And yet, here you are
Could it be that all your years on this Forum in addition to the passing of time, in general, has changed you and your opinion on these threads?Or perhaps you're just stuck to the carpet at the moment.
I am not reading any of it.....just hoping to get un der someones skin enough for them to realise I may be speaking sense.
Im actually tempted to run a regression analysis for the lolz.
To prove what? That the use of the derogatory definition of "chink" went up at times when there were wars and conflicts with China and even government propaganda was happy to use it in the derogatory sense? (the "Yellow Peril" and all that)
Of course it did.
How does that relate to the use of the word today on this forum - the vast majority of which is clearly the various non-offensive definitions?
You know, in skim reading, I had obviously misread one of his posts (or it was edited). I thought there was a post explicitly saying something along the lines of "ok I can see that blocking 'chink' is problematic, but surely there is no dual use of 'chinky'."
Apologies.
Anyway - even he has had the sense to leave the thread
Evidence that a thread is shite and should die.1. original discussion is all but lost
2. use of google to find spurious quotes backing up position yet ignores much more obvious contrary ones.
3. Arbitrary last word point scoring between a limited number of protagonists.
4. multiple quote trees.
5. Willful and deliberate misinterpretation.
6. no light, all heat.Have I missed anything?
7. People pop up to declare that it's shite whilst adding nothing further to the conversation. Case in point:
in the old days when teej and fred contributed to posts and got a nice debate going, it was fun.
this is just boring shyte.
... the third time at least he's said the same thing, in successive posts.
Why are you still in here if it's boring? I think threads about football are "boring shyte," so do you know what I do? I don't read them! It works really well for avoiding discussions that don't interest you, you should try it.
"How does that relate to the use of the word today on this forum - the vast majority of which is the various the non-offensive definitions?"
Got proofs, for a pretty outdated term the useage is much higher in 2000 than it was before Chinese immigration.
I somehow doubt it is mostly used in its inoffensive term as I don't see a reason for the original meaning to come back into vogue.
just hoping to get un der someones skin enough for them to realise I may be speaking sense.
You know what happens to deliberate trolls, don't you.
cougar, because I am bored shitless, plain and simple.
this post is just cementing the fact.
[I]ton - Member
I am not reading any of it.....just hoping to get under someones skin enough for them to realise I may be speaking sense. [/I]
Unfortunately, the core protagonists seem to display Elite forumite levels of thread perpetuation and procrastination, possibly in the name of irritating others while trying to win the internet, from each other.
And anyway, don't you realize? We'll never reach 22 pages relying on common sense, alone.
You know what happens to deliberate trolls, don't you.
so so predictable.
[I]slowoldman - Member
Isn't "Nip" just a truncation of "Nippon"?
You mean like **** and ****stan?[/I]
I was once called a "limey". We became friends.
The comment was made in a suitable context. Although frankly I'd not have been bothered if the person making the comment had been trying to offend me. I wouldn't have taken offence.
I somehow doubt it is mostly used in its inoffensive term.
There you go again assuming everyone except you is a racist.
Google it. Here I'll help:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:singletrackworld.com+chink
I see 137 results. Flicking through the first few pages of results I see 3 categories of usage:
1) this thread or threads very like it, discussing the term itself.
2) posts specifically calling out the racist use of it (e.g. that UKIP woman)
3) posts making entirely innocent use of the non-offensive definitions.
I haven't seen: 4) posts where it is being used a racial slur.
I'm sure there must be one or two that have slipped through moderation and reporting mechanisms if you look hard enough, so feel free.
Please knock up a nice bar graph or pie chart of the various use cases.
"Limey"
Were you an ethnic minority in this context and were you living in a country with a history of institutional prejudice and economic favouritism working against Brits?
Have you, as a minority, ever been assaulted by someone screaming "limey"?
haven't seen: 4) posts where it is being used a racial slur.
I'm sure there must be one or two that have slipped through moderation and reporting mechanisms if you look hard enough, so feel free.Please knock up a nice bar graph or pie chart of the various use cases"
The act and threat of moderation will scew the data.
