CHurricane 
"[@Princess Luna":](/forums/meta/topics/explanation-of-update-to-rule-0-for-consistency-and-clarity-especially-in-regards-to-racism?post_id=4897492#post_4897492
[bq]
)
>
> As for Aryanne herself, I think she does rather count to indicating that it's a Nazism thing when combined with stuff like gas chambers, unless there's something to specify that she's not normal Aryanne (like clothing indicating a different ideology or such).
> Contextual clues can get quite messy.
[/bq]
>
>
So if i wanted to censor nazism from that dabbing pic then i would have to censor the whole aryanne ant not only the swastikas?
Also aryane by herself does not imply nazis?
What are examples of "stuff like gas chambers" that combined with aryanne imply nazism?
Would picture of aryane in wermaht uniform shoting a gryphon in back of the head(no words, jewish symbols or anything) in empty field or city(location that does not imply concentration camp) be ok?
Also how much clothing impact what aryanne represents? If for example on that dabbing pic someone would change both swastikas to hammer and sicle then would that pic be ok then?(no further changes just symbols)
also what if we were considering a pic with aryanne cutie mark(uncensored) visible? Would adding armband(or hat) with hammer and sicle then make her "not nazi"?
Also what about mixed clothing for example anthro aryanne in full ss uniform(style) but witch symbols switched to again hammers and sicles? Or lets say ss uniform(nazi symbols) on legs and torso but witch soviet officer hat? How much symbols are required to change her meaning and can they coexist with other symbols?
Another question: above i proposed changing the swastikas to hammer and sicle to change ideological meaning but soviets(they used that symbol extansively) also commited many war crimes so does changeing nazi symbolics and rethoric to symbolics and rethoric of other hatefull ideologies that caused death and destruction(like soviet communist) be sometimes not enough to make pic ok for example if we take pic of aryanne in ss uniform shooting bunch of gryphons and saying that they deserve it for being inferior(discrymination based on race ) which i think would be not ok and we change that pic to have aryanne wear nkvd uniform and change the aryanne dialouge to say taht they deserve it for being part of elite(rich/educated/religious/land owners/factory owners or other part of intelligentsia that soviet communist ideology considered enemy and persecuted like Polish intelligentsia in katyn massacre in 1940) that exploits common workers(dyscrymination based on role[active or percived] in society) in my opinion it should also be not ok.
So generall does changeing nazi symbolism to symbolism of other "problematic" ideologies is sometimes not enough? Or do you have only problem with nazism and we can change symbolism to for example communism one becouse communist were less racist(at least in ideological sense)?
And if we are already in symbolism does change of ideological meaning require usage of active used real life symbolism of other ideologies? What i mean by this is that sometimes people use other symbols to replace nazi ones like smiling face or in mlp case black version of celestia cutie mark so for example if we have picture of aryanne with nazi styled armband(no uniform only armband) and we changed swastika in that armband to smiling face or celestia cutie mark would that make aryanne "not nazi" or do we have to change it to more obvious real life symbols like hammer and sicle? What about changing the swastika to symbol of fictional ideologies/organizations that exist in mass culture( books/movies) for example symbol of rebels in star wars? Does less common fictional examples count? For example lets say someone writes mlp fanfic an in it the communist will be useing three-armed swastica as their symbol would changeing regular swastica to the three-armed one then imply change of ideological meaning? And what if there is no prior fictional background of used symbols(author of the picture thinks of it by himself) for example if autor of picture used some symbol (first presence of this symbot ever) to substitute swastica on armband and then said in description of that picture that this new symbol is a symbol of for example crystal empire comunist party would then that symbol be accepted as good enough replacement that change ideological implication of the picture?
And last thing about symbols: will symbol meaning change in the future affect older art? What i mean by this is that some symbols that were acceptable in the past now become controversial and their perceptive meaning changed with time (like "ok" hand symbol being now considered by some symbol of white power) so lets say we have dabbing aryanne pic and we change aryanne to be twilight sprkle and remove hat with swastica and we remove swastica from armband(we still have gryphon being gassed in gas chamber but by removing "nazis" from picture the picture should be ok enough if i understand corectly) and then we wuold put some other symbol on armband like for example cupcake and posted it on site then in lets say 5 years some neo-nazi organisation will start useing cupcake as their symbol would then that changed pic be considered no longer acceptable(it would again imply nazis) and be deleted?
