Rule #0 Policy Refinement Feedback Thread

@A2Rhombus  
I don’t think anyone’s input should be considered more important than anyone else’s based on the color of their skin. That sounds pretty racist.

@Princess Luna  

 
Would this rule affect coverage of drama in the fandom? Like stuff relating to Derpygate >>71411, >>55991 or Down with Molestia style stuff? >>401711 (deleted), >>401462, >>401893, >>402960. I know something like >>185678 could but I also could see a lot more falling under that.

Regardless, i think staff are on the right track with these rule clarifications.

@Princess Luna  
I’m not trying to bait. I just legitimately think a panel of white people should not be the judge of whether or not a black person should be offended by a racist post.

@doloresbridge  
Probably the last two images would be deleted under it, but otherwise, I don’t think it would affect much. Note that the actual art involved would be fine. Also, you appear to be using an old version of the proposal; it’s a little clearer now (see the first post in this thread for the up-to-date version).
 
@A2Rhombus  
We’re not going to discuss the racial makeup of the staff or using it to consider what the staff think, period.

@A2Rhombus  
Whether or not you are offended by something should not be the criteria to have it removed. Anyone can claim to be offended by anything.

@Princess Luna  
Ok my mistake. thanks for your time answering.

Softball, I guess, since I want to contribute to the conversation but don’t have much to add. Is >>1355964 or Aryabuse in general at risk? I assume and hope it’s not but I figured even a simple question can help add to the corpus of staff responses.
 
@Datte-Before-Dawn  
I think so as well, roughly speaking. The propaganda question is more complicated, if it needs to be discussed beyond “nothing overt”.

@Background Pony #85AC  
As far as advocating, just depicting doing it isn’t sufficient, but if we take that to be advocation anyways for the sake of argument, it’s a buck that I don’t think is “significant” violence.

In fairness, since most of the drama came from the Nazi horse, don’t you think you should value the opinion of the Jewish users when trying to evaluate if something is bad?
 
You know, like Mittsies?

@Princess Luna  
So “Punch a Nazi” would be okay as it isn’t significant violence?

@Miss Shy  
That would be great actually. But the mods here don’t seem to think that way.

@Miss Shy  
I’m Jewish, I dont want my opinion to matter any more or any less than anyone else’s. As I said before, that sounds pretty racist.

@Rene_Z  

 
Only if “Gas a Jew” is also allowed.
 
 
To avoid any assumption: no, I am not advocating for this. I am merely pointing out logical consistency.

I really appreciate the attempt to reword rule 0 more clearly. I think that the nazi and racism tag only attract trolling behavior. Please ban nazi stuff, communist stuff, racist stuff and other troll tags and not excellent behavior. The nazi symbol itself is an endorsement of an inherently racist ideology, especially in porn. I don’t mind banning the hammer and sickle for reasons of not supporting a murderous regime.
 
@Background Pony #85AC  
All happy nazi/commie ponies are propaganda for fascism to portray it as a good think even if the intent is ironic/joke. Irony is dead online so I have to take everyone at face value.

@Background Pony #E7BF  
I think killing someone is a bit more significant violence than punching someone. And I only asked that question because Luna said that “bucking” doesn’t fall under significant violence.