So, Boss...*cough*

[9bit]

If a word has multiple definitions it's OK to use that word when you mean one of its definitions. So I think "gimp" is a perfectly acceptable term used in Smash when it's referring to essentially hobbling someone by taking a stock early.

The thing is, in Smash, no one ever calls a player or a character a gimp. They aren't using that definition of a word that actually has a lot of definitions. To complain about it in Smash context is just superfluous. Gimp also means "a narrow flat braid or rounded cord of fabric used for trimming." In the context of Smash that doesn't apply and no one thinks it. Just like the derogatory usage, it doesn't apply at all in Smash and should not be considered to.

@ XXXX1000 if we let the word **** evolve naturally, as it has been doing, it may change in definition a lot sooner than you think. Maybe even within a decade or two. This is a transitional period for the word. But whatever, I don't actually really care about this topic, so I'll let the people who do care duke it out.

 

[210stuna]

Can someone bring back 'clobbered'? Bonus points for making it a Luigi dash attack term.

Fix'd

 

[Deleted member]

In your example, I would say the opposite - that the first statement is worse. I'll be honest, to me neither of them really mean much at all, so it's more of an issue of "which one is worse", but the kicker here is that you KNOW the word **** is a sensitive word. Talking about someone's mom is childish, and the person who is told that OBVIOUSLY doesn't think you actually interacted with his/her mom, but the word **** carries baggage with it. I find that to be much more rooted in reality. Should people start running around talking about each others' moms? No, but it'd be much better than people running around saying they ****/***** that person's video game character.

The problem with this logic is that you're acknowledging that one statement is applied with context while the other is not. It can be equally assumed that I had no relations to his mother just as much as ****** a fox has no relation to reality, but between the two at least one of them makes sense at least conceptually if nothing else. Choosing to accept the context of one shows me that you understand that it is an essential part of communication that must be taken into consideration, so why do you ignore the context when **** is referred to? It's inconsistent. Talking about each others' moms would be strictly worse because you're talking about a real person that you could potentially affect. Talking in a vulgar manner about a video game affects literally no one.

---

We can turn this into a social experiment if you wish. Let's ask Boss which he dislikes more between the two, my white-bread self using the word nigger with no malicious intent as he did on the stream, versus his being denied speaking as he normally does by using the term himself. Anyone want to take bets? I think we all know exactly how this is going to go, so why can't we just be honest about it?

 

[Redd]

Lol, oh wow. Boss got his own thread?!??!

Anyways, he knows better, but sometimes the whole "trolling" aspect is too much to resist for some people. He won't do it again, definitely not on the mic. Those terms are extremely unacceptable, especially lately as the smash community is brought to light with all the attention we've been getting.

I (and many others I know) have made a conscious effort to eliminate it from our vocabulary, and it really is just more professional. You never know who's going to be a loca/regional/national these days.

 

[XXXX1000]

The problem with this logic is that you're acknowledging that one statement is applied with context while the other is not. It can be equally assumed that I had no relations to his mother just as much as ****** a fox has no relation to reality, but between the two at least one of them makes sense at least conceptually if nothing else. Choosing to accept the context of one shows me that you understand that it is an essential part of communication that must be taken into consideration, so why do you ignore the context when **** is referred to? It's inconsistent. Talking about each others' moms would be strictly worse because you're talking about a real person that you could potentially affect. Talking in a vulgar manner about a video game affects literally no one.

---

We can turn this into a social experiment if you wish. Let's ask Boss which he dislikes more between the two, my white-bread self using the word nigger with no malicious intent as he did on the stream, versus his being denied speaking as he normally does by using the term himself. Anyone want to take bets? I think we all know exactly how this is going to go, so why can't we just be honest about it?

You're making the operative words "Fox" and "mom" when that's not what the issue is, the issue is between "*****" vs "wrecked". That's why the word "****" is more of a problem. I didn't ignore any context, I actually agree with what you said - you doing anything with that person's mom is just as unrealistic as ****** a fox, neither are rooted in reality, but in one example you said "wrecked" and one "*****". You can insult someone's mom, and that makes you a jerk, but that doesn't really affect anyone besides the person you told that to. "****" can (and is) offensive to lots of people, whether the term is directed at them or not. That is why it's an issue - nobody really cares that you are not personally offended by something, but these words are having an effect on other people.

