@Paradox

> Intent.

This is why I keep asking who decides. It's obvious what's a good way to have a conversation and what isn't, but you try to actually implement it and you get a lot of problems. It is difficult to construct rules that achieve what you are trying to achieve, and even harder to make rules that people will understand (so that a person can tell in advance whether what they are doing violates those rules, and so that whoever is charged with applying them can actually do so, and so that others can review those decisions). Then you have who is actually in charge of deciding. If it was easy, if it was clear-cut, it could be handed to a machine and we could ignore it, but it's not easy.

> You can satirize something and show how to improve it, or you can just dunk on it ad nauseam.

There's no objective set of rules that can distinguish the two cases.
tupac_ft._trick_daddy--still_ballin.mp3