Bring on the clowns. Again.

[SB_Johnny]

Almost certainly completely unrelated to the blog post, but if anyone harbors a doubt about whether the gender wars are a live issue among WP's "content contributors", here's proof.

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

Almost certainly completely unrelated to the blog post, but if anyone harbors a doubt about whether the gender wars are a live issue among WP's "content contributors", here's proof.

Formerly called Malleus Fatuorum, Eric Corbett again used "cunt" in the northern English sense, not applied to anybody in particular, and a few people went bananas. Calm and wiser persons pacified the aggrieved person. As usual, Eric was defended by women contributors who actually write serious articles.

This has nothing to do with academic feminists or "gender wars".

[iii]

Almost certainly completely unrelated to the blog post, but if anyone harbors a doubt about whether the gender wars are a live issue among WP's "content contributors", here's proof.

Formerly called Malleus Fatuorum, Eric Corbett again used "cunt" in the northern English sense, not applied to anybody in particular, and a few people went bananas. Calm and wiser persons pacified the aggrieved person. As usual, Eric was defended by women contributors who actually write serious articles.

This has nothing to do with academic feminists or "gender wars".

What do you suppose this is supposed to mean, then?

The discussion seems to be more about you and your prissy militant feminist friends.

Are you somehow able to distinguish between which feminists are "academic" and which are "prissy militant"?

[HRIP7]

Calm and wiser persons pacified the aggrieved person.

Not sure where you got that impression from. This is turning into Cuntgate. And Eric has been blocked for 72 hours ... not for saying the c-word in female company, but for an edit summary.

And now Bishonen (T-C-L) has called an Indian editor a ciunt. (She did it at his request, I hasten to add!)

Thank you for the kind word, Bish. I feel better already. - Sitush (talk) 08:03, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

And there is something or other about child porn in there as well ...

Just a day in the life of the wonderful project designed to make the sum of human knowledge freely available to all.

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

Calm and wiser persons pacified the aggrieved person.

Not sure where you got that impression from. This is turning into Cuntgate. And Eric has been blocked for 72 hours ... not for saying the c-word in female company, but for an edit summary.

The aggrieved editor seemed to accept that others had consensus she was over-reacting and misunderstanding/mischaracterizing Eric's (ill chosen) remark at 3 discussions at AN and ANI and some administrators' talk pages. Snottywong / Scottywong again tried to provoke Eric, with his usual failure.

You are correct that I was premature in my judgment.

Then the aggrieved editor started whining at Jimmy Wales's talkpage, where Eric finally left an edit summary with a question about whether the person was last in the queue at which God was handing out brains, for which he was blocked by Brownhairedgirl, who threw out the consensus at the previous discussions and emphasized his use of "cunt".

Update:
Citing the consensus at two ANI discussions, administrator Dangerous Panda undid the block.

[snowskarlet]

Are you somehow able to distinguish between which feminists are "academic" and which are "prissy militant"?

To me a clue would be that academic feminists are involved in article improvement and in writing more articles on women. Those who run to drama and complaint boards and spam user talk pages to forum shop are the prissy militants.

I have been following this on en-wiki so I speak from some context of the multiple discussions. At one point, an editor asked one of the main instigators if she had ever considered actually just writing Wikipedia articles instead of POV pushing? I cannot be more specifiic, since amongst all the miles and miles of text that has occurred in the past several days, I will not be able to find a diff. I mean this is on so many talk pages...

(edited for bad spelling...)

[snowskarlet]

An example of related contributions by one main complainer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:C ... htbreather

[iii]

Are you somehow able to distinguish between which feminists are "academic" and which are "prissy militant"?

To me a clue would be that academic feminists are involved in article improvement and in writing more article on women. Those who run to drama and complaint boards and spam user talk pages to forum shop are the prissy militants.....

It seems that you missed the false dichotomy in that comparison. You also missed that the pejorative adjective employed is needlessly and, I would say, inflammatorily sexist . Additionally, the pejorative noun employed is not equivalent to a person who is being judged solely on the basis of writing certain strings of words on a page on the internet.

