@wjmaggos @amerika @jeremiah @Moon

> that doesn't solve the problem for the people who will stop using the service if they see that regularly from different accounts.

Are those people more or less interesting than the assholes?

Can you construct a rule that bans Fred Phelps but not a parody of Fred Phelps?

I mean that: this is a pointless discussion without an answer to that question. Banning a word throws out the Blazing Saddles baby with the David Duke bathwater. You cannot come up with a rule that can meet the requirements for a fair rule, but sitting down and trying is instructive.

A fair rule can be detected and enforced, the enforcement can be done evenly, a person can know *before* they do something if that thing will constitute a violation of the rule, nothing but a mistake of fact makes a mistake in detection, and it's not so onerous that it will be routinely ignored. Maybe the most important is whether a person can know before they do something whether that thing is against the rules or not: they can connect their action with the consequence. A rule that is routinely ignored also doesn't allow people to connect their actions with consequences: 99% of the time, nobody cares, but once in a while, someone will make a big deal out of it.