This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]

This message was self-deleted by its author (Gormy Cuss) on Sun Mar 10, 2013, 11:42 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

202 replies, 70339 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Cannot reply in locked threads

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

202 replies	Author	Time	Post
This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]	Gormy Cuss	Dec 2012	OP
agreed	La Lioness Priyanka	Dec 2012	#1
Agreed -- and I also agree with LLP's suggestion downthread	obamanut2012	Dec 2012	#2
Thank you and yes.	Starry Messenger	Dec 2012	#3
I agree. I now know that it is absolutely needed.	Democracyinkind	Dec 2012	#4
Agreed	hedgehog	Dec 2012	#5
thank you. i too support the proposal of adding more clarity to this issue in TOS. nt	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#6
Agreed. IMHO the folks who are posting sexist	kestrel91316	Dec 2012	#7
Yeppp n/t	HonEur12	Dec 2012	#163
I'd like to see the language before I endorse it. nt	rrneck	Dec 2012	#8
As would I. Because even as a rape survivor I think a lot of the complaints here have been over the	peacebird	Dec 2012	#10
Nah, you won't be PPR'd.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#13
Do you think sexism and misogyny should be in the TOS?	obamanut2012	Dec 2012	#19
I don't know. It depends on how you put it in there.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#21
So, you are ambivalent that sexism and misogyny should be TOS offenses	obamanut2012	Dec 2012	#22
Strawman arguments should have some sort of repercussions too... n/t	DRoseDARs	Dec 2012	#27
Im ambivalent about endorsing a change in the TOS sight unseen.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#32
it really would have nothing to do with us. skinner would decide and word it. i trust him	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#43
I can understand that.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#59
he has it on du2. he can transfer it over. go find that. nt	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#66
Cool. Why dont you copy and paste it here. nt	rrneck	Dec 2012	#75
no. go find it. dont. i dont care. i am so fuckin tired of these fuckin games. nt	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#85
Well, if it's not worth a right click on your mouse	rrneck	Dec 2012	#95
What language from DU2 would you like transferred? Here are links to the rules:	Make7	Dec 2012	#147
IMHO, a subset of that second link.	Gormy Cuss	Dec 2012	#161
how would YOU word it ??	Tuesday Afternoon	Dec 2012	#31
I'd like to see what I'm endorsing first.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#63
Pretend you have been given the chance to word it. Write it into the Tos just like you are Skinner -	Tuesday Afternoon	Dec 2012	#72
I don't have an opinion yet.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#74
? you want I should word it for your approval ?	Tuesday Afternoon	Dec 2012	#79
Yes. That is why the OP was posted.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#94
refresh my memory - when did we get to vote on the ToS first go round? --	Tuesday Afternoon	Dec 2012	#103
I don't know that it needs to be reworded	rrneck	Dec 2012	#110
ok. understood and agreed the discussion should take place in Meta. There is a thread over there.	Tuesday Afternoon	Dec 2012	#121
Thanks.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#133
I agree with you. It really never was about the words HH used. It was his attitude -	Tuesday Afternoon	Dec 2012	#136
+1000	countryjake	Dec 2012	#151
I agree I'd like to see how it's worded and it's not too much to ask..	one_voice	Dec 2012	#33
skinner would decide on the phrasin and doubt he would be asking us, if he chose to adjust TOS.	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#39
