I believe as this community is essentially a parliamentary session, any vulgar or obscene commentary should be strongly discouraged. Much like the speaker of the house, moderators should consistently remind those who break the above guideline to refrain. Repeat offenders / extreme examples should be subject to a temporary ban. Thoughts?
edit: I wonder what people think is the purpose of downvotes? Do you not want to have the discussion?

  • Seraph089@sh.itjust.worksM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can see both sides of this one, but I’d lean towards a lighter touch that focuses on intent. Someone can have a civil conversation while also swearing a lot (me irl), but it’s a completely different story if they’re trying to be inflammatory.

    We probably won’t need to codify this in the rules. Someone who would receive the hypothetical ban for this would probably be breaking other rules anyway.

    • [email protected]@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agreed. Intent and good/bad faith is a better indicator, but also harder to automate / more work.
      There’s plenty of people who use nice words but aren’t there to have a discussion with you.
      I’ve met at least one of them in the mod voting thread.