In your next example, there are many factors. For starters, if either of you are on commentary, then neither of you should be using that word at all. For the exact same reasons that GimR pulled Boss off before. Just overall in the venue is a different story, but the point is that it's not just about how you or Boss personally feel about those words, it's about the community as a whole. Boss and you can think that any word is inoffensive, and that's fine to use in your daily lives, do your thing, but at an event there's other people that you could be affecting. The word obviously means little to you, since you use it, but it means a lot to someone else, and disrespecting that is, well, disrespectful.

Potential sponsors coming in and seeing and hearing "****", "******", "gay", "***" thrown around so easily will turn right around. Leage of Legends players get fined for saying racist things in-game. A guy just got banned from the NBA for life for saying *in a personal phone conversation* that he doesn't really like black people, and about 70% of the Clippers' sponsors jumped ship ASAP. Honestly, to a sponsor, throwing those words around shows a) that the community is insensitive or perhaps unaware of current social trends, b) that the community is either unable or unwilling to control itself and change the vocabulary, or c) that they literally don't care about the issue at all. If you're sponsored by an eSports organization, say "****" and then tell offended people to just deal with it, not only will you be out of a sponsorship real quick, but other organizations will see that and be reluctant to join the scene and sponsor players.

GimR isn't the entire smash community, but something that is good for VGBC is probably good for the smash community, as well. If VGBC misses an opportunity to grow because of foul commentary, then I think the community has an interest in respecting that and trying to help considering how much GimR puts into the community.

edited to clean up a sentence

 

[Deleted member]

I guess I can agree with all of that.

idk personally i'm just so tired of everyone being so sensitive, it's ridiculous.

 

[XXXX1000]

In a perfect world, people wouldn't be offended by those types of words. To be honest, I think you're right, if people were able to overcome those words and not let it affect them then things would be better, but I don't think that means the words should be allowed or encouraged. And I don't think it's fair to really just tell people to just stop let it bothering them and be done with it, even if that would be best.

 

[Deleted member]

ok i might disagree with you on that last bit, i firmly believe that being offended is a choice. not only is it fair to tell people to stop letting it bother them, it's probably the best thing you can actually do for them if you actually care about your fellow man. because once in a while, they'll say "wow you're right i should stop being a *****" and they'll actually get over it. this is clearly the superior outcome. by telling said person that it's okay not to deal with their problems and that "get over it" is unfair, you're actually just enabling that person to stay in a miserable and unhealthy mindset. i know some people don't want to hear something like "deal with it" but dealing with it is generally the healthiest outcome for them. i know if i cared about someone, i'd tell them to deal with it, and i don't think that's unfair at all.

---

if i was a true racist in the modern age and i really hated a demographic of people, the first thing i would do is enable "social justice" that we see on the internet today. by telling a specific group "yes you really are a victim of society", those people will read that over and over and start to internalize it and believe it. can you imagine waking up every day feeling truly disadvantaged about the world that you live in? and feeling like you can't do anything about it? and it would **** up your world view and make you hard and miserable? i can't think of a nastier way to hurt a specific demographic worse than fostering victimhood in our modern society.

 

[XXXX1000]

Someone earlier in this thread made the comparison to telling a depressed person to "just stop being sad" and I think that's a pretty solid comparison. People just don't get over their issues immediately or easily. Maybe you did, but it seems you're the exception, in that case. But I think there are better ways to help people overcome their problems with that word. I absolutely agree that the best thing would be for people to take control and overcome it, but "deal with it" is a really cold and aggressive way to help someone get to that point. If you were to show someone that you've been able to overcome the word and not let your past experiences control you, that would be much more effective tbh. Obviously that's not your responsibility so I wouldn't throw that on you, but this is turning into life advice social thread now so I won't go down that path.

I agree with your sentiment, but I think there are better ways to get there.