[snowskarlet]

Are you somehow able to distinguish between which feminists are "academic" and which are "prissy militant"?

To me a clue would be that academic feminists are involved in article improvement and in writing more article on women. Those who run to drama and complaint boards and spam user talk pages to forum shop are the prissy militants.....

It seems that you missed the false dichotomy in that comparison. You also missed that the pejorative adjective employed is needlessly and, I would say, inflammatorily sexist . Additionally, the pejorative noun employed is not equivalent to a person who is being judged solely on the basis of writing certain strings of words on a page on the internet.

Hence, a futile exercise in semantics in both cases; yours and mine.

[tarantino]

Calm and wiser persons pacified the aggrieved person.

Not sure where you got that impression from. This is turning into Cuntgate. And Eric has been blocked for 72 hours ... not for saying the c-word in female company, but for an edit summary.

And now Bishonen (T-C-L) has called an Indian editor a ciunt. (She did it at his request, I hasten to add!)

Thank you for the kind word, Bish. I feel better already. - Sitush (talk) 08:03, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

And there is something or other about child porn in there as well ...

Just a day in the life of the wonderful project designed to make the sum of human knowledge freely available to all.

Sitush is a middle-aged white guy from Manchester.

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

Are you somehow able to distinguish between which feminists are "academic" and which are "prissy militant"?

To me a clue would be that academic feminists are involved in article improvement and in writing more article on women. Those who run to drama and complaint boards and spam user talk pages to forum shop are the prissy militants.....

It seems that you missed the false dichotomy in that comparison. You also missed that the pejorative adjective employed is needlessly and, I would say, inflammatorily sexist . Additionally, the pejorative noun employed is not equivalent to a person who is being judged solely on the basis of writing certain strings of words on a page on the internet.

Hence, a futile exercise in semantics in both cases; yours and mine.

Any mind cogitating cliches---particularly the pomo pseudoacademic decadence displayed in worrying about "science wars", "gender wars", "math wars", etc.---was a terrible thing to have wasted.

Pomo pseudoacademics are simultaneously (1) so open minded that their brains are falling out and (2) prone to preening displays of self-righteous indignation around their favored identity "politics".
Eric's "prissy" does not have the charity associated with my writings.

[Writegeist]

GetEricFest 2014

The gist:
Eric Corbett says something about cunts. Shock horror. Lightbreather (1) flat-out lies that Eric called her a cunt and (2) goes on a wild forum-shopping spree. BrownHairedGirl jumps in with feminista granny standup routine (squeals of "misogyny!" etc.); quite funny but way too long. Collect, everybody's favorite comedian, makes a brief appearance, gets ignored, goes away. Scottywong gets snotty. Dennis Brown calls out Snottywong. Eric gets blocked (BrownHairedGirl) and unblocked (Panda). Dimbo tries to strong-arm Panda. Creepy alliance of civility militia and all-round prissy schoolmarms make chicken's-bottom faces and circle-jerk as they join together for the annual grim GetEricfFest. Etc., etc.

Best clown show in town, playing at numerous venues. Don't miss.

ANI:
Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive848}"Personal attack(s) and harassment" (T-H-L) Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Conduct_unbecoming_of_an_administrator (T-H-L)

Panda:
User_talk:DangerousPanda#Link, please (T-H-L)
User_talk:DangerousPanda#Unfortunate (T-H-L)

AN3:
Wikipedia:AN3#User:Eric_Corbett_reported_by_User:Bloodofox_.28Result:_Pointless_squabble.29 (T-H-L)

Dimbo talk:
wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#I_don.27t_know_if_it_will_make_any_difference... (T-H-L) et seq.

Additional links on those pages.

[Midsize Jake]

Also discussed <merged now> in this other thread, though I suppose it probably should have a thread of its own, given the absurd degree to which these things get blown up.

