No Discrimination Rule...

Sushi Roll · **Posted:** Thu Jun 26, 2008 8:49 pm

Mightybalto1925 wrote:

As it has been pointed out, this is a useless topic. your mostly telling on the person. (in a differnt way.) You should of reported this person, isnted of rambling about it, here.

If it was only criticism about a specific member then you would be correct and I'd agree with you.

She didn't point out anyone specific, so there has been no "tattle-tailing".

Buuut, in this case, she has stated more than just complaints. She has posted reasoning and a suggestion. (Don't get me wrong though, I'm not trying to tick you off, just trying to show a different point-of-view) ^^

Mighty · **Posted:** Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:42 am

x_X_Emily_X_x wrote:

Mightybalto1925 wrote:

As it has been pointed out, this is a useless topic. your mostly telling on the person. (in a differnt way.) You should of reported this person, isnted of rambling about it, here.

If it was only criticism about a specific member then you would be correct and I'd agree with you.

She didn't point out anyone specific, so there has been no "tattle-tailing".

Buuut, in this case, she has stated more than just complaints. She has posted reasoning and a suggestion. (Don't get me wrong though, I'm not trying to tick you off, just trying to show a different point-of-view) ^^

I see. Thanks for correcting me.

warriorcat · **Posted:** Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:04 pm

i would agree with what has already been said. making a rule for homosexuals and bisexuals IS discrimination. which is what you were talking about in the first place, right angel fang?

Beastii · **Posted:** Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:57 pm

warriorcat wrote:

i would agree with what has already been said. making a rule for homosexuals and bisexuals IS discrimination. which is what you were talking about in the first place, right angel fang?

wrong.

RagingBalto · **Posted:** Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:00 pm

I think I get where warriorcat is coming from, but I'm not quite sure. Elaborate.

warriorcat · **Posted:** Sat Jun 28, 2008 2:31 pm

angel fang's topic was about the fact that she is upset about a few other members making fun of her and her friends of being homo/bisexuals right? Therefor, making a SEPERATE rule for ONLY those not of the hetrosexual group, being singled out not by other members, but by a rule posted nice and wide for everyone to see, which in my eyes, IS discrmination to them becuase since there is already a rule about harassment its like saying "oh, these people are different becuase of thier sexual orientation, so they have to have a SEPERATE rule just because they are 'different' ". i believe that when something such as "no harassment" is posted, it already covers making fun of someone in every way possible.

RagingBalto · **Posted:** Sat Jun 28, 2008 5:34 pm

warriorcat wrote:

angel fang's topic was about the fact that she is upset about a few other members making fun of her and her friends of being homo/bisexuals right? Therefor, making a SEPERATE rule for ONLY those not of the hetrosexual group, being singled out not by other members, but by a rule posted nice and wide for everyone to see, which in my eyes, IS discrmination to them becuase since there is already a rule about harassment its like saying "oh, these people are different becuase of thier sexual orientation, so they have to have a SEPERATE rule just because they are 'different' ". i believe that when something such as "no harassment" is posted, it already covers making fun of someone in every way possible.

That's what I thought.

Animation Source Forums

No Discrimination Rule...