[I]Tom_W1987 - Member
Were you an ethnic minority in this context and were you living in a country with a history of institutional prejudice and economic favouritism[/I]
Yeap.
I wouldn't have taken offence.
[img] 
[/img]
The act and threat of moderation will scew the data.
Indeed.
And so will people self-policing their posts, being careful with their language, and trying not to offend others.
Isn't that what we want?????
[I]Tom_W1987 - Member
Have you, as a minority, ever been assaulted by someone screaming "limey"? [/I]
Ah!, edit ninja be ninja-ing.
Nicely selected context.
Oh, help me, which do I choose I wonder, assault or being called Limey.... Tough one....
[I]funkmasterp - Member
I wouldn't have taken offence.[/I]
Borrow?
"Have you, as a minority, ever been assaulted by someone screaming "limey"?"
Has anyone ever assaulted a Black Bean sauce shouting "Chinky"?
Just to be clear, I've not particularly argued for the banning of Chink, what I argued for was consistency in the banning of words. Lots of words are banned because they are offensive or profane (essentially the same thing). I suggested adding these words because they too are offensive. Just because there are contexts in which they are not offensive is not good enough a reason on its own to legitimise them here. Often, chink is used in microagressions along with other provocative posts which are then excused based on their alternative meanings. But that is the nature of microaggressions. We broadly agree that '****' could be banned, but there are contexts where that word could also be used 'innocently' for example talking about the Dambusters movie or Conrad novels. But it is no great loss not being able to use the word. Same with the word chink, go ahead and allow it but then allow other 'offensive' terms too. My argument wasn't to ban it so much as to say there are equal reasons for banning it as there are for many other banned words.
And so will people self-policing their posts, being careful with their language, and trying not to offend others.Isn't that what we want?????
Well, fine, I'd also be happy with having no banned words"
[quote=AlexSimon ]Anyway - even he has had the sense to leave the thread
Maybe he's having a rest
"Yeap"
I don't believe you. Where were you, the most Irish part of Boston, MA?
Oh, help me, which do I choose I wonder, assault or being called Limey.... Tough one.
Would you agree that someone might associate that word with being assaulted after it had happened? Eg my wife.
You know what happens to deliberate trolls, don't you.
The third goat knocks them off the bridge?
...I spoke too soon
[quote=CharlieMungus ]Often, chink is used in microagressions along with other provocative posts which are then excused based on their alternative meanings.
Often? Graham's just given another search link up there - why don't you go and find just how "often" that happens.
My argument wasn't to ban it so much as to say there are equal reasons for banning it as there are for many other banned words.
and you're still wrong, for the reasons I've explained multiple times, and which you've failed to successfully refute.
...I spoke too soon
Someone said my name 3 times...
But actually, once explaining myself, I only post to clarify my position where folks ask me a question or misattribute ideas
and you're still wrong, for the reasons I've explained multiple times, and which you've failed to successfully refute.
Well, yes we have a difference of opinion there, but I was just clarifying why I was calling for a ban.
Besides, I've explained multiple times, that chink is largely an unnecessary word, it's just that you have a different opinion.
[I]CharlieMungus - Member
My argument wasn't to ban it so much as to say there are equal reasons for banning it as there are for many other banned words. [/I]
But you have also made a judgement that it's acceptable to you, to lose a word to the filter, when used for it's alternative meanings.
Others here have disagreed.
Sometimes it's not as straight forward as just blindly pursuing consistent application of a policy/rule.
ah yes, google is biased
No, googling posts within singletrack to select your sample is though.
[I]Tom_W1987 - Member
I don't believe you[/I]
Not a surprize to me and not my problem.
Please think about what I've just pointed out to you.
Seeing as you dont care for giving thought to why someone might find a word being used both worrying and offensive - Ill give exactly no thought to your experience what so ever Solo.
