Re: Reporting acts of ethnic slurs
« Reply #26 on: June 21, 2015, 12:14:22 PM »
It doesnt matter what i want and what i've voted for. Rules with the most votes = rules that apply
This is really the bottom line, and the only reason I reversed one (1) warning. It's so obvious, I don't understand how there can be 1930249 pages of arguing about it. If a warning is given for something that isn't against the rules, that's incorrect. If the the warner refuses to acknowledge this fact, then that's intellectual dishonesty. It's no secret that most people here don't like claw, so it's warning him without justification just because you don't like the guy that's biased, not the other way around. I have no problem warning him if he ever deserves it, he's just been smart enough not to so far.
And, he's also right about "Polack":
However, the English loanword "Polack" is considered an ethnic slur in the United States and the United Kingdom, and therefore is considered insulting in nearly all modern usages.
1.Slang: Disparaging and Offensive (Random House Unabridged Dictionary)
2.Offensive Slang used as a disparaging term for a person of Polish birth or descent (The American Heritage Dictionary)
Seems legit to me. If anyone thinks that "nigger" deserves a warning and "polack" does not, well, I guess they're just sanctimonious hypocrites. :P