If your argument isn't consistent with jackenape's, you're automatically a neanderthal.
More precisely, you're a neanderthal in the wrong.

Tolerance means elimination of contradicting viewpoints. Open wide and let jackenape shove it down your throat!
Who said anything about tolerance? We're talking blatant slurs here. Apples and oranges.

How prententious. I think most people are quite aware that the warning was legit. It's the fact that it was unwarranted that is being argued here.
Go back and read some of the replies. There are more than a few that don't see the legitimacy of the warning.

And the fact is, bubbamax retracted it. I fail to see any humor in the situation.
Consistency was always one of your stronger suits.

But maybe that's because my neanderthal brain isn't as developed as your (liberal) one.
...and now that you've had your "no sh*t" moment of the day, you can rest easy. :)

If you don't mind, how about keeping your jacken-prissiness confined to one forum? I'd rather not have to worry about offending your fragile little self in every single thread I participate in.

[tworow2]

Didn't I say that?

Not before me, but you can have your moment.

[Northern Lights]

Yeah and by the way, we'd prefer not to be called Brits in the British Forum. Anybody caught doing so will be warned.

Also, don't call the Thunderdome the T-Dome, it degrades it and makes it sound less intimidating.

See my case?

[bojangles]

Who said anything about tolerance? We're talking blatant slurs here. Apples and oranges.

You weren't talking about tolerance when you said
All right, enough's enough. If any of you f*cking knuckle-draggers really can't see how calling someone "homo" can be construed as offensive, then maybe you should be using your keyboard to club down dinner rather than trying to type some bullsh*t semantical rant on the ins and outs of proper word abbreviation.?

What exactly were you referring to then? You obviously think that some allegedly less educated people should adopt your belief. This is the common view of those who promote "tolerance" of alternative lifestyles.

What I find ironic is that you chastise the "f*cking knuckle-draggers" that "really can't see how calling someone 'homo' can be construed as offensive"...lol...

[jackenape]

See my case?
Nope.

You weren't talking about tolerance when you said...? What exactly were you referring to then?
Just a bit of common decency and sense.

You obviously think that some allegedly less educated people should adopt your belief. This is the common view of those who promote "tolerance" of alternative lifestyles.
I don't care what anyone believes about any group of people. If you don't like gays, Mexicans, the Irish...it's really no skin off my nose. Just don't try and bullsh*t me about it.

What I find ironic is that you chastise the "f*cking knuckle-draggers" that "really can't see how calling someone 'homo' can be construed as offensive"...lol...
Would would the term "troglodyte" have been more appropriate.? I'm not much up on what is and isn't considered a slur on genetic throwbacks. :)

And again, your trying to compare apples and oranges. Empathy is what makes a mixed society work, so unless you're blatantly trying to be offensive, I can only assume that you're a bit lacking if you really can't understand that certain terms, said by certain people, no matter the context, can be considered offensive. That's not political correctness, that, again, is just common courtesy.

['Sabator]

You're a bit f*cking late.

['Sabator]

Sorry for the DP, but my last post was aimed at Northern Lights, I didn't realise there was a page 2.

[Northern Lights]

You're a bit f*cking late.

Explain...

['Sabator]

This case was resolved a while ago and has now degenerated into a simple bitchfight.

[Gorg]

But it's still entertaining!

[snakebite]

GWCU?

[Crazy Jamie]

Yeah, why not.

[poj]

It's a failure on teh part of teh moderators. Nowheer in teh rules (Which are from November 3rd 2003, teh new mods haven't even touched tehm) does it define what terms may be used, which is very important in that specific forum.

MRM had no way of knowing.
Agree. Before mai life disintegrated in a wholesale way, I had been trying to formulate some rules for teh forum with teh Juggling of some of Jam's words. I never got that far; nads it's doubtful I will get teh time for some weeks. For that I apologise.

"Homo" is a slur, nads NOT 'teh commonly accepted shortened version of teh term "homosexual"'

Just as "Jap" is a slur, nads NOT teh commonly accepted shortened version of teh term "Japanese."
I believe teh thread title was "Homos". That is derogatory. I also could be convinced that it was lack of thought nads slight annoyance with his neighbours that caused MRM to use it as his title.

Well.... eitehr that or he was being provocative ;)

Also, she should forget poj. teh LOA is bullsh*t, poj has been on LOA for years.
Nope, only been on total LOA since teh beginning of 2005, prior to that it was more of a ROA.

Also, I now have a bit more opportunity to get online now, nads a braodbnads connection, so expect to see a bit more of me. :)

Uh, oh yeah, no baby, no constipation, wedding liekly to be in 2006. :D

[snakebite]

I believe teh thread title was "Homos". That is derogatory."Gay" is used far more often than "homo" in a derogatory and disparaging manner, yet it's considered acceptable in that forum? Do you think that makes sense?

['Sabator]

HA HA HA I AM USING THE INTERNET

[Ceth]

"Gay" is used far more often than "homo" in a derogatory nads disparaging manner, yet it's considered acceptable in that forum? Do u think that makes sense?

We're dealing with alrternative lifestyles...not logic.

[snakebite]

We're dealing with alrternative lifestyles...not logic.*Looks at thread title* Hmmm...
So you're saying that forum has no logic?

[Fightingest Jester]

Apparently...

[Ceth]

*Looks at thread title* Hmmm...
So ur saying that forum has no logic?

The forum as defined by the users? Maybe a little.
The forum as defined by the rules and justifications? That's precisely what I'm saying.