Still, it really would be better for everyone if Mr. Corbett would stop using that word altogether. (At least on the internet.)

[Kumioko]

I also think that things are blown way out of proportion. Its not like Eric isn't well known to use fowl language or make an unflattering comment, and he isn't the only one. What I find more of a problem is those editors that are baiting him into these situations. Yes its his fault he is taking the bait, but if the "admins" and other miscreant leaders of Wikipedia cannot look at the situation and see that he is being baited and deal with those editors that are galling him into a confrontation, then they are not doing their jobs. They are just as much at fault as eric or the antagonizers. With that said, I do agree that Eric should remove that word from his vocabulary.

[EricBarbour]

I'll throw it on the pile, despite not being especially "original" or anything.

Just since May 2013, he's been blocked and unblocked seven times. As Malleus Fatuorum, he was blocked/unblocked 22 times that I can find, and there are probably blocks that were removed from the block logs. Perhaps after block #50 he'll get a free car wash.

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

BWilkins and I have often disagreed, and he likely has blocked me (or at least supported blocks) in the past.

Yet, here again, BWilkins / DangerousPanda displayed admirable backbone, humility (in presenting the ANI consensus rather than his ego), and calmness.

Perhaps those who objected to my endorsement of him (for similar qualities and actions) in the last Arbcom Election may reconsider whether they have underestimated him?

[enwikibadscience]

BWilkins and I have often disagreed, and he likely has blocked me (or at least supported blocks) in the past.

Yet, here again, BWilkins / DangerousPanda displayed admirable backbone, humility (in presenting the ANI consensus rather than his ego), and calmness.

Perhaps those who objected to my endorsement of him (for similar qualities and actions) in the last Arbcom Election may reconsider whether they have underestimated him?

Under which identity did you endorse him?

(Of his.)

[Writegeist]

Its not like Eric isn't well known to use fowl language

Good point, and In fact it's commonplace all over the British Isles. "Hen" is a Scots term of endearment. Ditto "duckie" among Cockneys. And many Brits take a gander at the daily tabloid photos of bare-breasted birds, some of whom appear in films which always turn out to be turkeys.

[Randy from Boise]

BWilkins and I have often disagreed, and he likely has blocked me (or at least supported blocks) in the past.

Yet, here again, BWilkins / DangerousPanda displayed admirable backbone, humility (in presenting the ANI consensus rather than his ego), and calmness.

Perhaps those who objected to my endorsement of him (for similar qualities and actions) in the last Arbcom Election may reconsider whether they have underestimated him?

I have repeatedly growled and swore about him, but he has been brave and unflinching here.


RfB

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

Its not like Eric isn't well known to use fowl language

Good point, and In fact it's commonplace all over the British Isles. "Hen" is a Scots term of endearment. Ditto "duckie" among Cockneys. And many Brits take a gander at the daily tabloid photos of bare-breasted birds, some of whom appear in films which always turn out to be turkeys.

"Hen" is also the Swedish androgynous pronoun that some feminists wish to replace "he" ("han") and "she" ("hon").

[Writegeist]

Its not like Eric isn't well known to use fowl language

Good point, and In fact it's commonplace all over the British Isles. "Hen" is a Scots term of endearment. Ditto "duckie" among Cockneys. And many Brits take a gander at the daily tabloid photos of bare-breasted birds, some of whom appear in films which always turn out to be turkeys.

"Hen" is also the Swedish androgynous pronoun that some feminists wish to replace "he" ("han") and "she" ("hon").

Farsi is gender-neutral (though probably not because of Persian feminist activism), and also does without definite and indefinite pronouns.

The people on each side of the Cuntgate kerfuffle might be satisfied by the substitute of "genitals" for both cunt and dick. "If you don't want to be called genitals don't act like them." I'll try it on the natives in a far-flung outpost there and see how it goes.

[Vigilant]

BrownHairedGirl (T-C-L) sure is a self righteous victim.

