My biggest problem with too much language policing is I feel the ability to dictate what speech is ok and what isn't is only allowed at a certain point in time before it becomes too commonplace to root out without significant influence. Once it's spread so far that it's lost its original meaning then you can't really moderate on it without causing disruptions and frustrations amongst newer potential users without some heavy backlash becuase they have no idea about the origin that makes these phrases so bad. As I made reference to with this video's use of "Normie" and "Doomer"

>>38853
Once it becomes you need to write an entire book of context to convey the idea of something being bad then it's not really as bad anymore either, in my opinion. Because in the same vein the term has been somewhat washed of its origin. Not to say that these aren't able to be moderated somewhat on the community side because there's still the vested interest of some to explain that backstory and context to others, and godspeed to them if they want to. It's been effective in preserving stuff like "norm"/"normalfag" over "normie" on imageboards, as well as keeping some "-oomers" down. But it's not something that I believe deserves to be heavy-handedly moderated with deletions/bans (on their own).

Is this video about drugs

>>38868
it's about a druid being out of mana and unable to contribute to the raid

>>38869
That guy got saved by Idubbbz throwing himself on the Hasan sword

>>38868
>>38869
>>38870
what's this shocker talk about

>>38853
>As I made reference to with this video's use of "Normie" and "Doomer"
i still think these two are quite meaningful
normie as the absolute cheapest, most watered down attempt at being countercultural, which immediately outs the speaker as the opposite of what he pretends to be, and doomer being heavily associated with people who make tons of fagass complaints about the state of the world (still present as a metaphor in the video)
both are related to undesirable patterns of behavior
the strings of letter themselves do not matter nearly as much as the frame which they fit into, and if someone catches flak because of it that's hardly a bad thing

>>38879
>and if someone catches flak because of it that's hardly a bad thing
Um... I never said it was a bad thing. Just that my stance is that staff moderation of it isn't necessarily a good thing.

>>38880
need more wordfilters