 

[Deleted member]

telling someone to stop being sad with depression is a poor comparison though, because depression is a clinical disease that is resolved with treatment. one does not treat an adopted ideology in a medicinal sense. i agree that a cold and aggressive approach lacks the tact and appeal required to pursuade someone to change his/her world view, but i don't recommend that approach either. i only put it as an opposing dichotomy to illustrate each perspective in perhaps an overly simplistic manner. obviously it is better to provide support and patience, but i'll stand firm to my premise that actually having the individual resolve the issue is better than enabling victimhood and helplessness.

i don't think i'm an exception in any way, i simply feel like our modern societal response to adversity is a poor one that discourages personal growth and development. being unable to refer to **** is just one example of this. i'd like to think that i can respect my peers enough that they can differentiate between non-consentual relations from a video game that has no premise in reality, but that is increasingly not the case. frankly, it's really sad to watch.

 

[Matthew "Demo" Rak]

The people who get offended by terms like "****" and "********" have no understanding of context and are simply choosing to be offended.

The only time these terms should be avoided is when sponsorships, money, and general community growth are on the line. In GiMR's case, what he did was completely appropriate and handled fairly well. However, if one were to think that his commentators are representative of the entire smash community, I'd say you're delusional.

Personally, I'm not going to change my vocabulary to be politically correct just for you. My words, or anybody's words for that matter, shouldn't be considered representative of an entire community and shouldn't be analysed without the proper context.

Best post in the thread. The only time anybody should consider censoring themselves is when they're representing a team or venue. And even then, it's iffy.

Consider Ken was relatively well known for calling his opponents ******s, *******, *******, or *******. It's Team Liquid's responsibility to know that before offering him a contract. If this hypothetical Ken signed a contract and it was stated he was not to use any derogatory terms while streaming, at events, or in interviews, Ken then has to censor himself.

I grew up with online gaming, so there are times when I curse and use pretty inappropriate language. Would I change the way I talk during a match? Absolutely not. Would I change the way I talk if it meant that I was going to be ejected from an event or lose a sponsorship? Yep, without hesitation. If an organization is choosing someone to cast, or play, or run an event, then they should probably have done enough research to know if that person is going to represent them the way they want to be represented.

You'll never stop the community from using certain language. Twitch chat will constantly be a cesspool and I love it. It breathes life into the matches.

 

[Waite]

To me, it's less about what is being said and more of where. After well over a decade of playing games online, nothing surprises me in terms of language from players. If I'm at a tournament and someone is dunking in the shallow end of the vocabulary pool, that doesn't bother me, because that person is technically only representing themselves at that point.

The issue with what Boss said came from the fact that he was commentating, and in that moment (whether he realized it or not), he was representing Smash. It was completely unprofessional in the position he was in, and GimR had every right to remove him from that. This argument should be about how commentators and representatives of the community should be carrying themselves when they're front and center, and not necessarily what players themselves are saying while off the record, because there's really no controlling that.

 

[-_Face_-]

To me, it's less about what is being said and more of where. After well over a decade of playing games online, nothing surprises me in terms of language from players. If I'm at a tournament and someone is dunking in the shallow end of the vocabulary pool, that doesn't bother me, because that person is technically only representing themselves at that point.

The issue with what Boss said came from the fact that he was commentating, and in that moment (whether he realized it or not), he was representing Smash. It was completely unprofessional in the position he was in, and GimR had every right to remove him from that. This argument should be about how commentators and representatives of the community should be carrying themselves when they're front and center, and not necessarily what players themselves are saying while off the record, because there's really no controlling that.

Best post in the thread. The only time anybody should consider censoring themselves is when they're representing a team or venue. And even then, it's iffy.

Consider Ken was relatively well known for calling his opponents ******s, ******s, *****es, or *******. It's Team Liquid's responsibility to know that before offering him a contract. If this hypothetical Ken signed a contract and it was stated he was not to use any derogatory terms while streaming, at events, or in interviews, Ken then has to censor himself.

I grew up with online gaming, so there are times when I curse and use pretty inappropriate language. Would I change the way I talk during a match? Absolutely not. Would I change the way I talk if it meant that I was going to be ejected from an event or lose a sponsorship? Yep, without hesitation. If an organization is choosing someone to cast, or play, or run an event, then they should probably have done enough research to know if that person is going to represent them the way they want to be represented.

You'll never stop the community from using certain language. Twitch chat will constantly be a cesspool and I love it. It breathes life into the matches.

See, I can't really get behind the subjective morality of this. I can recognize it's legitimacy as a moral outlook. It's not wrong...just not the kind of morality I try to have. To me, no matter when or where you do it, comparing Smash to sexual assault and the physical and emotional agony that goes along with it isn't right.