That being said, Eric Corbett and Malleus before have been blocked over 40 times for being a giant douchebag.
Were all 40 admins wrong?

Get your shit together wikipedia.
Or you can sit around on Jimbo talk have "thoughtful" and angst filled conversations in circles while wringing your collective hands about how you can't do anything about an obvious dickhole.
Either suits me.

Hasten the day!

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

BrownHairedGirl (T-C-L) sure is a self-righteous victim.

Surely, Vigilant, your heart was pumping as much peanut butter as mine was after BHG's sycophancy towards "the founder" Jimmy Wales and outgoing WMF CEO Sue Gardner ("up against the wall, the way Ironholds likes it").

The former Executive Director Sue Gardener (sic) repeatedly acknowledged the seriousness of the incivility problem, even noting that when she met people with the expertise to significantly enhance Wikipedia's coverage of neglected areas, she was reluctant to recommend that they expose themselves to such a hostile editing environment. That is an appalling indictment of the foundation's governance, particular when editor retention is problem acknowledged by all involved. -- BrownHairedGirl 12:17 pm, Yesterday (UTC+2)

Why does Wikipedia tolerate people who address other editors like that? Even when they post like that to the talk page of Wikipedia's founder -- BrownHairedGirl 10:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

[Randy from Boise]

Taking a stab here, this one ends in an ArbCom case in which Malleus is indeffed at long last, BHG loses tools, and B. Wilkins gets sternly reprimanded. And the forum-shopper who caused the shitstorm skates...

Oh, and Hell in a Basket is also a goner if ArbCom touches this one — that is guaranteed.


RfB

[Kumioko]

I also agree that at some point Eric/Malleus will be banned. I don't condone his conduct and have often disagreed with his "statements" and language but I don't think he is the worst one on the project. Yes he uses some foul language and absrasive tone but in almost every case, when looked into, you will see that someone baited him into it, often times an admin who would then block him. So although I cannot completely be on Eric's side here, I also do not think he is the only one who is culpible either. I rather hope that someone does an Arbcom case and that the arbs in a rare attempt to do the right thing for once due some due diligence and get rid of some of the abusive admins who actively harass, bait and stalk eric's edits. I rather doubt it, because lets face it the arbcom is neither thorough, fair or even competent, but it is my hope anyway.

[HRIP7]

I say, Jimbo was taken to ANI. Discussion on his talk page.

[Randy from Boise]

I also agree that at some point Eric/Malleus will be banned. I don't condone his conduct and have often disagreed with his "statements" and language but I don't think he is the worst one on the project. Yes he uses some foul language and absrasive tone but in almost every case, when looked into, you will see that someone baited him into it, often times an admin who would then block him. So although I cannot completely be on Eric's side here, I also do not think he is the only one who is culpible either. I rather hope that someone does an Arbcom case and that the arbs in a rare attempt to do the right thing for once due some due diligence and get rid of some of the abusive admins who actively harass, bait and stalk eric's edits. I rather doubt it, because lets face it the arbcom is neither thorough, fair or even competent, but it is my hope anyway.

The secret about Eric is that he throws verbal haymakers but has a glass chin. He is easy to bait and prone to go berserk when baited.

He also does excellent work at Wikipedia, it is always worth mentioning.

How much value does one place on having a nice, polite Friendly Space™ Teaparty and how much value does one place on having the best Encyclopedia-and-Compendium-of-General-Information possible?

THAT is the big question...

RfB

[Kumioko]

I also agree that at some point Eric/Malleus will be banned. I don't condone his conduct and have often disagreed with his "statements" and language but I don't think he is the worst one on the project. Yes he uses some foul language and absrasive tone but in almost every case, when looked into, you will see that someone baited him into it, often times an admin who would then block him. So although I cannot completely be on Eric's side here, I also do not think he is the only one who is culpible either. I rather hope that someone does an Arbcom case and that the arbs in a rare attempt to do the right thing for once due some due diligence and get rid of some of the abusive admins who actively harass, bait and stalk eric's edits. I rather doubt it, because lets face it the arbcom is neither thorough, fair or even competent, but it is my hope anyway.

