Hacker News Reader

Comment by 14u2c | Hacker News Reader

Is this not the classic problem with all censorship? Of course the majority (and I) would agree that the language used is not productive, but the question of whether something should be allowed, despite its "goodness" (or lack there of), is much more nuanced. I think an argument can be made that the definition of a public forum has changed.

View on HN

No, it isn't.

OP can host his own server and invite his friends and they can say whatever they want there.... but no one has any obligation to give him a venue.

If I have a shitty band and I want to book your venue for a gig, you have every right to say to me "no, your band is too shitty for my venue, I don't want to degrade myself or the public in that way."

There's very little nuance here at all, no one is saying he is not allowed to be a terrible person, they're saying they don't want to be associated with him because he's a terrible person.

Yes it is. It is not governmental censorship, but it is censorship.

You seem to think “retarded” is magnitudes worse than all of the other negative words you used and worth shutting down a community for.

I think most people do not think this is true.

I think moderation is hard and I’m generally in favor of private companies being able to moderate how they want (with something like Urbit being a good alternative for a user owned network).

That said, the word policing around this and wsb in particular (a pretty good natured community really) is pretty off.

I think you’re wrong on this one.

> You seem to think “retarded” is magnitudes worse than all of the other negative words you used and worth shutting down a community for.

To be clear, it absolutely is.

https://www.specialolympics.org/stories/impact/why-the-r-wor...

I'm genuinely hoping the huge number of sophists trying to defend it are doing so because they genuinely feel kind of bad for having done so and don't want to comprehend the moral implications of having used it casually for years.

I know people who grew up with disabled relatives and I can assure you that insult is among the worse things you could use. Maybe those who use it don't think of themselves as bad persons, and "thats just the way language evolved", but if you use this word it shows that you never reflected on the other persons position. It tells me, you are either not the brightest bulb in the shed, unempathic or just mean.

So yes, depending on the context using retard as an insult is worse than many other things. It might not be to you, but so might have been the n-word a few generations before. Just because a lot of people don't get it, doesn't mean it is okay.

Edit: and now that you know that this insult might cut two ways (because you never know who has a disabled relative), you might also deem it less useful.

This is a topic that won’t make much progress on an Internet forum (too heated, too personal for people).

I think there’s a difference between using the word to target someone who is disabled and using it the way it’s used on wsb.

I also think there’s an irony in calling me “not the brightest bulb” for thinking this, which is a euphemistic way to say dumb (or even the word in question) in a way that’s more targeted than most of the forbidden word’s use on wsb.

I also don’t use “retarded” in writing either, I just don’t see as much issue with it in the wsb context.

> I think there’s a difference between using the word to target someone who is disabled and using it the way it’s used on wsb.

Try being a white person and using the n-word in any context at all. Apart from an incredibly narrow set of contexts, it's deeply offensive and will be called out as such. Joking with your other white friends isn't one of the acceptable contexts.

I agree with you.

I don’t think the use of the word retarded is the same.

If it's not exactly the same, it's very similar. It's a slur, used by members outside a group, defined by birth, to insult them and discriminate against them.

I could see how someone could hold the position you do, I just don’t agree with it.

You’ve picked out the similarities, but have ignored what I would argue are more important differences.

I suspect we’re not going to agree on this, so probably okay to just leave it here.

Huh? I didn't call you "not the brightest bulb”, that was projection on your part and I am sorry for miscommunicating. What I meant was that these are the thought processes that spring to my mind when I hear someone using these phrases. I also explained a little bit of the underlying thinking on my side. This was my attempt of showing you my side of how I think about this.

Also: just because these thoughts spring to my mind doesn't mean I deterministically from now on think that person is stupid etc. I had my best friends use these words in an unreflected way.

My mistake - after rereading your comment I understand what you were saying.

I agree with you actually - I generally find overuse of profanity in real life leaves a bad impression on me too.

I just think the wsb context is a bit of a different thing and the word use in some contexts is fine.

It's also likely some of this is colored by other related word policing I find to be more stupid, (like saying 'on the other hand' is ableist). I have a general bias towards not policing words.

Op doesn’t own the server, but neither do you as far as I know. You are free to express your opinion, but don’t pretend to speak for everyone. In my book, people who use offensive language are preferable to those who make snap value judgement about human worth based on it. The latter is far more destructive

Discord owns the server. They seem to agree with me?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com