(March 20, 2018 at 12:34 pm)Shell B Wrote: ABBA is sooooo bad. Tibs made me watch some ABBA musical. It was cringey as fuck!

Mama Mia, with Meryll Streep in it?

I quite liked it.

(March 20, 2018 at 12:34 pm)Shell B Wrote: ABBA is sooooo bad. Tibs made me watch some ABBA musical. It was cringey as fuck!

Ha ha ha, I like their music as everyone knows, but I agree, I am no fan of musicals. You couldn't get me to sit through Grease or The Rocky Horror Picture Show for that matter.

Even I have my limits.

(March 20, 2018 at 12:35 pm)Lutrinae Wrote:

(March 20, 2018 at 12:34 pm)Shell B Wrote: ABBA is sooooo bad. Tibs made me watch some ABBA musical. It was cringey as fuck!

Mama Mia, with Meryll Streep in it?

I quite liked it.  

It was campy, but more tolerable than some other musicals.

Brian, I like Rocky Horror. Funny musicals are fine. All other musicals must die.

(March 20, 2018 at 12:39 pm)Shell B Wrote:

(March 20, 2018 at 12:35 pm)Lutrinae Wrote: Mama Mia, with Meryll Streep in it?

I quite liked it.  

It was campy, but more tolerable than some other musicals.

Brian, I like Rocky Horror. Funny musicals are fine. All other musicals must die.

Give me a stage play over any musical, yea even Rocky Horror. I like Mama Mia the song, but I would kill myself if you forced me to watch the Musical Movie. I have never liked musicals.

(March 20, 2018 at 12:39 pm)Shell B Wrote:

(March 20, 2018 at 12:35 pm)Lutrinae Wrote: Mama Mia, with Meryll Streep in it?

I quite liked it.  

It was campy, but more tolerable than some other musicals.

Brian, I like Rocky Horror. Funny musicals are fine. All other musicals must die.

If you like fantasy/knights and comical musicals, check out a show called Galavant. Only went for two seasons but it's still in my top 20 shows.

I will!

We love the Star Kid musicals, but even those could do with fewer songs.

(March 19, 2018 at 4:06 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(March 19, 2018 at 3:19 pm)Losty Wrote: I think it’d be cool if people just didn’t use really vulgar words in their titles but I don’t think we should have a rule against it, mainly for reasons I already said like that it would be impossible to agree on which words were ok and which are too vulgar for titles, but also because I think the rules should be the bare minimum to keep the forum running and whenever possible we shouldn’t limit people on what they’re allowed to say here.

If the mods decided to set baseline community standards, not everyone has to agree with it, but those decisions must still to be respected, even the decision to have no limits at all. It will always be a judgment call. And it need not be too controversial. Most people, I believe, could understand a "Thanksgiving Dinner" rule i.e. if most people wouldn't say it in front of their whole family then it shouldn't be in a thread title.

I presume that's why Area 69 exists. Because certain topics and ways of speaking are not appropriate for general public viewing.

I'm a New Yorker Neo, I think my rhetoric here is incredibly tame compared to the dinner table.

(March 20, 2018 at 12:47 pm)Shell B Wrote: I will!

We love the Star Kid musicals, but even those could do with fewer songs.

A highlight is Vinnie Jones doing a musical number...

(March 20, 2018 at 12:18 pm)Shell B Wrote: I object 100% to the idea that swears are "vulgar" and need to be stemmed in any way, shape or form.

You seem to think that making a suggestion is equivalent to condemnation. I do not condemn vulgar titles because they vulgar. I just think AF would be better if there was less of them. Some, like me, would welcome such a rule. Others, like you, would not. It seems to me that you're the one presenting a self-righteous tone, accusing me of being sanctimonious because I hold the opinion that people should tailor their language to the intended audience or venue, including whether or not to use words that are generally considered vulgar or offensive.

The question I raised in the OP has nothing to do with making an "objective" judgement on what is or in not offensive; but rather, to request a rule that the staff apply their consensus judgment to thread titles that, in their collective judgement, are blatantly vulgar, in the same way that they already use their judgement to remove or alter titles that negatively characterize entire groups of people without qualification. (Maybe, like the clickbait rule, they don't do that anymore, I don't know.)

It all depends on what kind of community they, not I, want AF to be. I can only prompt them to reflect on the question based on my own opinion of what AF is like now and what AF could be. I fully recognize the volunteer nature of forum moderation. If staff feel it is unworkable, undesirable, or just to time-consuming for them to deal with annoying prudish complaints then so be it. It was just a suggestion.

If the suggestion is to stop something, it absolutely is equivalent to condemnation. How is it self-righteous to assert that everyone should be able to use the language they choose in the titles? You're the one being offended and labeling certain language as vulgar. The rules you cite involve ideas, not the words used to convey them.

I know it was just a suggestion. I'm saying I think it's a bad one, especially given the free-thinking nature of the forum.

Try giving me a good reason why a swear is worse than another word without saying, "It's just offensive." and you might see where I'm coming from. I'd be mightily surprised if you could do that without simply citing people being offended by it or thinking it's beneath them.