Oh, I misunderstood...	one_voice	Dec 2012	#51
oh gosh, well, i do not know. i think we all have an idea that we would have influence in the	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#54
That would be the language	obamanut2012	Dec 2012	#62
Then that's easy.	Chan790	Dec 2012	#106
works for me.... nt	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#111
The admins will be the ones deciding how to word their own TOS...	Little Star	Dec 2012	#164
This is good. We need to have those two words "sexism and misogyny" in the text.	CTyankee	Dec 2012	#167
My expectation would be the inverse actually...	Chan790	Dec 2012	#88
I see the use of the word gender as the basic problem.	DURHAM D	Dec 2012	#56
If someone were to say...	one_voice	Dec 2012	#83
So you are against clarifying language?	DURHAM D	Dec 2012	#86
No, I said I wasn't against it in my last comment....	one_voice	Dec 2012	#93
okay. got it. thanks	DURHAM D	Dec 2012	#96
No member will decide the language. If the admins agree with proposal they will decide the language.	Little Star	Dec 2012	#36
How would you like for it to read? nt	rrneck	Dec 2012	#70
Personally, just adding the two words would be fine by me. Then like with all TOS..	Little Star	Dec 2012	#135
I'd have to go the other way.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#139
But we already DO ban words. We don't allow "n***r" or "fg".	CTyankee	Dec 2012	#168
Actually, for some reason I thought Little Star	rrneck	Dec 2012	#169
But I am wondering if we set such a high standards when it comes to race? Isn't the use of	CTyankee	Dec 2012	#170
About the best answer i can give you is little more than a policy statement	rrneck	Dec 2012	#171
but why is it so difficult to do this for sexist speech when it isn't for racist speech?	CTyankee	Dec 2012	#172
I see no difference.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#173
Two things: I am not familiar with what transpired with SalmonEnchantedEvening, so I don't	CTyankee	Dec 2012	#176
Well, like i said in #158	rrneck	Dec 2012	#179
Is this any different from the evaluation process we already do here, with regard to racist and	CTyankee	Dec 2012	#180
I don't necessarily agree with the inclusion of those terms.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#181
Well, as to your first point: is it any harder to discern sexism than it is racism or homophobia?	CTyankee	Dec 2012	#182
I've only been a member for four years	rrneck	Dec 2012	#183
As we speak (type?) the discussion is on about Salmon's decision to leave and about HH's wife's	CTyankee	Dec 2012	#184
I agree.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#185
I love that you are an artist, but we do disagree about whether there will be a change to the TOS.	CTyankee	Dec 2012	#186
So glad to see everyone working together on this.	DURHAM D	Dec 2012	#24
I agree	obamanut2012	Dec 2012	#26
yes... I see this as a very positive opportunity....	hlthe2b	Dec 2012	#53
Glad to see you.	DURHAM D	Dec 2012	#58
Back at ya....	hlthe2b	Dec 2012	#61
Skinner makes the decision on TOS violations.	boston bean	Dec 2012	#35
How would you like for it to read?	rrneck	Dec 2012	#73
Why yes I have.	boston bean	Dec 2012	#77
Thank you.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#78
why the sarcastic remark.	boston bean	Dec 2012	#82
Hmmmmm. More resistance.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#104
this	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#108
OMG, leave me alone please. this is becoming harassment.	boston bean	Dec 2012	#115
I agree.	graham4anything	Dec 2012	#9
"It should go without saying, but it needs to be said."	redqueen	Dec 2012	#12
Agreed. nt	redqueen	Dec 2012	#11
Honestly I've been avoiding these threads	d_r	Dec 2012	#14
