[R} Biden Thread

[Gormwood]

Political NIcknaming.

I will vote for Biden if the running mate is Baldwin or Pocahontas. Otherwise it’s Howie Hawkins.

[Giovenith]

Addressed.

[South Odreria 2]

I would like to appeal this ruling.

As I understand it, this is the site policy on political nicknaming:

Political nicknaming is taking the target's name and altering it so as to mock or disparage that person. With Trump, the most famous one is calling him "Drumpf." That was the family's name 300 years ago or so. Other examples would be "Killary" or "Hitlary." "Dipshit in chief" isn't political nicknaming.

Just as “Dipshit in chief” is not an alteration of the name “Donald Trump,” “Pocahontas” is not an alteration of the name “Elizabeth Warren.”

[Northwest Slobovia]

This appears to be the relevent ruling: viewtopic.php?p=34777951#p34777951

I'd quote it, but then the nested quotation referring to "Pocahontas" would be lost because of the nesting limit. Since Jakker mentions discussing it with the team, it appears to be a consensus ruling, and has been enforced that way since.

[Gormwood]

I would like to appeal this ruling.

As I understand it, this is the site policy on political nicknaming:

Political nicknaming is taking the target's name and altering it so as to mock or disparage that person. With Trump, the most famous one is calling him "Drumpf." That was the family's name 300 years ago or so. Other examples would be "Killary" or "Hitlary." "Dipshit in chief" isn't political nicknaming.

Just as “Dipshit in chief” is not an alteration of the name “Donald Trump,” “Pocahontas” is not an alteration of the name “Elizabeth Warren.”

It's literally a political nickname. Under that "logic" of yours I would be perfectly fine calling Trump "Spanky Bonespurs".

[The Archregimancy]

Appeal denied.

Given that this is likeliest to be one of the nastiest presidential elections in living memory - a general observation, and not a value judgement of either side - you can expect us to be particularly strict on trolling; and political nicknaming is a subset of trolling.

We are as likely to crack down on calling Senator Warren 'Pocahontas' or Vice President Biden 'SleepyCreepy' as we are to crack down on calling President Trump 'the Mussolini of Mar-a-Lago', 'the Orange Orangutan', 'President Tweety', or indeed 'Spanky Bonespurs'. As per the link offered by Northwest Slobovia above, 'Pocahontas' in application to Senator Warren was ruled as actionable as far back as 2018

So please take this as a formal statement that A) trolling via political nicknaming need not narrowly encompass variations of an individual's name and B) the rule can equally apply to people who are using that nickname while stating that they're voting for a candidate. On B, we don't want opponents of a candidate running around saying 'but you let that candidate's supporters use that name, so why should I be warned for it?'

Though as ever, we'll take things on a case by case basis; circumstances matter. Farnhamia's May ruling quoted above, while defining nicknaming more narrowly than I would have done, was right to draw a distinction between an insult and a nickname. You can still insult a candidate; as per long-standing precedent, insulting people who aren't members of the site isn't flaming. Referring to the president as a 'fucking dipshit' or to Biden as a 'creepy quasi-rapist' remains valid so long as it doesn't descend into trolling. I fully accept that the line between insult and trolling may not always be clear; but if you're not sure, then maybe steer clear of that line.

Finally, discussion of political nicknames is legitimate. So debating points along the lines of 'I think it's really objectionable to refer to our brave president as Spanky Bonespurs' or 'Trump's Pocahontas nickname for Senator Warren is implicitly racist', etc. remains valid.

[South Odreria 2]

Ok, thank you for the explanation and policy statement, I appreciate it.