%^&!@*! — Profanity Isn’t Worse Than Vulgarity or Lies

[Whiskey]

I wrote Be Less Dickish, so no one should be surprised that I use profanity. It’s part of my voice. Shades has his own preferences — he dislikes vulgarity and really dislikes profanity. That’s fine. We all get to have tastes. And the board already offers a PG filter for anyone who doesn’t want strong language. So surface-language issues are already solved.

The real problem isn’t about words. It’s about dishonesty.

Profanity is loud.
Vulgarity is crude.
Dishonesty is corrosive.

And here’s the part that keeps getting ignored: Dishonesty isn’t just making up facts. It includes shifting the discussion away from the topic and turning it into commentary about the poster instead of the argument.

That maneuver — switching the subject from the issue to the person — is not clever debate. It’s a technique designed to derail the conversation and force the other person into defending something they never said in the first place. It’s not “taunting” in the schoolyard sense; it’s a form of intellectual dishonesty that changes the terms of the exchange. Once someone redirects the discussion into personal distortions, the conversation is no longer about ideas. It’s about cleaning up the mess created by the distortion.

Answering that directly and bluntly is not helplessness, and it’s not lack of restraint. It’s responding to the conversation as it has been redirected.

If someone introduces false claims, invented motives, or misrepresented statements, the tone of the reply naturally matches the level of the escalation. That’s not a moral failure. That’s simply engaging on the new terrain the other person chose.

Profanity may offend aesthetic preferences.
But dishonesty wrecks the foundation of meaningful discussion.

If we’re ranking harms:

Meh: Profanity = aesthetic offense
Meh: Vulgarity = decorum offense
Real Damage: Dishonesty (including personal distortions) = structural offense

Only the last one threatens the credibility of the board. Only one of those things actually threatens the integrity of a discussion space — and it’s not the c-bombs or the f-words.

[Molok]

lol

[Whiskey]

lol

Deep. Very deep.

[canpakes]

lol

Deep. Very deep.

Likely very honest, too.

[Marcus]

I wrote Be Less Dickish..

Once someone redirects the discussion into personal distortions, the conversation is no longer about ideas. It’s about cleaning up the mess created by the distortion.

Answering that directly and bluntly is not helplessness, and it’s not lack of restraint. It’s responding to the conversation as it has been redirected.

If someone introduces false claims, invented motives, or misrepresented statements, the tone of the reply naturally matches the level of the escalation...

Huh. Be Less Dickish doesn't seem to recommend that.

Be Less Dickish provides a simple strategy for dealing with triggers in less extreme ways... We can all do better. We can be less dickish, and be less of an asshole, douchebag and pussy too.

https://pix-media.com/books/Be-Less-Dic ... mAzgEACAAJ

[Whiskey]

I wrote Be Less Dickish..

Once someone redirects the discussion into personal distortions, the conversation is no longer about ideas. It’s about cleaning up the mess created by the distortion.

Answering that directly and bluntly is not helplessness, and it’s not lack of restraint. It’s responding to the conversation as it has been redirected.

If someone introduces false claims, invented motives, or misrepresented statements, the tone of the reply naturally matches the level of the escalation...

Huh. Be Less Dickish doesn't seem to recommend that.

Be Less Dickish provides a simple strategy for dealing with triggers in less extreme ways... We can all do better. We can be less dickish, and be less of an asshole, douchebag and pussy too.

https://pix-media.com/books/Be-Less-Dic ... mAzgEACAAJ

Are you sure?

Tell me what is inconsistent.

[Marcus]

I wrote Be Less Dickish..

Once someone redirects the discussion into personal distortions, the conversation is no longer about ideas. It’s about cleaning up the mess created by the distortion.

Answering that directly and bluntly is not helplessness, and it’s not lack of restraint. It’s responding to the conversation as it has been redirected.

If someone introduces false claims, invented motives, or misrepresented statements, the tone of the reply naturally matches the level of the escalation...

Huh. Be Less Dickish doesn't seem to recommend that.

Be Less Dickish provides a simple strategy for dealing with triggers in less extreme ways... We can all do better. We can be less dickish, and be less of an asshole, douchebag and pussy too.

https://pix-media.com/books/Be-Less-Dic ... mAzgEACAAJ

Are you sure?

Tell me what is inconsistent.

Lol. Too funny.

[Whiskey]

Huh. Be Less Dickish doesn't seem to recommend that.

Are you sure?

Tell me what is inconsistent.

Lol. Too funny.

I didn't think you were sure.

The BS and taunting definitely and naturally escalates the conversation to confrontation.
Not sure what is not clear about that.

[Marcus]

Lol. Too funny.

I didn't think you were sure.

The BS and taunting definitely and naturally escalates the conversation to confrontation.
Not sure what is not clear about that.

What's clear is that Binger/Cultellus/Mayan Elephant/Whiskey possibly didn't actually write that book that he says he did:

Be Less Dickish provides a simple strategy for dealing with triggers in less extreme ways.
https://pix-media.com/books/Be-Less-Dic ... mAzgEACAAJ

[Whiskey]

I didn't think you were sure.

The BS and taunting definitely and naturally escalates the conversation to confrontation.
Not sure what is not clear about that.

What's clear is that Binger/Cultellus/Mayan Elephant/Whiskey possibly didn't actually write that book that he says he did:

Be Less Dickish provides a simple strategy for dealing with triggers in less extreme ways.
https://pix-media.com/books/Be-Less-Dic ... mAzgEACAAJ

You came to an imaginary and incorrect conclusion about me, great. But as for the topic, do you have a cogent thought?