No.1811
File: 1537235622088.png (294.15 KB, 974x962, 487:481, 827659.png) ImgOps Google
This other anon's thread >>>/pony/827659 was locked. I understand one reason for locking it (it sure seems like political shitposting to me), but I would like clarification on a point. A stated reason for locking the thread is "Normalizing Nazi iconography isn't acceptable". But I see nowhere in the existing or newly proposed rules any indication that the 'normalization' of the iconography of certain political ideologies is verboten per se. Is all casual use of symbols exclusively associated with any violent extremist groups (such as Nazis, ISIS, and Antifa) forbidden? What about symbols of violent street gangs? It seems like this should be its own rule, if it is to be enforced as such by the mod team.
No.1812
File: 1537238632615.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, Shy Fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google
huh, i thought you two were the same anon. my apologies. :c
i think under the new rules, this current thread would fall under new rule 8. And maybe rule 7.
As it stands, it falls under Rule 11, and Rule 6.
This decision is consistent with our stance, since our founding day, towards Nazi "sh*tposting" as per the rules. pardon my language.
No.1813
File: 1537239581100.jpg (76.13 KB, 724x1024, 181:256, 1510.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>1812>huh, i thought you two were the same anon. am i wrong? Yeah, that wasn't me who made the Aryanne thread.
>i think under the new rules, this current thread would fall under new rule 8. And maybe rule 7. I see; that makes sense.
>As it stands, it falls under Rule 11, and Rule 6.Rule 6 I understand. With respect to Rule 11, what is the offensive slur?
No.1814
File: 1537239915405.png (157.54 KB, 435x360, 29:24, you are a wonderful pony.png) ImgOps Google
>>1812>>1813goodness, i also sort of gave you a non-answer. The answer, as to the rest of the content, is that it will be looked at from a case-by-case basis.
If someone posts the antifa symbol, whatever that is, and has a thread that says "lol, alt-right ain't right" or something to that effect, it too would trip our rules in that same way, i suspect.
As to rule 11, the Nazi swastika specifically has become a slur in its own right, nowadays.
No.1815
File: 1537240791449.png (390.71 KB, 511x800, 511:800, 139018386006.png) ImgOps Google
>>1814> the Nazi swastika specifically has become a slur in its own rightNani??? Doesn't the word "slur" denote only words/language? Google tells me that "slur" means "an insinuation or allegation about someone that is likely to insult them or damage their reputation". I don't see how the Nazi swastika is a slur.
No.1816
File: 1537241042860.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, Shy Fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google
>>1815The Nazi swastika is iconography that carries with it a host of insinuations in the modern world.
If you spray painted it on a mailbox, or graffiti'd it on a wall, you'd be charged with a hate crime, like any other slur.
i think, for that reason, it makes sense.
No.1817
File: 1537241822474.png (356.75 KB, 526x975, 526:975, 140616539210.png) ImgOps Google
>>1816Eh, I still think that "卍" isn't a word, and therefore isn't a slur.
>If you spray painted it on a mailbox, or graffiti'd it on a wall, you'd be charged with a hate crime, like any other slur. If I vandalized a home by spray-painting a noose on it, that would of course be serious crime, but the picture of the noose still wouldn't be a slur.
No.1818
File: 1537241880846.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, Shy Fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google
>>1817it also wouldn't be a hate crime, unless you intended to send a message to a minority or something, in which case if a similar thread was made here it would be taken down for the same "slur" reason, as per the current rules.
No.1819
File: 1537242387805.jpg (183.13 KB, 850x1063, 850:1063, 1453698383902.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>1818Hmm, I still don't see how a picture of a noose can be considered a "slur". It (the picture of the noose) is not a word, and furthermore it's more of a threat than an insult or disparagement.
No.1822
File: 1537262878190.jpg (47.5 KB, 481x680, 481:680, tumblr_pcas94uR0l1r100h5o1….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
Yeah a swastika (when used in reference to Nazis rather than as a symbol of peace- that is, not tilted sideways slightly-) isn't a slur.
It's more or less an implied threat, I guess. That would be the closest you could really get to it.
But slur is simply incorrect. Slurs are verbal, they are words. Slurs are not symbols. Unless you're talking music. Then slurs are a musical symbol. But that's not the same.
