NTTAWWT

[NUance]

Is "NTTAWWT" offensive? (Seinfeld) I ask because it was brought up in the Derp thread in the Shed. LINK And I myself am guilty of posting it several times over the past few years. The Shed conversation relates to a report from a couple days ago. LINK

============================================

Anyway, I guess I hadn't thought that this is particularly offensive. It's just a silly Seinfeld thing. But since it's been brought up I'll probably just refrain from using it. But I don't think it rises to the level of offensiveness that we need a decision rule on it.

:

 

[Saunders]

IMO it's fine. No need to get too uppity about things.

 

[AR Husker Fan]

Agree. It is, to most, a shared, common cultural reference.

 

[Mavric]

I don't think it's a problem personally.

In fact, Seinfeld himself said that's why they put that line in the episode. They wanted to make a joke but didn't want it to be offensive. They came up with that line to try to make sure everyone know they weren't intending to offend people.

 

[Thanks_Tom RR]

The phrase was not the problem, it was what was said before and after the Seinfeld quote that was a rule violation. Here is the quote, in full.

I'm concerned about how much time you spend thinking about my "mod muscle."

Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just that I'm straight.

For some context, knapplc was arguing with kchusker_chris about whether we should approve NSFW content throughout the board, which devolved into personal barbs stemming from a long-standing disagreement between the two regarding this topic and how heavy-handed kchusker_chris perceived knapplc to be when he was a mod. Knapplc made the above statement about how obsessed kchusker_chris was with his "mod muscle", implying that he was gay. This is using sexual orientation as a means to attack someone, which is a clear violation of board rules.

I sent a PM to knapplc explaining he crossed a line. Of course, knapplc, JJHusker, and others decided to make jokes for the next couple of days about the use of NTTAWWT and mod muscle. I ignored these comments because on their own, both NTTAWWT and mod muscle are perfectly acceptable. The problem was that knapplc used sexual orientation is a derogatory manner.

 

[NUance]

The phrase was not the problem, it was what was said before and after the Seinfeld quote that was a rule violation. Here is the quote, in full.

I'm concerned about how much time you spend thinking about my "mod muscle."

Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just that I'm straight.

For some context, knapplc was arguing with kchusker_chris about whether we should approve NSFW content throughout the board, which devolved into personal barbs stemming from a long-standing disagreement between the two regarding this topic and how heavy-handed kchusker_chris perceived knapplc to be when he was a mod. Knapplc made the above statement about how obsessed kchusker_chris was with his "mod muscle", implying that he was gay. This is using sexual orientation as a means to attack someone, which is a clear violation of board rules.

I sent a PM to knapplc explaining he crossed a line. Of course, knapplc, JJHusker, and others decided to make jokes for the next couple of days about the use of NTTAWWT and mod muscle. I ignored these comments because on their own, both NTTAWWT and mod muscle are perfectly acceptable. The problem was that knapplc used sexual orientation is a derogatory manner.

So, if I understand correctly, the original exchange was between Knapp and kchusker. But it was darkhorse85 who reported it. LINK Is that right?

 

[Thanks_Tom RR]

The phrase was not the problem, it was what was said before and after the Seinfeld quote that was a rule violation. Here is the quote, in full.

I'm concerned about how much time you spend thinking about my "mod muscle."

Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just that I'm straight.

For some context, knapplc was arguing with kchusker_chris about whether we should approve NSFW content throughout the board, which devolved into personal barbs stemming from a long-standing disagreement between the two regarding this topic and how heavy-handed kchusker_chris perceived knapplc to be when he was a mod. Knapplc made the above statement about how obsessed kchusker_chris was with his "mod muscle", implying that he was gay. This is using sexual orientation as a means to attack someone, which is a clear violation of board rules.

I sent a PM to knapplc explaining he crossed a line. Of course, knapplc, JJHusker, and others decided to make jokes for the next couple of days about the use of NTTAWWT and mod muscle. I ignored these comments because on their own, both NTTAWWT and mod muscle are perfectly acceptable. The problem was that knapplc used sexual orientation is a derogatory manner.