Thanks for speaking out d_r.	Little Star	Dec 2012	#17
Beautifully said.	redqueen	Dec 2012	#18
Thanks, d_r. Well said.	freshwest	Dec 2012	#23
Wonderful post.Thank you. nt	sufrommich	Dec 2012	#25
Thank you so much for posting.	boston bean	Dec 2012	#37
can i record please, lol. i guess what i see is that for so many of us it is progression	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#38
you are too cool, d_r	Skittles	Dec 2012	#45
Awesome post	gollygee	Dec 2012	#64
IMO, your post is right-on-the-spot.	salin	Dec 2012	#65
No argument here	Tsiyu	Dec 2012	#107
d_r, thank you for laying it out so clearly.	Gormy Cuss	Dec 2012	#124
Thanks friend.	Starry Messenger	Dec 2012	#145
This should be an OP for EVERYONE to read. Well said d_r. Thank you. n/t	auntAgonist	Dec 2012	#156
+1. Well said. n/t	FSogol	Dec 2012	#165
Thank you!	myrna minx	Dec 2012	#166
Agree. Would love to see the women of DU make this so.nt	sufrommich	Dec 2012	#15
The last few days make it pretty obvious that DU needs...	Little Star	Dec 2012	#16
I also support this effort and believe it is needed. n/t	MadrasT	Dec 2012	#20
K&R. thanks.	Tuesday Afternoon	Dec 2012	#28
I agree	Ohio Joe	Dec 2012	#29
Yes	Kaleva	Dec 2012	#30
I agree that misogyny and sexism need to be added to the TOS...	Violet_Crumble	Dec 2012	#34
I am in 100% total support of this.	boston bean	Dec 2012	#40
yes	obamanut2012	Dec 2012	#57
thanks for opening this topic, we need input from Admin on this.	Whisp	Dec 2012	#41
yes	irisblue	Dec 2012	#42
No, it's not the best place; Meta would be better.	muriel_volestrangler	Dec 2012	#44
But it is about helping people.	Hatchling	Dec 2012	#188
sad that it is needed	Skittles	Dec 2012	#46
I support the idea, but I'm not sure it will help	Scootaloo	Dec 2012	#47
It will help with those who don't see it spelled out clearly, understand	boston bean	Dec 2012	#50
The problem is language is not static	jeff47	Dec 2012	#130
Yes. It needs to be clarified.	greatauntoftriplets	Dec 2012	#48
Agreed	LiberalLoner	Dec 2012	#49
Absolutely. It must be in the TOS since the absence	DevonRex	Dec 2012	#52
I've already posted my thoughts on the subject	Major Nikon	Dec 2012	#55
some clarifications could be things like	La Lioness Priyanka	Dec 2012	#60
+1 this -- great ideas	obamanut2012	Dec 2012	#68
those are very good ideas	boston bean	Dec 2012	#81
Sounds pretty complicated	Major Nikon	Dec 2012	#90
Agreed n/t	gollygee	Dec 2012	#67
So a subjective judgement will deem a violation of TOS?	Gman	Dec 2012	#69
being against marriage equality may seem subjective to some	La Lioness Priyanka	Dec 2012	#76
Well, unfortunately a lot of people here see some kind of slight in just about anything	Gman	Dec 2012	#89
yet some do. as should this one	La Lioness Priyanka	Dec 2012	#119
Isn't that the same with all the mentioned bigotries?	obamanut2012	Dec 2012	#80
just look at the hh wife thread, how many defended	boston bean	Dec 2012	#84
adminstration decide the tos. that simple. regardless of how they clarify the tos, they are the	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#92
Point well taken	Gman	Dec 2012	#99
absolutely. and they do not rush. they take the time. and a person gets plenty of rope	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#102
There should be	ismnotwasm	Dec 2012	#71
Somebody got a primer on the reason for this?	michigandem58	Dec 2012	#87
Sexism has no place on DU. nt	s-cubed	Dec 2012	#91
All for it. Here's the language from DU 2 that is pretty damn clear:	NYC Liberal	Dec 2012	#97
this. nt	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#105
I find it disgusting that many people apparently need to have this spelled out for them.	NYC Liberal	Dec 2012	#109
yup. nt	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#114
Thank you.	DURHAM D	Dec 2012	#113