[quote=Tom_W1987 ]No, googling posts within singletrack to select your sample is though.
Eh? We're discussing use of the word on STW, where else should I select my sample? Or is there some other obtuse point you're trying to make?
He can't be bargained with, he can't be reasoned with and he will not stop,ever, until you admit that he's right.
Tom is the T800 of the STW forum.
[I]Tom_W1987 - Member
Seeing as you dont care for giving thought to why someone might find a word being used both worrying and offensive - Ill give exactly no thought to your experience what so ever Solo.[/I]
I'm fluent only in English, and even that's marginal.
Edit:
Btw, I experienced worse while I was there, and that was only what I could understand being spoken in English.
I was asking you to look at your own disbelief regarding my experience.
You claim not to believe it happened, because you don't want to believe it happened and that it didn't bother me.
Evidently there seems to be no room in your paradigm for people such as me.
Eh? We're discussing use of the word on STW
Are we? I don't believe we are.
Often? Graham's just given another search link up there - why don't you go and find just how "often" that happens
I reckon I can see a few examples in the last few pages of this very thread.
what I argued for was consistency in the banning of words.
... which I emailed you about when you accused us of inconsistency back when this thread was still in short pants. To wit:
"****" is profanity. We consistently remove these words.
"Chinky," whilst potentially offensive, is not. We consistently do not remove these words.
I suppose the latter isn't strictly accurate; it should really state that "we consistently do not [b]automatically [/b]remove these words." If you used the term in an offensive manner it would be deleted.
Whilst you assert that there is no situation where "chinky" would not be offensive, if it were in the blocked list we wouldn't have been able to even have this conversation. (Whether or not that's a bad thing I'll leave as an exercise for the reader.)
It's a swear filter. Clue's in the name. Again, I said this right at the start, it is not intended to be a definitive list, it is a blunt instrument to automate the removal of the more common swear words. Words that are not in the filter are not just ignored, rather they're moderated by Real People who can make a judgement call. If you like, just because we've popped up a speed camera in an accident blackspot doesn't mean that we've done away with traffic police.
We could "nanny state" it I assume, and put every single possible word in there that someone somewhere could possibly take offence at if they really tried, but I don't think anyone [i]really[/i] wants that, do they?
[quote=Tom_W1987 ]Are we? I don't believe we are.
[b]We[/b] are. You could go and have an argument with yourself if you want to do something different.
[quote=CharlieMungus ]I reckon I can see a few examples in the last few pages of this very thread.
I must have missed them - linky and/or quote or you're making it up.
The terracotta soldier, and other similar the Wong on many levels image
[quote=Cougar ]We could "nanny state" it I assume, and put every single possible word in there that someone somewhere could possibly take offence at if they really tried, but I don't think anyone really wants that, do they?
I think CM does - here's his post where he makes exactly that point:
[quote=CharlieMungus ]* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ****
Point of order, incidentally, is that moderators don't have access to the swear filter. Or rather, we do but it's read-only (and hilarious). Even if I agreed with you, which I don't, there's nothing I can do directly to change it beyond making the request.
[I]do they? [/I]
Nope.
[I]aracer - Member
I think CM does - here's his post where he makes exactly that point:
CharlieMungus » * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ****[/I]
L,LOL @ ^^
[quote=CharlieMungus ]The terracotta soldier, and other similar the Wong on many levels image
Hmm, except you claimed:
CharlieMungus » Often, chink is used in microagressions along with other provocative posts which are then excused based on their alternative meanings.
I see no excusing being made (like Graham my finger hovered over the report post), and one of your examples doesn't even use the offending word. Meanwhile "a few" conventionally means more than two (we must be accurate in our terminology).
"****" is profanity. We consistently remove these words.
"Chinky," whilst potentially offensive, is not. We consistently do not remove these words.
I know, but the profane is such because it us offensive, unless there is something special about the offensive of profanity which is absent from other offensive terms. I accept that mods have no control over it and respect that you admit that it is laughable, but we have no other conduit to the decision makers.
