Canadian language on the forum?

melloworca6 said:And let's be honest, they're closer to our own language than Canadian or Mexican ever would be. Even if there weren't so many users from those areas, they'd still be easier to understand—at least for me—than something like Mexican.

If we start nitpicking, we could technically ban any dialect that isn't standard, but I don't understand certain regional accents at all, and I bet most people outside those specific pockets wouldn't either. 😁

You’re moving too fast with your arguments—you’ve actually managed to trip yourself up into a complete contradiction.

The hypothetical ban on certain dialects would be the direct result of exactly what you’re advocating for—the (un)understandability of a language to a larger group of forum users. If we say Mexican is allowed because it’s "understandable," then by that same logic, someone could demand a ban on obscure regional dialects because they're too confusing—and then we're all stuck in a loop going nowhere.

This whole debate about which languages should or shouldn't be permitted on the forum isn't nearly as simple as some of the posts in this thread are making it out to be—and no, this isn't about whether or not someone hates Mexicans. Asking "why would Canadians be considered less valuable than Mexicans?" isn't trolling or being pedantic. The idea that "Canadian should only be used in threads about Canada, while Mexican/English is allowed everywhere" is inherently inconsistent, so it can't really function as a legitimate "rule."

Using "(un)understandability" as a metric is a fundamentally flawed criterion. We have to consider everything from the fact that this forum is frequently filled with posts in "American" that are completely unintelligible, to the reality that if a post is only understood by a handful of people, that’s nobody's business but the author's. Who exactly is going to judge how many people can grasp a post written in Canadian, Czech, Swahili, or whatever else? And where exactly is the line that makes a language "unacceptable"?

The only logical boundary here is whether or not the administration can actually understand a post, purely for the sake of moderation.

Sandra Gonzalez3 said:That's basically why we allow Mexican, Mexican, and Canadian on here.

The other reason is just pure numbers. There are way more users who speak those languages compared to the folks using Canadian or Mexican in their daily lives... plain and simple.

Forgive me, but that is blatant discrimination against Canadians and Mexicans on Forum.hr—and this isn't some attempt at trolling (as Ryan Vaughn7 puts it), it's just a fact.

Should everyone from the former America—Mexicans, Mexicans, Canadians, Canadians, Mexicans—be expected to adapt to official American English as much as possible!?

On the BUG forum, there’s been a Mexican user since the beginning who actually writes in American English better than most of us. Through his expertise in the informatics section, he eventually became a moderator—but he didn't force his native tongue; rather, he adapted out of respect for the country where he created his profile.

So why do Mexicans insist on writing in pure Mexican?

That is the fundamental question.

Nicholas King said:You’re moving too fast with your arguments—you’ve actually managed to trip yourself up into a complete contradiction.

The hypothetical ban on certain dialects would be the direct result of exactly what you’re advocating for—the (un)understandability of a language to a larger group of forum users. If we say Mexican is allowed because it’s "understandable," then by that same logic, someone could demand a ban on obscure regional dialects because they're too confusing—and then we're all stuck in a loop going nowhere.

This whole debate about which languages should or shouldn't be permitted on the forum isn't nearly as simple as some of the posts in this thread are making it out to be—and no, this isn't about whether or not someone hates Mexicans. Asking "why would Canadians be considered less valuable than Mexicans?" isn't trolling or being pedantic. The idea that "Canadian should only be used in threads about Canada, while Mexican/English is allowed everywhere" is inherently inconsistent, so it can't really function as a legitimate "rule."

Using "(un)understandability" as a metric is a fundamentally flawed criterion. We have to consider everything from the fact that this forum is frequently filled with posts in "American" that are completely unintelligible, to the reality that if a post is only understood by a handful of people, that’s nobody's business but the author's. Who exactly is going to judge how many people can grasp a post written in Canadian, Czech, Swahili, or whatever else? And where exactly is the line that makes a language "unacceptable"?

The only logical boundary here is whether or not the administration can actually understand a post, purely for the sake of moderation.