So, if I understand correctly, the original exchange was between Knapp and kchusker. But it was darkhorse85 who reported it. LINK Is that right?

Yep. Also, kchusker replied by saying "I'm surprised you're not gay since you seem to think boobs are icky". However, I editing his comment to "you seem to think boobs are icky" to move it away from the discussion of sexual orientation. Now, if you are following the discussion in the Woodshed, knapplc and kchusker apparently took no offense to either comment. Whatever.

 

[Saunders]

It's in the shed, which is kinda we we have it in the first place, soI don't think it's a big deal. In my opinion, it's just a smack talk statement, nothing I would consider hateful ala "kill all XXX" or something of the sort.

 

[Thanks_Tom RR]

It's in the shed, which is kinda we we have it in the first place, soI don't think it's a big deal. In my opinion, it's just a smack talk statement, nothing I would consider hateful ala "kill all XXX" or something of the sort.

Yep, too vastly different degrees of attack. Still, I get that someone who is gay or cognizant of the bias against homosexuality would view the use of homosexuality as an insult as derogatory. In this case, a third party actually reported the post, so it's interpreted meaning was distinct from intension.

 

[Saunders]

It's in the shed, which is kinda we we have it in the first place, soI don't think it's a big deal. In my opinion, it's just a smack talk statement, nothing I would consider hateful ala "kill all XXX" or something of the sort.

Yep, too vastly different degrees of attack. Still, I get that someone who is gay or cognizant of the bias against homosexuality would view the use of homosexuality as an insult as derogatory. In this case, a third party actually reported the post, so it's interpreted meaning was distinct from intension.

Right, but the question is, do we care if it's in the shed? Obviously, the rest of the board is a no no, but there are far, far worse things said in the shed that what darkhorse complained about.

I guess what I'm getting at is are we drawing a line in the sand on this?

 

[Thanks_Tom RR]

It's in the shed, which is kinda we we have it in the first place, soI don't think it's a big deal. In my opinion, it's just a smack talk statement, nothing I would consider hateful ala "kill all XXX" or something of the sort.

Yep, too vastly different degrees of attack. Still, I get that someone who is gay or cognizant of the bias against homosexuality would view the use of homosexuality as an insult as derogatory. In this case, a third party actually reported the post, so it's interpreted meaning was distinct from intension.

Right, but the question is, do we care if it's in the shed? Obviously, the rest of the board is a no no, but there are far, far worse things said in the shed that what darkhorse complained about.

I guess what I'm getting at is are we drawing a line in the sand on this?

I would agree that being opposed to the use of homosexuality, race, religion, or sex as an insult would be a good line to have and something already covered by our board rules.

 

[Saunders]

I agree that we don't wanna allow extremist views, but if the example we're discussing is the new measuring stick, you're gonna have to shut down half the political board, and pretty much entire woodshed.

 

[Thanks_Tom RR]

Well, our response can reflect the degree of the violation. Your example of "kill all XX" would earn a ban. Arguing with another member then using "XX" as an insult and a third party member reporting the post, should result in the post being removed with a PM to the offending member but no warning points. Heck, we removed the gif of a deer head exploding. I think it is fair to make degrading homosexuality out-of-bounds.

 

[Saunders]

Well, our response can reflect the degree of the violation. Your example of "kill all XX" would earn a ban. Arguing with another member then using "XX" as an insult and a third party member reporting the post, should result in the post being removed with a PM to the offending member but no warning points. Heck, we removed the gif of a deer head exploding. I think it is fair to make degrading homosexuality out-of-bounds.

Was that in the shed, or regular forum?

Look, all I'm getting at is we need a clear delineation going forward on what is/isn't acceptable. In my humble opinion, what Knapp said was no worse than people calling each other bitches, dicks, and pussies, all (currently) accepted insults in the thread, all clearly meant as a derogatory term in reference of a particular gender.

And I think that's what the other guys are getting at too.