Acceptable: I don't like Sarah Palin because she was a hypocrite." (giving the reason why you feel she was hypocrite.) OR "I don't like Obama because he is not keeping his promise" (again giving a reason.)
- Palin is a jackass.
- Obama is a jackass
Neither are discussion. Both are insults. This is not the place for insults. If you need to attack a politician personally (not the politics or what he/she has done, but a personal attack,) that is NOT for Misc. That type of discussion may occur in TNZ.
If you want politics in here, this is how it will be. The mods will warn you if you get personal like you have been with political stuff.
You MAY still post political stuff. You may not post things which are insulting a person, not their policy and you may not say sexist or racist things.
Spaceman Spiff wrote:
There are plenty of us on staff who think this is an overreaction. The problem we were dealing with was many women on the board and the staff saying that they feel uncomfortable in Misc and avoid it due to some of these remarks. So plenty of us thought we need to try to keep it in check. I don't know why this got extended to the discussion of politics in Misc, because that played a very small part in the problem. I'm sure Bonz will be along to explain, but I'm hoping some of this announcement can be scaled back a bit.
Without dredging private BR stuff into the public domain, I certainly feel able to add my voice in public to those feeling that the idea of extending "flame protection" to public figures is very much a bridge too far in terms of moderation. I agree with Spiff
that seperate issues have very unhelpfully become conflated in these announcements.
However, I also feel obliged to also say that since I'm no longer responsible for any sort of policy enforcement in Misc, my comments here are purely personal (though obviously influenced by my past experience dealing with this board), written as a fairly frequent Misc poster rather than a staff member.