Dante is a complete wuss.

[stitches]

So what is your solution? Infractions for every gay reference? What about posts that offend people (intended or not) on religion, nationality, race, spirituality, gender, financial or some other area? Is there a requisite number of people that need to be offended first? or just one? What is acceptable and what isn't? What about when the implied offense is BS and it's a personal vendetta (quite common on here)?

It depends on what you aim for this community to be. IRL I'm against censorship of almost any kind(exceptions being things like threats of violence, libel, etc.), I have no problem with Westboro baptist church screaming "God hates ****" on street corners or where ever public they feel like. (I just keep the right to call them insufferable bigots for it) Every private place(this being one), though, can enforce rules that are conducive to making the place better to visit by it's members/users/clients, easier to operate or whatever other criteria you want to meet.

There is already some censorship here. For me saying naughty words is the least offensive thing in the word, yet they are the first thing banned here. It's a family forum you say, kids visit and would be corrupted by such profanity. So **** and **** are blurred, but then you allow those same kids to see people using gay/racial/religious slurs, attacking members using gay/racial/religious slurs(maybe even themselve), etc.

So yah, it's not about censorship, there already is some - it's not like this forum is some bastion of freedom of speech where fighters for all worthy causes come to express their opinions and to be heard(no matter how much DutchJazzer thinks that's what this place is for), it's about the type of environment you want this place to be. If you had to ask me personally, I'd ban any flames and personal attacks to begin with. I've been around a ton of places and the best ones to spend my time in have usually been the ones where that's not tolerated. It's conducive to better discussions and less pointless and meaningless exchanges... From then on, you decide what to tolerate when not used in a personal attack - racism, homophobia, misogyny, xenophobia... I don't know. You might decide to let it all in, or you might decide to draw a line somewhere... Depends on what kind of place you want this forum to be.

In this sense, this thread is the definition of what I was talking about. It was made with the sole purpose of flaming and attacking personally people, I really don't see any other purpose to it.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

It depends on what you aim for this community to be. IRL I'm against censorship of almost any kind(exceptions being things like threats of violence, libel, etc.), I have no problem with Westboro baptist church screaming "God hates ****" on street corners or where ever public they feel like. (I just keep the right to call them insufferable bigots for it) Every private place(this being one), though, can enforce rules that are conducive to making the place better to visit by it's members/users/clients, easier to operate or whatever other criteria you want to meet.

There is already some censorship here. For me saying naughty words is the least offensive thing in the word, yet they are the first thing banned here. It's a family forum you say, kids visit and would be corrupted by such profanity. So **** and **** are blurred, but then you allow those same kids to see people using gay/racial/religious slurs, attacking members using gay/racial/religious slurs(maybe even themselve), etc.

So yah, it's not about censorship, there already is some - it's not like this forum is some bastion of freedom of speech where fighters for all worthy causes come to express their opinions and to be heard(no matter how much DutchJazzer thinks that's what this place is for), it's about the type of environment you want this place to be. If you had to ask me personally, I'd ban any flames and personal attacks to begin with. I've been around a ton of places and the best ones to spend my time in have usually been the ones where that's not tolerated. It's conducive to better discussions and less pointless and meaningless exchanges... From then on, you decide what to tolerate when not used in a personal attack.

In this sense, this thread is the definition of it. It was made with the sole purpose of flaming and attacking personally people, I really don't see any other purpose to it.

The only kind of censorship I like here is the NSFW pictures and stuff, because you don't want to be scrolling through Jazzfanz in a public place and have some weird/pervy **** come on the page.

 

[UGLI baby]

Opinions never are.

You are so strange.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I had no idea Xsy was gay. I should try to follow JFC's personal lives more closely.

Arent you gay also? Your gaydar broken?

 

[Siro]

Arent you gay also? Your gaydar broken?

I'm not gay. You suck one **** and suddenly everyone thinks you're gay!

 

[UGLI baby]

Lol

 

[Stoked]

You are so strange.

Why? Because some people think it was a shot at XSY personally and some don't think it was personal but general (not that one is better or worse than the other)? Those are opinions.

 

[franklin]

This is the gayest thread of all time. Especially the UGLI/Cunning linguist posts.

 

[Keefe]

He was 100% talking about Xsy, as Xsy was the main person who got mad.

I don't even really care, just pointing out the obvious that he was referencing Xsy.

Is XSY a Ute fan doe?

 

[Keefe]

I'm not gay. You suck one **** and suddenly everyone thinks you're gay!

Uh, come again?

 

[Xsy]

Why? Because some people think it was a shot at XSY personally and some don't think it was personal but general (not that one is better or worse than the other)? Those are opinions.

Yo, it clearly was a personal shot at me. It might have been an attempt at a light hearted joke, but it was clearly aimed at me.

I dunno, whenever someone questions my masculinity based on my orientation, I just see red. It's definitely a soft spot for me. I hate being stereotyped, and whether it was a joke or not, it set me off.

Even if it wasn't a personal shot at me, the dude made a thread specifically to bring up old drama that had ended days ago. I'm not sure why this topic wasn't just closed on the spot? It's not hard to see, man. lol

 

[Revolution 9]

Talk about derailing a thread...

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I invite you all to check this link. https://jazzfanz.com/memberlist.php?&pp=30&order=desc&sort=joindate

Forum filters out any account with fewer than 10 posts.

First page doesn't even have enough new accounts from the entire year, as the last account goes into OCTOBER of last year. So including the entire season that just passed, you can only fill new members enough to fill one page, and I'd say the majority of those regular posters are alternate accounts or re-registrations.

As been mentioned in this thread, there haven't been a ton of other options for Utah Jazz related message boards, yet this one can't even get 30 legitimate new posters over the course of an entire season? Kinda tells you that no one really wants to post here, doesn't it? I don't think it's hard to infer that threads like this, and other fairly unwelcoming type of posts is a big reason for that.

 

[Xsy]

Is XSY a Ute fan doe?

Nah, college sports are lame.

 

[Stoked]

Yo, it clearly was a personal shot at me. It might have been an attempt at a light hearted joke, but it was clearly aimed at me.

I dunno, whenever someone questions my masculinity based on my orientation, I just see red. It's definitely a soft spot for me. I hate being stereotyped, and whether it was a joke or not, it set me off.

Even if it wasn't a personal shot at me, the dude made a thread specifically to bring up old drama that had ended days ago. I'm not sure why this topic wasn't just closed on the spot? It's not hard to see, man. lol

Others disagree, clearly.

But I will give you the closure you crave.

Edit: For everyone's peace of mind it is being reviewed and discussed.