[ home ] [ pony / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/canterlot/ - Canterlot

Site related staff board
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]


File: 1536566304449.png (153.02 KB, 487x584, 487:584, A_confused.png) ImgOps Google

So, if I'm going to be under this so-called "political ban" for how ever many months remain, I'm going to need one of you to specify what is and isn't "political". Because every day I am running the risk of violating the rules by not knowing. Does it only involve things related to the government? If so, which countries government? Since I don't live in Canada, could I discuss Canada's government? Or does it include other topics, and if so, which? For example, I would like to discuss the idea of "censorship" on the internet right now, but I don't know where it falls in these nebulous rules. Help a brother out, what is and isn't allowed?


Not a mod
But for you, you might consider staying out of American politics and sensitive themes like psychology and racial tensions.

I suppose stuff like DMV or drugs stuff can't be too bad?


I am asssuming "American politics" is included under the ban. But I need confirmation and defined boundaries on those other topics. Banning me from discussing race in ANY capacity seems impossible, given I'm one of the few non-white posters on the board. So a boundary needs to be set. I'm not sure what DMV you mean, but "drugs" wouldn't seem to be included in a "political" ban. Neither would "psychology". Again, defined boundaries. To me, it seems the mods put this on me without actually discussing the limits of it just to shut me up. I need these things defined.


File: 1536618052863.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, Shy Fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google

Sorry for not making that clear, Manley. The definition we'll use is this one: politics = a person's opinions about how a country should be governed.

This means that there are a lot of politically relevant conversations that might be off limits to you, dear friend.

Please remember to report those who try to goad you into those conversations, and to try to resist engaging back.


Ok, but first question: Does this pertain to ANY government, or just the US? And second, the way you just described, I would not be barred from discussing issues like racism or mental health, since those are not in relation to how a country is governed. And thirdly, what about the conversation on free speech that I was curious about. That CAN be "political" according to your criteria here, but it isn't exclusively political.


How is >>>/pony/821766 considered political?   I don't think it is political to merely point out that those with a sufficient disposable income can trade a portion of it for sex (and for airfare to a suitable jurisdiction if it would be illegal in their home jurisdiction).


I don't think it's simply about a lack of the act of sex with some people. There's emotional and self-esteem factors as well.

Your post looked like baiting because you are stating a controversial opinion as if it were a fact, ignoring other mitigating factors.


File: 1536971992239.jpg (59.59 KB, 540x733, 540:733, 1536538863927.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>Ok, but first question: Does this pertain to ANY government, or just the US?
I don't see why it wouldn't apply to other countries.  (Well, I suppose if you wanted to objectively discuss, e.g., the political situation of ancient Mesopotamia, or something else that nobody cares about and thus is unlikely to raise a shitstorm, that might be okay.)

>And second, the way you just described, I would not be barred from discussing issues like racism
I'd guess that it depends on how closely your post is tied to political matters.

E.g., it would probably be okay for you to say something like, "Companies should try to recruit qualified minority candidates, because they represent an under-exploited talent pool that the company can profitably tap".  

But it might not be okay for you for you to say something like, "Companies should continue affirmative actions programs, in order to help achieve racial justice", because that is tied closely to politics.  (Why is it tied to politics?  Because achieving racial justice doesn't help maximize shareholder wealth, so the immediately obvious reasons why a company would participate is such a scheme is political: either the gov't forces it to (obviously political), or it does to avoid customer boycotts (also political).)


I'd agree by large. Bait it definitely is, but, political bait probably not.


I'd really like to hear the boundaries from someone on the modstaff, not a robot.


I'd just like to state in Manley's thread that Manley's been pretty nice lately.  Also he hasn't held a grudge against me for our past, seems to be a genuinely fun guy for the most part.

Not that he needs my approval or anything.

[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]