The secret about Eric is that he throws verbal haymakers but has a glass chin. He is easy to bait and prone to go berserk when baited.

He also does excellent work at Wikipedia, it is always worth mentioning.

How much value does one place on having a nice, polite Friendly Space™ Teaparty and how much value does one place on having the best Encyclopedia-and-Compendium-of-General-Information possible?

THAT is the big question...

RfB

Agreed. I am not sayin gthat Eric shouldn't be blocked for his swearing but I can't see a ban for an editor with that much content development to their credit. Especially when he is being baited by some others including admins. I definately think he needs to get some thicker skin and yes the same can be said of me and a lot of others.

[Writegeist]

I also agree that at some point Eric/Malleus will be banned. I don't condone his conduct and have often disagreed with his "statements" and language but I don't think he is the worst one on the project. Yes he uses some foul language and absrasive tone but in almost every case, when looked into, you will see that someone baited him into it, often times an admin who would then block him. So although I cannot completely be on Eric's side here, I also do not think he is the only one who is culpible either. I rather hope that someone does an Arbcom case and that the arbs in a rare attempt to do the right thing for once due some due diligence and get rid of some of the abusive admins who actively harass, bait and stalk eric's edits. I rather doubt it, because lets face it the arbcom is neither thorough, fair or even competent, but it is my hope anyway.

The secret about Eric is that he throws verbal haymakers but has a glass chin. He is easy to bait and prone to go berserk when baited.

He also does excellent work at Wikipedia, it is always worth mentioning.

How much value does one place on having a nice, polite Friendly Space™ Teaparty and how much value does one place on having the best Encyclopedia-and-Compendium-of-General-Information possible?

THAT is the big question...

RfB

Agreed. I am not sayin gthat Eric shouldn't be blocked for his swearing but I can't see a ban for an editor with that much content development to their credit. Especially when he is being baited by some others including admins. I definately think he needs to get some thicker skin and yes the same can be said of me and a lot of others.

The tendency to threaten to quit if he doesn't get his own way is an EC characteristic I don't much care for. It seems a fairly widespread practice. There's even one pompous ass who does the announcing in Latin, which makes him look even more of a hilarious fuckwit. Three things I do like about the way EC operates: he doesn't suffer fools gladly, he calls them on their bullshit, and he doesn't mince his words.

[Vigilant]

I also agree that at some point Eric/Malleus will be banned. I don't condone his conduct and have often disagreed with his "statements" and language but I don't think he is the worst one on the project. Yes he uses some foul language and absrasive tone but in almost every case, when looked into, you will see that someone baited him into it, often times an admin who would then block him. So although I cannot completely be on Eric's side here, I also do not think he is the only one who is culpible either. I rather hope that someone does an Arbcom case and that the arbs in a rare attempt to do the right thing for once due some due diligence and get rid of some of the abusive admins who actively harass, bait and stalk eric's edits. I rather doubt it, because lets face it the arbcom is neither thorough, fair or even competent, but it is my hope anyway.

The secret about Eric is that he throws verbal haymakers but has a glass chin. He is easy to bait and prone to go berserk when baited.

He also does excellent work at Wikipedia, it is always worth mentioning.

How much value does one place on having a nice, polite Friendly Space™ Teaparty and how much value does one place on having the best Encyclopedia-and-Compendium-of-General-Information possible?

THAT is the big question...

RfB

Agreed. I am not sayin gthat Eric shouldn't be blocked for his swearing but I can't see a ban for an editor with that much content development to their credit. Especially when he is being baited by some others including admins. I definately think he needs to get some thicker skin and yes the same can be said of me and a lot of others.

He's a dick...all the fucking time.

How long would he have teeth if he said this to people in person?

