i don't get it

[GirlNextDoor15]

I unfortunately have to point out that on a Western world internet forum populated with teens, when you say a term including a certain colour of waffle (heck, even when you just say "waffle"), most folks here know exactly what you're talking about within seconds. I would say those edits are fair, because the topic at hand when you mention such things is absolutely repulsive, and I think you and I both know you were not talking about the food.

oops ok fine. what if a kid posted blue waffles, will he get edited? there are two meanings for that term and you shouldn't warn them because of whatever based on your understanding. you'll end up offending them.

[HotelUser]

oops ok fine. what if a kid posted blue waffles, will he get edited? there are two meanings for that term and you shouldn't warn them because of whatever based on your understanding. you'll end up offending them.

This is a scenario where a moderator would exercise their best judgement and assess the scenario as best they could to determine in what context the user posted the phrase in. When it comes down to "waffles", it's usually quite obvious where a user is having a genuine discussion about cooking for example, and when they're promoting the other sort of "waffle".

[GirlNextDoor15]

This is a scenario where a moderator would exercise their best judgement and assess the scenario as best they could to determine in what context the user posted the phrase in. When it comes down to "waffles", it's usually quite obvious where a user is having a genuine discussion about cooking for example, and when they're promoting the other sort of "waffle".

genuine.. genuine as in what an 18 year old would think of what a 10 year old said or 10-10? its just not right. oh and when does this whole 'moderators have the best judgement' thing started? what i posted wasnt even offensive. but meh. i only get edited. im still ok with it

[xxMATTGxx]

genuine.. genuine as in what an 18 year old would think of what a 10 year old said or 10-10? its just not right. oh and when does this whole 'moderators have the best judgement' thing started? what i posted wasnt even offensive. but meh. i only get edited. im still ok with it

Let's be honest here, blue waffles is hardly blueberry waffles now. What you posted was related to the rather disturbing image.

[beth]

if you were thinking blueberry waffles why would you shorten it to blue... even without the disgusting connotation. nobody shortens blueberry to just blue, that's silly.

[brandon]

I've updated the FAQ here and rule A3 too.

[GommeInc]

I've updated the FAQ here and rule A3 too.

Finally some common sense - you can use FU as long as it's not in a way of insult. So anyone posting those FUUUUU comics cannot be penalised for posting non-insulting material. Good job brandon

[brandon]

Finally some common sense - you can use FU as long as it's not in a way of insult. So anyone posting those FUUUUU comics cannot be penalised for posting non-insulting material. Good job brandon

Haha don't praise me because it doesn't say that! I don't think 'FU' is a big deal really, I spoke to sct about including it or not and the only problem in allowing it I can see is that in going down the road of allowing some and not others we've already made it a bit complex before adding exceptions to the ones that aren't allowed, that and the fact that there could be cloudy situations where someone claims they were using 'FU' indirectly and they weren't, when it's 100% clear it's not aimed at somebody then yes I don't think you should be penalised for using it.

[Catzsy]

Haha don't praise me because it doesn't say that! I don't think 'FU' is a big deal really, I spoke to sct about including it or not and the only problem in allowing it I can see is that in going down the road of allowing some and not others we've already made it a bit complex before adding exceptions to the ones that aren't allowed, that and the fact that there could be cloudy situations where someone claims they were using 'FU' indirectly and they weren't, when it's 100% clear it's not aimed at somebody then yes I don't think you should be penalised for using it.

So all abbreviations are now allowed unless they are used to insult other members? Just to clarify as the way it reads it could be interpreted that FU is still not allowed. If all abbreviations of the 'f' word are allowed except for insulting which would be rule A1 anyway I do think it is a good move and much better than just a few exceptions.

[brandon]

So all abbreviations are now allowed unless they are used to insult other members? Just to clarify as the way it reads it could be interpreted that FU is still not allowed. If all abbreviations of the 'f' word are allowed except for insulting which would be rule A1 anyway I do think it is a good move and much better than just a few exceptions.

Yes I think that's the way we're going to have to go otherwise it's far too confusing still , I've tweaked it slightly again. So to clarify, you can use all of these abbreviated phrases now including FU but if they are deemed to be used offensively they'll be removed under rule A1 - correct.