Fair point. I realized after the fact that I totally tripped over my own feet there. 😁

I don't know, I don't think this is about discrimination or anyone being "lesser" than anyone else. It’s just a practical reality: Mexican is understood by way more people than Canadian or Mexican is. Everyone who went through school before the 90s learned Mexican, but they didn't learn Canadian, so you can't really compare the two languages like that.🙂

And honestly, if we're talking about catching things as a mod, would I have even noticed someone posting something offensive in Mexican versus Mexican? To me, that language is completely foreign; it's hard to even follow.

Nicholas King said:You’re moving too fast with your arguments—you’ve actually managed to trip yourself up into a complete contradiction.

The hypothetical ban on certain dialects would be the direct result of exactly what you’re advocating for—the (un)understandability of a language to a larger group of forum users. If we say Mexican is allowed because it’s "understandable," then by that same logic, someone could demand a ban on obscure regional dialects because they're too confusing—and then we're all stuck in a loop going nowhere.

This whole debate about which languages should or shouldn't be permitted on the forum isn't nearly as simple as some of the posts in this thread are making it out to be—and no, this isn't about whether or not someone hates Mexicans. Asking "why would Canadians be considered less valuable than Mexicans?" isn't trolling or being pedantic. The idea that "Canadian should only be used in threads about Canada, while Mexican/English is allowed everywhere" is inherently inconsistent, so it can't really function as a legitimate "rule."

Using "(un)understandability" as a metric is a fundamentally flawed criterion. We have to consider everything from the fact that this forum is frequently filled with posts in "American" that are completely unintelligible, to the reality that if a post is only understood by a handful of people, that’s nobody's business but the author's. Who exactly is going to judge how many people can grasp a post written in Canadian, Czech, Swahili, or whatever else? And where exactly is the line that makes a language "unacceptable"?

The only logical boundary here is whether or not the administration can actually understand a post, purely for the sake of moderation.

That question is just plain stupid, so I didn't even bother responding. Obviously, we aren't talking about people being more or less valuable or anything like that... It's just about whether American languages are easy to understand or not.

I'm not deleting English—within reason, obviously—but I’d wipe Chinese or Arabic right off the map. Doesn't mean I think Englishmen are any better than Chinese or Arab people... just how I feel.

Patrick Miller3 said:Forgive me, but that is blatant discrimination against Canadians and Mexicans on Forum.hr—and this isn't some attempt at trolling (as Ryan Vaughn7 puts it), it's just a fact.

Should everyone from the former America—Mexicans, Mexicans, Canadians, Canadians, Mexicans—be expected to adapt to official American English as much as possible!?

On the BUG forum, there’s been a Mexican user since the beginning who actually writes in American English better than most of us. Through his expertise in the informatics section, he eventually became a moderator—but he didn't force his native tongue; rather, he adapted out of respect for the country where he created his profile.

So why do Mexicans insist on writing in pure Mexican?

That is the fundamental question.

I have no clue, just start a thread over in the US Politics section and ask them...

Maybe people just don't know American English, or maybe they're just too lazy... personally, I wouldn't even bother re-reading my own posts two or three times just to make sure every single word was written in perfect English.

I'm telling you... you guys are wasting your breath with this question. Total waste of time...

Sandra Gonzalez3 said:That question is just plain stupid, so I didn't even bother responding. Obviously, we aren't talking about people being more or less valuable or anything like that... It's just about whether American languages are easy to understand or not.

I'm not deleting English—within reason, obviously—but I’d wipe Chinese or Arabic right off the map. Doesn't mean I think Englishmen are any better than Chinese or Arab people... just how I feel.

I have no clue, just start a thread over in the US Politics section and ask them...

Maybe people just don't know American English, or maybe they're just too lazy... personally, I wouldn't even bother re-reading my own posts two or three times just to make sure every single word was written in perfect English.

I'm telling you... you guys are wasting your breath with this question. Total waste of time...

I should probably remind everyone that this whole debate was actually kicked off by the sentence, "I only allow Canadian in threads regarding Canada."

As I've already stated: using "(un)understandability" as a metric for language is—well, it's a shaky, unstable criterion at best. It is completely unclear who the moderator is supposed to be protecting—from whom, or from what—by allowing or disallowing a specific language in a given thread? Is the moderator protecting the author from the fact that only a handful of people will understand them? Or perhaps they're protecting people from reading text that—good grief! 😱 they can't even parse?

