Minor inconsistency in the rules

[happyturtle]

Extreme Flaming
A flame that includes insults or slurs based on anyone's race, religion, ethnicity, age, sex, gender, or sexual orientation is a Permanent Infraction, at the least, and may result in an Instant Ban for Hate Speech. Additionally, this Infraction may be issued in the case of a particularly nasty flame of any type at the discretion of the Mods.

Hate Speech
Particularly flagrant examples of insults or slurs based on categories/characteristics including but not limited to: race, religion, ethnicity, disability, age, sex, gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation. Also, denigrating comments or advocating violence towards those groups mentioned above will result in an immediate ban.


I noticed today that the Hate Speech definition includes two groups that aren't listed under Extreme Flaming (bolded above). I doubt it was an intentional decision, so I hope that disability and gender identity can be edited in to be covered by both rules.

[Abrexa]

Yeah. This is especially sad seeing all the mockery and dismissal of disabled people in my thread that was apparently okey :smallfrown:

[The Dark Fiddler]

I, personally, don't feel like gender identity is missing from flaming, since both sex and gender are included there. Gender identity feels a bit redundant in hate speech, actually, since it would almost certainly be covered by either/both of gender or/and sex.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: In addition, it's also covered under regular "Flaming." Also, parsing the rules at this level of detail in an attempt to evade them or justify evading them will be completely unsuccessful. I'll add this to the rule update list, but really, this is a non-issue.