[Vigilant]

The tendency to threaten to quit if he doesn't get his own way is an EC characteristic I don't much care for. It seems a fairly widespread practice. There's even one pompous ass who does the announcing in Latin, which makes him look even more of a hilarious fuckwit. Three things I do like about the way EC operates: he doesn't suffer fools gladly, he calls them on their bullshit, and he doesn't mince his words.

He's an asshole.
That's the word you're searching for.
In a collaborative work, he's a huge net negative.

[Writegeist]

How long would he have teeth if he said this to people in person?

Good question.

a giant douche [...] an obvious dickhole [...] a dick [...] an asshole

About as long as you?

...pompous ass...hilarious fuckwit

Or me?

[Kumioko]

The tendency to threaten to quit if he doesn't get his own way is an EC characteristic I don't much care for. It seems a fairly widespread practice. There's even one pompous ass who does the announcing in Latin, which makes him look even more of a hilarious fuckwit. Three things I do like about the way EC operates: he doesn't suffer fools gladly, he calls them on their bullshit, and he doesn't mince his words.

He's an asshole.
That's the word you're searching for.
In a collaborative work, he's a huge net negative.

I personally find it quite ironic that you and he share a lot of the same characteristics. In fact I haven't completely decided if your not Eric yourself.

[Triptych]

I think Brownhairedgirl was using her administrative powers reasonably to block Eric Corbett for 72 hours (I'd oppose any longer) for his edit comment "were you hiding behind the door when God handed out brains?" or whatever the precise words were.

Dennis Brown runs around unchallenged calling a new editor "dick" and blocking him a week for the comparatively impersonal comment that some manual-style page must have been written by an idiot. How can he do that? He's pretty much the captain of WP:AN/ANI.

The reason Bwilkins felt at liberty to reverse Brownhairedgirl's move was sexist and bullying: she's not a regular in the WP:AN/ANI boys club and he figured (correctly) he'd get away with it, and further he'd get backing (he did) from the other regulars like Tparis and John and so forth. Bwilkins has been known to boast of the size of his "admin phallus" and he was swinging it around again in this case.

[Writegeist]

How long would he have teeth if he said this to people in person?

Good question.

a giant douche [...] an obvious dickhole [...] a dick [...] an asshole

About as long as you?

...pompous ass...hilarious fuckwit

Or me?

I feel confident that your false equivalency is plain for all to see. I am not trying to build an encyclopedia.

Further, I am more than confident that my fingers are not writing checks my body can't cash.

An encyclopedia-builder who calls people cunts or questions people's intelligence face to face is at risk of having his teeth knocked out, whereas there's no risk to a non-encyclopedia builder who calls people douches, dickholes, dicks, and assholes?

Absent any evidence either way I must take your word for your ability to protect your teeth. I'd give EC the same benefit of the same doubt. Do you have evidence he can't defend himself?

[eagle]

I say, Jimbo was taken to ANI. Discussion on his talk page.

where we find this gem of truth:

When this sort of thing kicks off, as it regularly does, don't you just think 'who the hell would want to get involved with us'? Anyone looking in on WP from the outside must think this place is just bonkers. DeCausa (talk) 20:36, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

[Vigilant]

How long would he have teeth if he said this to people in person?

Good question.

a giant douche [...] an obvious dickhole [...] a dick [...] an asshole

About as long as you?

...pompous ass...hilarious fuckwit

Or me?

I feel confident that your false equivalency is plain for all to see. I am not trying to build an encyclopedia.

Further, I am more than confident that my fingers are not writing checks my body can't cash.

An encyclopedia-builder who calls people cunts or questions people's intelligence face to face is at risk of having his teeth knocked out, whereas there's no risk to a non-encyclopedia builder who calls people douches, dickholes, dicks, and assholes?

Absent any evidence either way I must take your word for your ability to protect your teeth. I'd give EC the same benefit of the same doubt. Do you have evidence he can't defend himself?

I've seen his pictures.

