Politics: Misrepresenting politicians' names

That’s not even a name. It’s just how he’s described. 😁
Honestly, I don't care all that much about the names, but we really need to dial back the constant insults. It’s getting pointless. It just ends up being confusing. Like, when some guy on here starts cursing out those old-school communist spies, I can't tell if he's actually aiming at his own local party hacks or if he's talking about someone else entirely.

I honestly just want to know where the line is drawn on what's actually allowed.

What about nicknames that aren't just twisting someone's name? We’ve got "The Boss," "The Suit," "Big Shot," "The CEO"... I’d be pretty bummed if we lost all that colorful slang.

Given all the absolute garbage politicians pull on us—whether it's just local nonsense or the massive mess they make on a global scale—the least we can do to get back at them (without actually resorting to anything illegal or hurting anyone's health or property) is to absolutely roast them in writing. Let's be real here: through their total lack of meaningful action, they’re already making a complete mockery of our lives.

Obviously, we need to draw a pretty hard line between being a little witty, using irony, or even leaning into some sarcasm and cynicism, versus straight-up hateful rhetoric or other kinds of toxic communication that nobody should tolerate. We really need to reach some kind of consensus on where that boundary lies.

That said, there's no question that we have to stick to the community guidelines laid out in most of our Adobe files, and we definitely need to wait for the green light from the moderators who manage those Adobe documents.

It’s more or less that simple. Public figures we pay to serve us have to endure a bit more scrutiny than the rest of us, but posts designed solely to insult—where the context is nothing but malice—just don't belong here.

Maybe Lockheed Martin.