<i>But saying "Don't say racial slurs." Why? "It offends people." What about other words that offend people? "LALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU" </i>
I think it's because Americans jump when they see a racial slur. I think it's some kind of a taboo in their country. I'm not sure what the exact reasoning is but I've always pegged it as "It's because we have a lot of Americans here and that's how they roll". Anyway, slurs are a bit more disruptive than other taunts and swear words since unrelated people are more likely to get mad just because of seeing the word. Swear words aren't equal either. Some people are annoyed by some words and some by others. Ultimately, it bogs down to which words the moderator who decides what to police on the forums hates. In Nivek's case, it's slur words. He wants those gone and is willing to moderate those out. Ultimately, a moderator acts against those words offend him and not against those that do not. Yes, it's subjective but that's how it works in practice. Thus, no slurs is a clear cut policy where the words Nivek wants out get moderated and he doesn't have to moderate the ones he doesn't care about. Restricting it to slurs will also restrict freedom of speech less than all swear words out, assuming that the target is to get the one or two annoying words out while still following a consistent policy.
<i>Baudolino's argument just doesn't seem to do ANYTHING for me at all. "If you don't mean to step on any toes, it's easiest to just avoid slur- and swear words" - Why not other words people find offensive? I still don't get why we're picking boogers here. Hey look, at the end of his post, just after the previous line: ""My knob tastes funny." - Jeez, that sure can be taken badly, can't it. In fact, I'd imagine that many people might find this to be vulgar, how dare he present it on a "public forum" where "words have different meanings to different people" and "the correct context or nuance is sometimes hard to catch" meaning that, even if he doesn't find it offensive, someone might and it "doesn't mean it's meaningless" just because it's meaningless to him. </i>
What people find offensive is a highly subjective thing and it is not feasible to forbid everything someone might find offensive. If something is generally found offensive by most of the people, then it counts as a slur or swear word, doesn't it? What comes to the taste of Baudolino's knob, I always imagine Baudolino bending over acrobatically and tasting his "knob" when I see that text in the end of his posts.
<i>Heck, why not just follow Baudolino in agreeing that "They're meant to be harmful, so it's better to just avoid them"</i>
We kinda do. Purely malicious intent in a post can get your post removed here (in moderator discretion. It usually violates some rule). However, I don't think that even slur words are necessarily meant to be harmful in every context. Also, criticizing someones log isn't always meant to be harmful. I think it's better to moderate using common sense than strictly by the book (although you need by the book sometimes as well). Thus, whether the intent is malicious or not is a big factor to me.