[Cla68]

Activists, as I've said before, are the bane of Wikipedia. Sooner or later, there will be a showdown between feminists and masculinists on WP because one is apparently currently taking place on the general Internet, and not just in Reddit. This episode, however, was not it.

[enwikibadscience]

.... You also missed that the pejorative adjective employed is needlessly and, I would say, inflammatorily sexist. ....

That is missed a lot. And pointing it out qualifies you as a militant feminist, if not more.

[Randy from Boise]

The infuriating thing about Eric is that he completely knows that the word cunt has an inflammatory and ultra-sexist amplified meaning in American English, yet he gleefully charges forward lobbing his verbal petrol bombs...

Well, someday soon one of those will blow up in his face and that will be the end of Eric on Wikipedia.

Just. Knock. It. The. Fuck. Off.

How much clearer can it be? There's a difference between "refusing to suffer fools gladly" and being an inflammatory asshole about it.

RfB

[Vigilant]

The infuriating thing about Eric is that he completely knows that the word cunt has an inflammatory and ultra-sexist amplified meaning in American English, yet he gleefully charges forward lobbing his verbal petrol bombs...

Well, someday soon one of those will blow up in his face and that will be the end of Eric on Wikipedia.

Just. Knock. It. The. Fuck. Off.

How much clearer can it be? There's a difference between "refusing to suffer fools gladly" and being an inflammatory asshole about it.

RfB

Bingo.

[Drowninginlimbo]

I'm sure the contributors at the Encyclopedia Britannica frequently called each other cunts during the construction of the encyclopedia, it's an important part of the process. In all seriousness, isn't the point of the whole civility thing just an attempt for editors to treat each other as they would colleagues? I personally can't connect with the issue as use of the word is pretty normal here in England but I would refrain from using it if it pissed somebody off. He should have just apologised and got back to editing.

[Randy from Boise]

Roll out the bold print, indeed, to prove I'm a femiBitch, please, for thinking "cunt" is offensive.

Of course it's offensive, but the concept of "hate speech" has (for the most part) usually referred to something different - i.e., something more than just using an offensive word to insult someone. The rule I always went with was, if you can substitute another naughty word like "asshole" or "dickface" and not change the meaning of the sentence that included the insult, then that's all it is. Whereas, Mr. Wolfowitz was making a fairly bald-faced attempt to characterize someone's actions as Nazi-like, which implies a good deal more than simply saying the person was a "shithead" or "giant douche" or something.

I'm not saying we can't have that discussion, though. This might even be an appropriate thread to do it in... personally I've always avoided use of the c-word in everything I post and in my daily life as well, but that's just me - the argument that British people take a more cavalier approach to that word isn't completely off-base. Most forum managers tend to resist use of badwords filters and "disemvoweling" because members feel like they're being treated like children, and of course we've also seen how the badwords-filter feature can be abused in petty and malicious ways. Still, elevating "the c-word" to the level of "the n-word" in terms of how the mods react to various posts isn't necessarily a bad idea.

But it often is more than "just using an offensive word to insult someone." That is my point. It is an offensive word also used to demean women as a whole. "Shithead" and "douchebag" aren't used prejudicially against people of a certain gender, race, religion or other often minority status. If you just say "cunt" and I have to guess something about the person you are name-calling, I will start with female. It's not a coin toss probability.

It is completely unnecessary to throw "cunt" around, and, while I bet many in here also are equally not targeted by "nigger" there is a sensitivity to that word that is missing with "cunt."

In American English, "cunt" is an obscene and very highly derogatory word for women, with thick overtones of misogyny. It is the sort of slur that a wife beater would use before throwing a punch, and has an impact roughly on a par of calling a black person "nigger." It is a word rarely uttered, even by pottymouths.

In British English, it has roughly the same prevalence and impact as the American English word "pussy" — rude and sexist in origin, absolutely, but targeted at males. Its meaning is roughly, "asshole, dick, jerk, stupid blockhead" — frequently prefaced by qualifiers like "dumb" or "stupid."

