A Clarification on the Posting of Certain Images.

Post Reply New Topic

1. Imagery of any flag or symbol (hereafter "element") can be permitted when illustrating a concept relevant to historical or news discussions, or to discussion of games and films. This includes the display of elements that may feature in linked material, but would not otherwise display.
The intention is to introduce a clear differentiation between the disallowed use and the allowed mention of an element.

2. Members are required to avoid personal associations when using this exception, and suggestions of associating oneself with such an element will be interpreted as promoting racism, white nationalism, Nazism or whatever banned ideology the element represents; suggestions of associating other members with such an element will be interpreted as personal attacks.

3. Using an element in, or as, an avatar is not permitted, owing to the ambiguity of purpose such context-free display would cause.

4. In any disputed cases of element usage moderators will make the final decision.


The original statement from Alex reads: "Racist imagery (confederate flags, white nationalist symbols, swastikas, etc,) are not permitted in any context. This includes memes."
He later added "Yes that should probably be clarified in some way." in response to a member questioning the use of historical photos or maps labeled with banners of the time.*

The moderation team feels this had been left in a vague, uncompleted state and as defined, unnecessarily restrictive - topics which are otherwise permissible might be restricted by limiting the posting of related imagery.

This clarification is intended to resolve that incompleteness, and stands until Alex informs us otherwise.



* viewtopic.php?t=389905#p8592419

I suggest you put this clarification in the original “How We Deal With Racism And Hate Speech On Wrong Planet” thread.

I was going to do that but thought it should have its own discussion instead - I'll add a link there to this thread.

So, this post:
https://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=398059&start=16#p8815184
is OK, right? It never occurred to me it might be a problem until I saw:

https://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=399448&p=8848121#p8848136
And realized my post might be in violation of a literal application of a rule that no swastikas could be shown "in any context".

Iron Sky, Iron Sky: The Coming Race, Dead Snow, and Dead Snow 2: Red vs. Dead are all fun, silly movies that involve "Nazis" (as bad guys!) and display swastikas. One of the trailer links in my post even displays partial swastikas (on the sleeves of the Nazi zombies).

I thought I was more likely to offend people who thought those four movies were just too stupid!

Thank you for the clarification.

It seemed a little odd that a rule that seemed primarily intended to squash open displays of support of such groups ended up being twisted into a tool to stifle criticism of those groups, or at least as something to go tattle on someone criticizing those groups in hopes of causing problems for them.

@Double Retired - it's because of references like those, which should have otherwise been disallowed, that we provided this clarification.

 TEST CASE 

Please advise.

But there's no reference there to an element as per the clarification.
What does your case test?

The use of an historical element (e.g., Warner Brothers' "Pepe Le Pew") in a way that that could be construed as a personal attack on a specific member of this website.

A Warner Brothers cartoon character isn't really the issue here - the clarification isn't addressing any historical element of any type.
See point 2 and the text after point 4 in the opening post.

Otherwise, the basic consideration remains - if you think the image might be misread or problematic for the member then don't post it.

Sorry Cornflake, I assume Alex's original policy

"Racist imagery (confederate flags, white nationalist symbols, swastikas, etc,) are not permitted in any context. This includes memes."

Has been clarified by the following additional statement

Imagery of any flag or symbol (hereafter "element") can be permitted when illustrating a concept relevant to historical or news discussions, or to discussion of games and films. This includes the display of elements that may feature in linked material, but would not otherwise display.

If this is the case then I recommend certain WP members who seemed quite over-confident (perhaps a little smug) in their knowledge of WP policies acquaint themselves with the rules a little more closely.

Last edited by Cornflake on 05 Sep 2021, 6:22 am, edited 2 times in total.: Unnecessary accusations redacted

Well, as per the opening post really.

But I would extend your highlighting of "can be permitted" to "can be permitted when illustrating a concept relevant to historical or news discussions, or to discussion of games and films."
It's not entirely open-ended.

I think revising the rules to clarify their intent is a good idea. I did read the rules but my memory is not photographic...when I made that post I tried to stay within the spirit of the rules.

And, mea culpa. Thank you for not nuking me when I unwittingly violated the letter of the law but rather placing me in the witless protection program.

If I considered the potentially offensive nature of every image I posted, then I would never post any images at all.

That's as maybe - but what's your decision as regards this image, that you considered "could be construed as a personal attack on a specific member of this website." ?
I'll remove it if you feel it could be construed as such, or you could ask the member how they feel about it.