 

[Matthew "Demo" Rak]

See, I can't really get behind the subjective morality of this. I can recognize it's legitimacy as a moral outlook. It's not wrong...just not the kind of morality I try to have. To me, no matter when or where you do it, comparing Smash to sexual assault and the physical and emotional agony that goes along with it isn't right.

To each their own. When I say the phrase "You got *****" during a game, some people think of the actual act of someone being *****. The vast majority of the community understands that the person speaking is referring to a sick combo, or an amazing gimp, or a phenomenal edgeguard.

Context trumps the actual definition of the word, every single time.

 

[JesseMcCloud]

Context trumps the actual definition of the word, every single time.

To you, perhaps. Some people will always find it offensive, like me, regardless of context or setting. The term is hateful, tasteless, and simply unnecessary when considering the versatility and variety of the English language.

 

[Matthew "Demo" Rak]

To you, perhaps. Some people will always find it offensive, like me, regardless of context or setting. The term is hateful, tasteless, and simply unnecessary when considering the versatility and variety of the English language.

You'll find that you're in the extreme minority. I'd wager that most of the community is entirely indifferent while there is a faction of people who will vehemently defend their right to use whatever language they have been using for years.

 

[Waite]

See, I can't really get behind the subjective morality of this. I can recognize it's legitimacy as a moral outlook. It's not wrong...just not the kind of morality I try to have. To me, no matter when or where you do it, comparing Smash to sexual assault and the physical and emotional agony that goes along with it isn't right.

I completely understand and agree. I should have clarified that it's much easier to keep a commentator's language clean than keeping an entire venue's language clean. I didn't mean to insinuate that I'm hunky-dory with the casual use of the word **** in any context.

 

[turtletank]

(D1 was talking about no longer using the word 'gimp' in the stream chat)

I just looked up the definition of "gimp", before now I had no idea it was a bad word. So yes, I'd say context is everything when it comes to language.

 

[SpiderMad]

Me neither, and that's a hard to replace word to describe quick stock cancels =/

how about gooped, uhp, seems it's a bad word too http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gooped

we'll go with gazoogled for now

 

[Matthew "Demo" Rak]

Me neither, and that's a hard to replace word to describe quick stock cancels =/

how about gooped, uhp, seems it's a bad word too http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gooped

we'll go with gazoogled for now

That's the whole point. The community has taken the word "gimp" and defined it as an early percentage death caused by an opponent. Context is way more important than the other definitions of the word.

Combine that with the fact that humanity will always considering change more difficult than not and you'll see why this isn't going to happen any time soon.

 

[Rᴏb]

To you, perhaps. Some people will always find it offensive, like me, regardless of context or setting. The term is hateful, tasteless, and simply unnecessary when considering the versatility and variety of the English language.

I don't see how that is anyone else's problem other than your own, therefore, you should try to study up on linguistics so you may realize that context can completely change the meaning of any given statement despite how you want to perceive it.

Or just quit being so sensitive in general.

 

[JesseMcCloud]

I don't see how that is anyone else's problem other than your own, therefore, you should try to study up on linguistics so you may realize that context can completely change the meaning of any given statement despite how you want to perceive it.

Or just quit being so sensitive in general.

I do agree some words vary by context. However, the core meaning of ****, that is, the meaning people will relate to when taken OUT of context, will still infer the the worst possible definition.
My girlfriend's cousin was *****; should I tell her to stop being sensitive about it?

 

[Rᴏb]

I do agree some words vary by context. However, the core meaning of ****, that is, the meaning people will relate to when taken OUT of context, will still infer the the worst possible definition.
My girlfriend's cousin was *****; should I tell her to stop being sensitive about it?

Some words? It's all or nothing when it comes to context, and if someone chooses to take my words out of context and give them a meaning that they want to perceive, that's their problem. I shouldn't have to change my language based on another person's issues.

And I'm sorry that that happened to your girlfriend's cousin. She definitely doesn't need to change her feelings toward (actual) ****, but that's not what we're talking about here.

 

[JesseMcCloud]

Some words? It's all or nothing when it comes to context, and if someone chooses to take my words out of context and give them a meaning that they want to perceive, that's their problem. I shouldn't have to change my language based on another person's issues.