Lastly i dont see in your post answer to one of my questions from earlier post so i will quote it again here:
[bq]
>
> Another question what in staff eyes qualify as "gas chamber" (what must be present in picture to be considered a gas chamber?) Metal door? Button on wall? Combination of two? Metal door on which someonr is banging from inside(So for exampke again the dabbing pic if i leave nazi imagery present but censor window and whole button but you will still see metal door in background and the banging noise would still be visible would that be considered as "censored enough" to not be considered a gas chamber in background? And if not then what else should also be censored? Banging noises? Whole door and not only window?)
>
>
[@Background Pony #6714](/forums/meta/topics/explanation-of-update-to-rule-0-for-consistency-and-clarity-especially-in-regards-to-racism?post_id=4897828#post_4897828)
>
> There are bad actors in every group, including this one. BLM is a concept which should be supported by all.
>
>
I agree that blm __**as a concept**__(demanding racial equality and safety from police) should be supported but that does not make the movement that was created from that concept and people that are taking part in it free from being criticised or joked about.
Similarly with communism/socialism. Those ideologies were created with noble intentions (and in ideal world with perfect people they might in theory work) but comunist/socialist countries/people(like china with their new concentration camps) should not be suported mindlesly just because they were created on noble ideas.
Supporting BLM movement is controvertial because of being heavili politicized(i live in eastern europe and we still have some blm protests mostly organized by members of left wing parties to virtue signall because we dont have almost any problems with police being excesive in use of force or treating other races diferent and if there are problems then they are almoust always[ there are some post comunist country problems with that ocasionally but moustly things are going in good direction with every year] dealt with)and being infiltrated by not insignificant number of bad actors(antifa, rioters) as well as racists and black supremacists.
In my opinion better way of doing things would be to not state that someone supports blm but to state that you support: racial equality, police reform, etc( concepts on which blm was build) it would still send positive messeage while not being nearly as much controversial.
Devil's Advocate
[bq]
>
> As for Aryanne herself, I think she does rather count to indicating that it's a Nazism thing when combined with stuff like gas chambers, unless there's something to specify that she's not normal Aryanne (like clothing indicating a different ideology or such).
> Contextual clues can get quite messy.
[/bq]
>
>
So if i wanted to censor nazism from that dabbing pic then i would have to censor the whole aryanne ant not only the swastikas?
Also aryane by herself does not imply nazis?
What are examples of "stuff like gas chambers" that combined with aryanne imply nazism?
Would picture of aryane in wermaht uniform shoting a gryphon in back of the head(no words, jewish symbols or anything) in empty field or city(location that does not imply concentration camp) be ok?
Also how much clothing impact what aryanne represents? If for example on that dabbing pic someone would change both swastikas to hammer and sicle then would that pic be ok then?(no further changes just symbols)
also what if we were considering a pic with aryanne cutie mark(uncensored) visible? Would adding armband(or hat) with hammer and sicle then make her "not nazi"?
Also what about mixed clothing for example anthro aryanne in full ss uniform(style) but witch symbols switched to again hammers and sicles? Or lets say ss uniform(nazi symbols) on legs and torso but witch soviet officer hat? How much symbols are required to change her meaning and can they coexist with other symbols?
Another question: above i proposed changing the swastikas to hammer and sicle to change ideological meaning but soviets(they used that symbol extansively) also commited many war crimes so does changeing nazi symbolics and rethoric to symbolics and rethoric of other hatefull ideologies that caused death and destruction(like soviet communist) be sometimes not enough to make pic ok for example if we take pic of aryanne in ss uniform shooting bunch of gryphons and saying that they deserve it for being inferior(discrymination based on race ) which i think would be not ok and we change that pic to have aryanne wear nkvd uniform and change the aryanne dialouge to say taht they deserve it for being part of elite(rich/educated/religious/land owners/factory owners or other part of intelligentsia that soviet communist ideology considered enemy and persecuted like Polish intelligentsia in katyn massacre in 1940) that exploits common workers(dyscrymination based on role[active or percived] in society) in my opinion it should also be not ok.