Same here re: ageism. I noticed a good amount of it in 2008.	NYC Liberal	Dec 2012	#132
Me too.	Little Star	Dec 2012	#154
I like the first two paragraphs. I dont like banning specific words.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#118
I assume you are aware that the admin wrote it.	DURHAM D	Dec 2012	#122
That's what this thread is about.	rrneck	Dec 2012	#129
Yes, this.	MadrasT	Dec 2012	#125
I support a change in the TOS	maddezmom	Dec 2012	#98
I am in favor of addressing these issues with specificity in the TOS. Juries will fine tune	WheelWalker	Dec 2012	#100
No bigoted hate speech.	Behind the Aegis	Dec 2012	#101
Your suggested changes look to me to be just what is needed...	Spazito	Dec 2012	#120
This one looks good. nt	rrneck	Dec 2012	#126
that works also. nt	seabeyond	Dec 2012	#131
yeah, this works.	one_voice	Dec 2012	#140
K&R!	hrmjustin	Dec 2012	#112
I think Meta is the place you want to be	Tsiyu	Dec 2012	#116
Thanks, Tsiyu.	Gormy Cuss	Dec 2012	#141
it is depressing that, on what is supposed to be a progressive, democratic board, we actually have	niyad	Dec 2012	#117
I agree, clarity is needed in the TOS beyond using "gender"...	Spazito	Dec 2012	#123
An explicit statement will help everyone	caraher	Dec 2012	#127
I support an amendment to the TOS to make a prohibition against misogyny clear.	yardwork	Dec 2012	#128
Absolutely not. Words, alone, devoid of meaning should not be banned. Messages of hatred may be.	leveymg	Dec 2012	#134
not following ...	DURHAM D	Dec 2012	#138
So, a;; s;urs shuld eb allowed then?	obamanut2012	Dec 2012	#146
It all depends upon the context, what is the meaning and message.	leveymg	Dec 2012	#152
You know, I hate the word wars, and am often on the side of those who post silly and juvenile	msanthrope	Dec 2012	#137
Agreed.	JoeyT	Dec 2012	#142
Aye.	JustJoe	Dec 2012	#143
Agreed,	LadyHawkAZ	Dec 2012	#144
great idea!	bettyellen	Dec 2012	#148
Cross posting from Starry Messenger's thread..	Permanut	Dec 2012	#149
I understand the functionality of preventing people from using the absence of that specific language	patrice	Dec 2012	#150
Don't know where it's best to propose it...	countryjake	Dec 2012	#153
I support this! n/t	wildflower	Dec 2012	#155
What constitutes 'sexism' here?	The Doctor.	Dec 2012	#157
Having thought about this TOS thing	rrneck	Dec 2012	#158
Unfortunatly it appears to be needed	One_Life_To_Give	Dec 2012	#159
I support this! nt	stevenleser	Dec 2012	#160
It is a fine place, but not the only place	Tumbulu	Dec 2012	#162
One could argue this is already covered by the TOS in several places	justiceischeap	Dec 2012	#174
I can't speak to the instance you reference about this poster who is leaving since I have not	CTyankee	Dec 2012	#177
Looks like it is, GC. Nice idea, thanks. nt	Zorra	Dec 2012	#175
I think it already very much does...	ellisonz	Dec 2012	#178
I think clarifying that sexism and misogny are unacceptable can only benefit discussion.	misschicken	Dec 2012	#187
Great idea.	Hatchling	Dec 2012	#189
has Skinner said Anything about this to anyone?	Whisp	Dec 2012	#190
No comment AFAIK	Gormy Cuss	Mar 2013	#194
I hope he realizes how insulting that is.	Whisp	Mar 2013	#195
No it's fine as it is.	Waiting For Everyman	Dec 2012	#191
Agreed	wryter2000	Feb 2013	#192
Yes. I think it's time our terms of service included a prohibition on denigrating 51% of the	Squinch	Mar 2013	#193
I support this 100%.	MineralMan	Mar 2013	#196
Kick'n Reck'n	Vanje	Mar 2013	#197
if nothing else, i would like to hear if this has been the administrations expectation and they	seabeyond	Mar 2013	#198
Its worse than it was 10 years ago here	olddots	Mar 2013	#199
Are you talking about DU.2 or DU.1?	Rhiannon12866	Mar 2013	#200
This message was self-deleted by its author	seaglass	Mar 2013	#201
Yes, unfortunately we have the answer.	Gormy Cuss	Mar 2013	#202