You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

joseph177 ago

So rule 2 effectively neuters the sub from discussion religion, zionism or any type of historical revisionism.

At least on reddit/r/conspiracy, we are free to discuss this.

Mumberthrax ago

Would you be willing to elaborate on that? That hasn't ever happened with the current rule so far as I'm aware, and it certainly wasn't something that seemed liable to happen to me when I put together the proposed update.

For reference, the current rule is:

No overt attacks on people's race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or creed

and the proposed updated version is:

No bigotry or hate speech

  • This includes, but is not limited to, bigotry based upon ethnicity, age, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, and religion.

For additional reference, the definition of bigotry I find most useful is:

  1. extreme intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.
  2. the actions, prejudices, etc., of a bigot.

Bigot being defined as:

One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

Similarly hate speech is:

Bigoted speech attacking or disparaging a social group or a member of such a group.


Based on this, I think it would be well within the realm of decency and within the bounds of the rule to discuss religion, Zionism, historical revisionism, etc. Discussion on these topics themselves is not forbidden by an anti-bigotry rule.

joseph177 ago

Hate Speech is a political term which is used to silence truth, since some truth is considered hate speech:

Simple Canadian example: http://i.imgur.com/aL4BiWc.jpg

Can't find the video, but I saw some bobble heads yapping and coming to the same conclusion.

Mumberthrax ago

That may be, I'm not really sure that I'm up to date on all the instances in which the term "hate speech" has been invoked. Would you care to propose any alternative terms which convey the same meaning to the common person?

How would you phrase the rule such that racist/sexist/etc. comments and submissions are understood to be not desired in our community?

nokilli ago

Simply adhere to the definition of what a conspiracy is. If the speech concerns itself with identifying a conspiracy for the purpose of exposing it and preventing and/or undoing the damage it intends, then it should be, must be, fair game.