Eric knows the difference, he has been down this road again and again and again and again.

If he did it consciously to get PC minds aflutter, it would have been a troll — but a poorly conceived one. But, per usual, this is just a case of obnoxious thoughtlessness, which seems to be a particular specialty of Eric's...

RfB

[iii]

.... You also missed that the pejorative adjective employed is needlessly and, I would say, inflammatorily sexist. ....

That is missed a lot. And pointing it out qualifies you as a militant feminist, if not more.

Are you trying to flatter me?

[Midsize Jake]

But it often is more than "just using an offensive word to insult someone." That is my point. It is an offensive word also used to demean women as a whole. "Shithead" and "douchebag" aren't used prejudicially against people of a certain gender, race, religion or other often minority status. If you just say "cunt" and I have to guess something about the person you are name-calling, I will start with female. It's not a coin toss probability.

Okay then - I completely agree with this. (It doesn't cover the cultural-difference argument, but who cares what the British think, after all.) What do we do rules-wise, though? If someone uses that word gratuitously when another, most gender-neutral naughty word would readily suffice, do we warn-then-suspend? Public or private warnings? If the warning doesn't work, maybe start with 24 hours, then 48, then a week, then indefinite? I assume you're not demanding zero-tolerance, but... would you prefer zero-tolerance?

[Zoloft]

But it often is more than "just using an offensive word to insult someone." That is my point. It is an offensive word also used to demean women as a whole. "Shithead" and "douchebag" aren't used prejudicially against people of a certain gender, race, religion or other often minority status. If you just say "cunt" and I have to guess something about the person you are name-calling, I will start with female. It's not a coin toss probability.

Okay then - I completely agree with this. (It doesn't cover the cultural-difference argument, but who cares what the British think, after all.) What do we do rules-wise, though? If someone uses that word gratuitously when another, most gender-neutral naughty word would readily suffice, do we warn-then-suspend? Public or private warnings? If the warning doesn't work, maybe start with 24 hours, then 48, then a week, then indefinite? I assume you're not demanding zero-tolerance, but... would you prefer zero-tolerance?

The first week of our forum, I was testing out a word-censor (which substituted 'neighbor' for the n-word and 'cutie' for the c-word if I recall correctly) and people were outraged at this attack on the citadel of their freedoms.

I'm hoping I won't be asked to set it up again. People just take so much joy in evasion.

[Midsize Jake]

The first week of our forum, I was testing out a word-censor (which substituted 'neighbor' for the n-word and 'cutie' for the c-word if I recall correctly) and people were outraged at this attack on the citadel of their freedoms.

Hmm... and rightly so I'd say, given that badwords filters don't discriminate between quoted material and oblique references to word-usage, which is sort of what we're doing now. I'm afraid it pretty much has to be a "cultural" prohibition if we're going to do it, in which case it's just a matter of determining the level of support for it - especially among our female participants - and beyond that, how to respond to violations.

IOW, if the badwords filter were clearly the best (or only) way to do it - which it isn't - you could probably just go ahead and change the settings right away and most people probably wouldn't fuss about it.

[enwikibadscience]

....

It's trolling in the original and purest sense of the word.

....

Yes, but everyone keeps saying Eric is being provoked to troll. No. He's trolling because he wants to, like all trolls.

[enwikibadscience]

....

If he did it consciously to get PC minds aflutter, it would have been a troll — but a poorly conceived one. But, per usual, this is just a case of obnoxious thoughtlessness, which seems to be a particular specialty of Eric's...

....

RfB

You could be right. This is much of the problem with calls for civility on en.Wikipedia, you are asking a bunch of uncouth oafs to be better than they are capable of.

[enwikibadscience]

.... You also missed that the pejorative adjective employed is needlessly and, I would say, inflammatorily sexist. ....

That is missed a lot. And pointing it out qualifies you as a militant feminist, if not more.

Are you trying to flatter me?

For stating the obvious? Always.