So generall does changeing nazi symbolism to symbolism of other "problematic" ideologies is sometimes not enough? Or do you have only problem with nazism and we can change symbolism to for example communism one becouse communist were less racist(at least in ideological sense)?
And if we are already in symbolism does change of ideological meaning require usage of active used real life symbolism of other ideologies? What i mean by this is that sometimes people use other symbols to replace nazi ones like smiling face or in mlp case black version of celestia cutie mark so for example if we have picture of aryanne with nazi styled armband(no uniform only armband) and we changed swastika in that armband to smiling face or celestia cutie mark would that make aryanne "not nazi" or do we have to change it to more obvious real life symbols like hammer and sicle? What about changing the swastika to symbol of fictional ideologies/organizations that exist in mass culture( books/movies) for example symbol of rebels in star wars? Does less common fictional examples count? For example lets say someone writes mlp fanfic an in it the communist will be useing three-armed swastica as their symbol would changeing regular swastica to the three-armed one then imply change of ideological meaning? And what if there is no prior fictional background of used symbols(author of the picture thinks of it by himself) for example if autor of picture used some symbol (first presence of this symbot ever) to substitute swastica on armband and then said in description of that picture that this new symbol is a symbol of for example crystal empire comunist party would then that symbol be accepted as good enough replacement that change ideological implication of the picture?
And last thing about symbols: will symbol meaning change in the future affect older art? What i mean by this is that some symbols that were acceptable in the past now become controversial and their perceptive meaning changed with time (like "ok" hand symbol being now considered by some symbol of white power) so lets say we have dabbing aryanne pic and we change aryanne to be twilight sprkle and remove hat with swastica and we remove swastica from armband(we still have gryphon being gassed in gas chamber but by removing "nazis" from picture the picture should be ok enough if i understand corectly) and then we wuold put some other symbol on armband like for example cupcake and posted it on site then in lets say 5 years some neo-nazi organisation will start useing cupcake as their symbol would then that changed pic be considered no longer acceptable(it would again imply nazis) and be deleted?
Lastly i dont see in your post answer to one of my questions from earlier post so i will quote it again here:
[bq]
>
> Another question what in staff eyes qualify as "gas chamber" (what must be present in picture to be considered a gas chamber?) Metal door? Button on wall? Combination of two? Metal door on which someonr is banging from inside(So for exampke again the dabbing pic if i leave nazi imagery present but censor window and whole button but you will still see metal door in background and the banging noise would still be visible would that be considered as "censored enough" to not be considered a gas chamber in background? And if not then what else should also be censored? Banging noises? Whole door and not only window?)
>
>
[@Background Pony #6714](/forums/meta/topics/explanation-of-update-to-rule-0-for-consistency-and-clarity-especially-in-regards-to-racism?post_id=4897828#post_4897828)
>
> There are bad actors in every group, including this one. BLM is a concept which should be supported by all.
>
>
I agree that blm __**as a concept**__(demanding racial equality and safety from police) should be supported but that does not make the movement that was created from that concept and people that are taking part in it free from being criticised or joked about.
Similarly with communism/socialism. Those ideologies were created with noble intentions (and in ideal world with perfect people they might in theory work) but comunist/socialist countries/people(like china with their new concentration camps) should not be suported mindlesly just because they were created on noble ideas.
Supporting BLM movement is controvertial because of being heavili politicized(i live in eastern europe and we still have some blm protests mostly organized by members of left wing parties to virtue signall because we dont have almost any problems with police being excesive in use of force or treating other races diferent and if there are problems then they are almoust always[ there are some post comunist country problems with that ocasionally but moustly things are going in good direction with every year] dealt with)and being infiltrated by not insignificant number of bad actors(antifa, rioters) as well as racists and black supremacists.
In my opinion better way of doing things would be to not state that someone supports blm but to state that you support: racial equality, police reform, etc( concepts on which blm was build) it would still send positive messeage while not being nearly as much controversial.