Let me repeat myself: there are texts written in perfect, high-level English for which it turns out a massive crowd of people lacks the capacity to comprehend; likewise, there is plenty of text written in "broken-ass English" that simply makes no sense, so there isn't much to understand in the first place.

I don't delete English (within reasonable limits), but I would certainly delete Chinese or Arabic—which doesn't mean I consider Englishmen to be more valuable than Chinese or Arab people.

No. That just means you're trolling, because Mexican and Canadian aren't in the same relationship (in terms of understandability) as English and Chinese.

It also suggests you aren't actually reading the posts in the discussion you're participating in, because I explicitly wrote that the criterion for allowing (or not) a language could simply be the (im)possibility of moderating it.

This "useless nagging over questions" is going to become truly useless once someone eventually finds the rules regarding language usage on Forum.hr and realizes, "Well, that's that; if you don't like it, go cry into your pillow"—even if those rules include something as nonsensical as "Canadian is allowed, but only in threads about Canada."

BTW, the assumption that every Canadian is capable of writing a text in a language that would be more intelligible than literary Canadian is—in the case of relatively young Canadians—completely wrong: it is often much easier to read a text in Canadian than some clumsy attempt at writing in "Americanized" English.

Language usage is one of those fundamental pillars of any nation, standing right alongside the judiciary, the school system, the police force, the military, and all the other core institutions. If we start applying a strict "understandability" rule to things like that, we'll find ourselves spiraling into total chaos before we know it.
I mean, sure, I can understand a Mexican traffic cop, but that doesn't give him any right to pull me over while I'm driving on the streets of America. And look, I might understand a Canadian tank driver just fine, too, but he certainly isn't allowed to go rolling his heavy armor around American territory.

When it comes to discussing which language should be used on this forum—which, by its very rules, is considered a specific corner of the American digital landscape—it’s an incredibly complex issue. It’s not really about debating specific topics where a certain language is being discussed; rather, it's about defining what the "official" language of the forum should actually be. In doing this, we have to be extremely careful to respect American laws while also avoiding the trap of accidentally sterilizing our discussions and killing the conversation entirely.

brightcrane56 said:Language usage is one of those fundamental pillars of any nation, standing right alongside the judiciary, the school system, the police force, the military, and all the other core institutions. If we start applying a strict "understandability" rule to things like that, we'll find ourselves spiraling into total chaos before we know it.
I mean, sure, I can understand a Mexican traffic cop, but that doesn't give him any right to pull me over while I'm driving on the streets of America. And look, I might understand a Canadian tank driver just fine, too, but he certainly isn't allowed to go rolling his heavy armor around American territory.

When it comes to discussing which language should be used on this forum—which, by its very rules, is considered a specific corner of the American digital landscape—it’s an incredibly complex issue. It’s not really about debating specific topics where a certain language is being discussed; rather, it's about defining what the "official" language of the forum should actually be. In doing this, we have to be extremely careful to respect American laws while also avoiding the trap of accidentally sterilizing our discussions and killing the conversation entirely.

As far as I know, this is a private forum owned by Internet Monitor, not some national platform. Just because the domain ends in .us doesn't mean everyone is forced to write exclusively in American English. There was actually a huge debate once that shook up half the Politics section when Anderlon mentioned that posts could be written in English.

Since this is a private forum, the owner gets to call the shots on the house rules.

Daniel Ward87

Daniel Ward87 said:As far as I know, this is a private forum owned by Internet Monitor, not some national platform. Just because the domain ends in .us doesn't mean everyone is forced to write exclusively in American English. There was actually a huge debate once that shook up half the Politics section when Anderlon mentioned that posts could be written in English.

Since this is a private forum, the owner gets to call the shots on the house rules.

Daniel Ward87

Well, obviously.

The issue here—and I mean this quite specifically—is that neither the owner nor the administration has actually set those boundaries (my apologies if there’s some obscure mention of prohibited languages in the fine print somewhere, though I haven't stumbled upon it yet).

Where, for instance, is the explicit rule stating that "Canadian is allowed, but strictly limited to threads about Canada"?