And I'm sorry that that happened to your girlfriend's cousin. She definitely doesn't need to change her feelings toward (actual) ****, but that's not what we're talking about here.

First off, thanks for the sympathy. That really does mean a lot.
However, is it really so wrong to just step up your personal vocabulary when you're out in public? Is it such an inconvenience if someone asks, "Excuse me, would you please watch your language around me," or "Pardon me for finding talk like that offensive."?

 

[Thane of Blue Flames]

Some words? It's all or nothing when it comes to context, and if someone chooses to take my words out of context and give them a meaning that they want to perceive, that's their problem. I shouldn't have to change my language based on another person's issues.

And I'm sorry that that happened to your girlfriend's cousin. She definitely doesn't need to change her feelings toward (actual) ****, but that's not what we're talking about here.

Question.

If we ask you not to say ni**er, do you find yourself put upon? Censored?

 

[Rᴏb]

First off, thanks for the sympathy. That really does mean a lot.
However, is it really so wrong to just step up your personal vocabulary when you're out in public? Is it such an inconvenience if someone asks, "Excuse me, would you please watch your language around me," or "Pardon me for finding talk like that offensive."?

No problem bud.
Yes I do think that is wrong. I would apologize for offending the person, but I would also tell them to grow up. I think the concept of "bad words" is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. And this isn't really relevant, but public =/= among friends playing a video game (for fun).

Question.

If we ask you not to say ni**er, do you find yourself put upon? Censored?

Of course I would, it's the same exact concept.

 

[Thane of Blue Flames]

I should clarify that I neither care what you say amongst friends at all, nor should I or anyone else try to mandate your personal vocabulary. Honestly if it can't be regulated, why bother. Lord knows I've said some odd things in personal company. You make some weird jokes when you find out that early humans probably ate Neanderthals according to some archaeological evidence.

I'm pretty sure we're talking about regulating vocabulary in a public space. Like a stream. Where sponsors or new players trying to get into the Smash scene etc. might be watching. Would you mind curtailing your word choice there?

 

[Rᴏb]

The only time these terms should be avoided is when sponsorships, money, and general community growth are on the line. In GiMR's case, what he did was completely appropriate and handled fairly well. However, if one were to think that his commentators are representative of the entire smash community, I'd say you're delusional.

 

[Saito]

Honestly I don't get why some people have such a problem with their word choices being impaired every now and then. Yeah yeah, the whole freedom of speech thing and what not, but it's probably one of the most minor inconveniences in the world.

It's common courtesy.

 

[Rᴏb]

When the focus of your statements gets unrealized/misconstrued because the person "listening" has a problem with a particular word you used, you'd get pissed. Or at least I would.

 

[cisyphus]

Imma real talk y'all for a second:
I shied away from joining this community for YEARS because of how often I heard "****" used (it's gotten a lot better, I have to say); anybody saying that the word use doesn't affect community growth needs to realize that language is a powerful pursuasive tool, and it plays a big role in how others view you. It frankly does say something about the person that says it, regardless of the context, and it certainly says something about the people that condone it and act like it isn't a big deal. It's plainly a disgusting word, and it's no different from any slurs; there's context for these sorts of things, and to take it out of the context is to do injustice to the context (that means you're undermining the severity of ****, effectually returning acceptance of it). That's a big reason why the N word isn't supposed to be used by white people: it reinforces a negligent attitude toward the subject that then makes it seem "okay" to do it (if just on a subconscious level, though I'd argue it's a bit more than that). The same can be said for murder and suicide, as others have stated: the fact is that you're not murdering someone, and whatever it is you're doing in smash, it's nothing compared to murder (so stop minimizing murder by doing so). The fact that so many people have the attitude "it's not even a big deal" makes all this even more evident. I say all of this as someone completely unaffected by ****: no victim mothers, daughters, sisters, brothers, or anything. It's no personal matter for me, but I still can't get behind it and call it okay or ignore it.

