Lionessa was PPR'd - Skinner was right to do that.

[Zorra]

38. Well, that was pretty mean. Anyway..."Proposal to Amend DU TOS Language"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11399347

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12565203

Do you consider all the awesome, sincere, incredibly genuine DU feminist women listed below, who proposed and/or supported amending DU TOS language to be assholes also, because, like me, they proposed or supported amending DU TOS? Or is it only me in particular that you feel a need to insult simply because I feel it is inappropriate to use sexist/misogynistic slurs on a progressive message board? Since you have stated that you believe that PC is such total bullshit, why don't you just tell us all how you really feel about us because of our PC bullshit, and call us all a bunch of *that nasty c slur for vagina* while your at it?

(I promise I won't get all PC and alert on you)

obamanut2012 Dec 2012 OP
LineReply I would rather cringe at the occasional word
Warpy Dec 2012 #1
LineLineReply No one is calling for a banned words list
obamanut2012 Dec 2012 #2
LineLineLineReply Well I do recall a jury about using the word bitch as a verb.
pennylane100 Dec 2012 #3
LineLineLineLineReply I do not understand why you are also talking about a banned word list
obamanut2012 Dec 2012 #4
LineLineLineLineLineNew Reply I was merely replying to your statement that nobody is talking about a banned word list.
pennylane100 Dec 2012 #9
LineNew Reply Yes, I think sexism and misogyny should be in the TOS
Lisa D Dec 2012 #5
LineLineNew Reply The current TOS gives some examples for the other guidelines.
Starry Messenger Dec 2012 #6
LineLineLineNew Reply LLP has some great examples at the link in the pinned OP
obamanut2012 Dec 2012 #8
LineNew Reply Specific language on this is definitely needed
LadyHawkAZ Dec 2012 #7
LineLineNew Reply Agreed.
Gormy Cuss Dec 2012 #10
LineNew Reply I haven't been up-to-date on what's been happening.
Neoma Dec 2012 #11
LineLineNew Reply This message was self-deleted by its author
yardwork Dec 2012 #12
LineNew Reply Count me in for any support needed. nt
Zorra

The hosts of four groups on DU, Feminists Group, History of Feminism, Feminism and Diversity and Women's Rights have come together to ask for your input on the topic of sexist and misogynistic posts on DU and whether the language of the Terms of Service provide sufficient guidance on whether such posts are acceptable.

The Terms of Service on Democratic Underground are absent of any mention of sexism or misogyny directly. There is a prohibition of bigotry based on gender but we have seen that not all DUers interpret this language to include sexism and misogyny. We are advocating for these bigotries to be explicitly added to the Terms of Service on DU, to aid in our struggles to eliminate these bigotries from DU. We request your input and your support is critical. Spread the news and show your support here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12565203

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