I have to disagree with this to a point. I think that having an explicit tag for the odd contextual swear word is fine, and I may want to listen to those episodes, so I'm not going to filter out episodes on the basis of the explicit tag. However, having just listened to the episode in question, I would not want to listen to gratuitous swearing for the sake of swearing, or - in this case - name calling.
The language doesn't bother me, but the (and I think this term was used in the episode comments) _aggressive_ nature of the language used - e.g. "you're a political f---wit", and the very offensive use of the term "retard". I do believe that spaceman was making a really good point, but I think it ended up being diluted by the tone used. On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 6:50 PM x1101 <x1...@gmx.com> wrote: > I concur, HPR is a network for people to express themselves, and while I > strongly believe in a censorship-free HPR, that doesn’t mean that we have > the right to force someone to listen to explicit material if they do not > wish to. This ‘explicit’ tag gives people a piece of information to make > that choice for themselves. I know that I will always tag my shows as > ‘explicit’, because I don’t keep track of my language. While I appreciate > that there are other things that folks might find offensive outside of > technically explicit language, its a good start. > > Keep the vulgarity, keep the tag, and let us all decide for ourselves what > we want to produce and what we want to listen to. > > /x1101 > _______________________________________________ > Hpr mailing list > Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org > http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org > -- Sent from my portable digital telecommunications device. Please forgive brevity and any mistakes.
_______________________________________________ Hpr mailing list Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
