Do not inhibit free expression of thought

[pottereuel]

Excellent discussion. I agree that the product sellers have authority. I will abide. I'm just concerned about the precedents that are being set.

[Cappie]

Could you explain to me which precedents are being set?

[Jest Phulin]

Some people see any limitation on speech (and, by extension, text as used in online communication) as inhibiting the free expression of oneself, which most modern countries take as a basic right. Since they see this as an infringement of a basic right, they fear that a precedent is being set to infringe on other rights.

There are two major problems with this line of thinking, though.

First, free speech applies to public forums. BGA is not a public forum; it is a private enterprise. As such, the administrators can place limits on what is allowable and non-allowable behavior and speech. They have determined that insulting behavior is unacceptable.

Second, even in a public forum, there are limits on free speech. The classic ruling in the United States is "you can't falsely shout 'fire' in a crowded theater." The ruling means that non-factual speech meant to cause damage is not protected. (Insulting speech is rarely factual, it is often opinion.) Beyond that, there are other generally accepted limitations: pornography should not be available in areas where minors could see it, for example.

[gurthbruins]

Earlier today, 8/14/18, Boardgamearena server would not allow the epithet: jerk. I object.

A large part of boardgaming is the repertoire. We insult each other with each turn. It's now called trash talk, but it's how games are played. Eliminate all censors. Battle filth if you must, but don't kill conversation.

Its how games are played? Do you decide that for everyone?

I really appreciate the attitude of the hosts here, having zero tolerance for trash. There is enough trash in the world without polluting this environment. Let's keep strict censorship. Please take your trash elsewhere.