A healthy online community, like any public space, needs basic rules against harassment and hate speech. This isn’t about policing opinions; it’s about preventing a space from being weaponized to spread bigotry and silence others.
Choosing to ‘not be offended’ is a personal choice, but allowing the space to be overrun by slurs is a collective failure to maintain a minimum standard of decency.
Hmmm you are probably right, it does seem like the person in question is flooding the chat with the word. That is a problem, the word itself should not be (probably except when intentionally used to cause harm, but intention is quite difficult to measure or prove)
The context removes all ambiguity. Spamming a slur in a public forum isn’t a debate about the word; it’s an attack on the community. The proof is in the outcome: hundreds of people have left the chat due to Valve’s non-existent moderation.
Regardless of whether you think slurs are “made up” or not, free speech absolutism is an open invitation to bigotry. That’s why so many libertarians & right wingers are into the idea.
All words are “made up”, but with respect, that observation misses the key point. The spam is the delivery method, but the slur is what makes this an act of targeted hate and harassment, not just a nuisance.
Dismissing the word’s power ignores the very real historical and social weight it carries; weight the spammer is intentionally leveraging to cause maximum harm. It’s not a coincidence they chose that specific word.
I believe I’ve been clear on why this distinction matters, so I’ll leave it at that.
You’ve perfectly described the mechanism, but drawn the wrong conclusion. The power isn’t ‘given’ by individuals being sensitive; it’s inherited from the word’s historical use as a tool of oppression and violence. That weight is a social fact, not a personal choice.
To use an analogy: a gun is a real weapon because it causes physical harm. A slur is a social weapon because it invokes that history to cause psychological and social harm. The harm is no less real to its targets.
Your argument ultimately suggests that the targets of historical violence should also bear the burden of dismantling the tools used against them, while the rest of us do nothing. I fundamentally disagree with that premise. We have reached an impasse, and I see no value communicating / explaining this premise to you any further.
It’s not in any individual’s power to take that away though. And even if that personal choice were meaningfully possible, you’d put that on thousands of people suffering harassment rather than the few doing it?
That’s just handing public spaces over to oppressors.
![The true beauty behind Valve's "hands-off" approach to moderating group chats [CW: Racism]](https://crazypeople.online/pictrs/image/572ed67f-7951-4688-aa83-1e3f9ae46487.png){kind=link}
It’s not about being ‘offended.’
A healthy online community, like any public space, needs basic rules against harassment and hate speech. This isn’t about policing opinions; it’s about preventing a space from being weaponized to spread bigotry and silence others.
Choosing to ‘not be offended’ is a personal choice, but allowing the space to be overrun by slurs is a collective failure to maintain a minimum standard of decency.
Hmmm you are probably right, it does seem like the person in question is flooding the chat with the word. That is a problem, the word itself should not be (probably except when intentionally used to cause harm, but intention is quite difficult to measure or prove)
The context removes all ambiguity. Spamming a slur in a public forum isn’t a debate about the word; it’s an attack on the community. The proof is in the outcome: hundreds of people have left the chat due to Valve’s non-existent moderation.
Removed by mod
Regardless of whether you think slurs are “made up” or not, free speech absolutism is an open invitation to bigotry. That’s why so many libertarians & right wingers are into the idea.
All words are “made up”, but with respect, that observation misses the key point. The spam is the delivery method, but the slur is what makes this an act of targeted hate and harassment, not just a nuisance.
Dismissing the word’s power ignores the very real historical and social weight it carries; weight the spammer is intentionally leveraging to cause maximum harm. It’s not a coincidence they chose that specific word.
I believe I’ve been clear on why this distinction matters, so I’ll leave it at that.
Removed by mod
You’ve perfectly described the mechanism, but drawn the wrong conclusion. The power isn’t ‘given’ by individuals being sensitive; it’s inherited from the word’s historical use as a tool of oppression and violence. That weight is a social fact, not a personal choice.
To use an analogy: a gun is a real weapon because it causes physical harm. A slur is a social weapon because it invokes that history to cause psychological and social harm. The harm is no less real to its targets.
Your argument ultimately suggests that the targets of historical violence should also bear the burden of dismantling the tools used against them, while the rest of us do nothing. I fundamentally disagree with that premise. We have reached an impasse, and I see no value communicating / explaining this premise to you any further.
Removed by mod
Classic crypto fascist comment. Post hog
It’s not in any individual’s power to take that away though. And even if that personal choice were meaningfully possible, you’d put that on thousands of people suffering harassment rather than the few doing it?
That’s just handing public spaces over to oppressors.
You may have heard the line about the nazi bar.
2015 idubbbztv take