Now I'm gonna take an linguistic perspective here and talk about why "kirbycide" is fine: it's not "suicide," it's a "kirbycide," and any word ending with the -cide suffix literally means "to kill." That's where homicide (to kill the same), suicide (to kill the self), and regicide (to kill the king) all come from. Therefore, a kirbycide is to kill the kirby (way), ergo NOT the same as suicide. As for "gimp," that's an example of anthimeria: we've adapted the noun "gimp" (which refers a disabled person*) and applied it to a verb setting of "gimp" (where you impede on someone's recovery) and thereby drastically change what the word signifies to the point that it takes on an entirely new meaning. This is different from using "****" in reference to an action ("Sheik ***** Falcon") because it's the verb for the verb, and therefore there's a lesser degree of difference there that's subtly less acceptable. At best, it's a metaphor, and a poor one at that. Words like destroy, decimate, et al are similarly acceptable in that they're related to murder, but they're not murder (because again: you're not murdering). And I realize that you're not "literally" ****** people while you're playing smash (at least, I hope not), but again: it's a poor metaphor that degrades the trauma surrounding your source material by applying it to a frankly unsubstantial act in a video game—foster your creativity some! (read some of the suggestions in this thread again! There's some gold here)
*which I honestly wasn't even aware of: BDSM and photo manipulation programs came to mind first.

I understand that languages evolve and to try and put limitations on that evolution is silly, but there's still contexts that need to be regarded: there are words you simply should not use in certain situations. You wouldn't tell your customer to have a "great ****ing day," would you? You wouldn't use homophobic slurs with your gay friend, would you? You don't use slang and txt shorthand in scholarly works, do you? It's the same here: why would you use **** (even as a metaphor) in a context where thousands of people (many likely more affected by it than you or me) will hear what you say? It's unprofessional, and that's the core issue here; there's a contextual expectation that's garnered, and Boss broke that expectation and get reprimanded for it. Cut and dried. I love hearing the guy's commentary, and Iove watching him play, but that gaff was pretty big, and to deny that is just silly. Say what you will where the context is right (in your basement or living room or wherever your buds and you play) but when you get into this kind of a spotlight, don't expect this coarse language to fly.

 

[Saito]

When the focus of your statements gets unrealized/misconstrued because the person "listening" has a problem with a particular word you used, you'd get pissed. Or at least I would.

Depends on the word for most people.

I mean if it's a word that can easily be misinterpreted then common sense would tell someone that "This word might be misinterpreted"

It's like going around talking about ******s and just assuming people will think you're referring to a bundle of sticks.
Talking about a murder and people thinking you will be talking about a flock of crows.
Talking about ***** and people thinking you will be talking about someone getting wrecked in a video game.

Whether or not your words get misinterpreted depends on the individual's thought process.

English just happens to be that very strange language.

 

[rikochet]

those kinds of words and the phrase get ***** when something happens is used in almost every FGC or competitive game. even girls say it. the only community with issues about things is the smash community

hopefully that just means the smash community has a higher standard for the game they love to play and will go further in the future when it comes to eSports. Professionalism for the win ?

 

[Jynx]

those kinds of words and the phrase get ***** when something happens is used in almost every FGC or competitive game. even girls say it. the only community with issues about things is the smash community

hopefully that just means the smash community has a higher standard for the game they love to play and will go further in the future when it comes to eSports. Professionalism for the win ?

Hardly, we're just lesser of the evils. We honestly should abolish that word if we can. It doesn't do us any good, and we can replace them with a million other better sounding ones. People honestly sound barbaric to me when they say they had ***** someone. When someone says they demolished their opponent, it paints a MUCH better picture in my head and even makes them seem like a better player.

 

[9bit]

This topic is ****ing terrible

 

[Thane of Blue Flames]

This topic is ****ing terrible

No.

 

[9bit]

Keep going in circles, opinion vs opinion, not changing anything.

I think we should change our language in the Smash community. I have worked at changing mine. But the people who don't care, or who indignantly want to keep saying these words, they're gonna keep saying them. It's good to bring this issue to light, but all this arguing is pointless.

 

[Thane of Blue Flames]

We all managed to reach a consensus on stream/public vocabulary, actually. Even Yursa and Umbreon.

You can plug you ears and yell "Lalalalala" if you'd like, though.

 

[9bit]

That consensus was already there. Nobody started with the opinion that sponsored stream commentators should be able to say terrible things.

 

[Mono.]

I wouldn't say anything about being ***** on a stream among an audience of thousands of viewers as a commentator for the sake of professionalism. But if I'm among my friends and self? No filters. This is how it should be.