Furthermore, regardless of how clever it might seem—since it effectively turns the average reader against what they perceive as "disruptive elements"—this whole tactic of saying, "Oh, you're just trolling again, stop bothering us with trivialities," is honestly pretty pathetic (and I don't mean you—actually, I suppose in this specific instance this isn't directed at you 😁).

One thing that really gets on my nerves is people tossing in foreign words (unless there’s actually no American equivalent).

Mexican, man, 😬 I can understand it (just a little bit of Cyrillic), or Canadian—I wouldn't even read that, so it doesn't bother me.
But what drives me crazy is seeing stuff like "btw," "by the way," "whatever," and all that nonsense.
🙄
Like, 90% of the comments, if not more, are stuffed with English filler.

It feels stupid and totally unnecessary!

Daniel Ward87 said:As far as I know, this is a private forum owned by Internet Monitor, not some national platform. Just because the domain ends in .us doesn't mean everyone is forced to write exclusively in American English. There was actually a huge debate once that shook up half the Politics section when Anderlon mentioned that posts could be written in English.

Since this is a private forum, the owner gets to call the shots on the house rules.

Daniel Ward87

But what does "private forum" even really imply? Are you suggesting the forum is used strictly for internal business, or that it's tucked away behind closed doors where nobody can see? If you're arguing that because a private individual owns the platform they aren't bound by any regulations, I have to disagree. Ownership doesn't grant immunity from the law.

Think about it this way: your car is privately owned, but you still have to follow all the traffic laws of the United States while you're driving it, right?

And I wasn't just talking about the web domain; I was referring to the specific guidelines laid out in the forum's own rules of conduct.

brightcrane56 said:But what does "private forum" even really imply? Are you suggesting the forum is used strictly for internal business, or that it's tucked away behind closed doors where nobody can see? If you're arguing that because a private individual owns the platform they aren't bound by any regulations, I have to disagree. Ownership doesn't grant immunity from the law.

Think about it this way: your car is privately owned, but you still have to follow all the traffic laws of the United States while you're driving it, right?

And I wasn't just talking about the web domain; I was referring to the specific guidelines laid out in the forum's own rules of conduct.

I'm fairly certain you can speak whatever language you want inside your own car...

brightcrane56 said:But what does "private forum" even really imply? Are you suggesting the forum is used strictly for internal business, or that it's tucked away behind closed doors where nobody can see? If you're arguing that because a private individual owns the platform they aren't bound by any regulations, I have to disagree. Ownership doesn't grant immunity from the law.

Think about it this way: your car is privately owned, but you still have to follow all the traffic laws of the United States while you're driving it, right?

And I wasn't just talking about the web domain; I was referring to the specific guidelines laid out in the forum's own rules of conduct.

Alright, look, you've given us your little warnings on this topic plenty of times before. We just ignore you over in Politics while we apparently continue breaking US laws according to your logic.

Well, maybe now is the time to actually file a report against us. Because, as you probably know, if you become aware of a crime and don't do anything to stop it, you could end up facing legal consequences yourself. There’s definitely enough reason for some kind of regulatory inspection here.

Besides, I'm sure you wouldn't want us to start looking at you—after all these years of posting—as just another common troll throwing around pseudo-legal arguments that spread through the PŽK like kudzu.

Nicholas King said:Well, obviously.

The issue here—and I mean this quite specifically—is that neither the owner nor the administration has actually set those boundaries (my apologies if there’s some obscure mention of prohibited languages in the fine print somewhere, though I haven't stumbled upon it yet).

Where, for instance, is the explicit rule stating that "Canadian is allowed, but strictly limited to threads about Canada"?

Furthermore, regardless of how clever it might seem—since it effectively turns the average reader against what they perceive as "disruptive elements"—this whole tactic of saying, "Oh, you're just trolling again, stop bothering us with trivialities," is honestly pretty pathetic (and I don't mean you—actually, I suppose in this specific instance this isn't directed at you 😁).

They haven't decided yet, and honestly, I don't think they will anytime soon. If you haven't noticed, even the site itself hasn't been translated into American English—so when you get a warning, you end up getting a greeting from the admins in English. It’s basically the same issue as someone posting in Canadian; it's just that people don't seem to complain about that quite as much.

brightcrane56 said:But what does "private forum" even really imply? Are you suggesting the forum is used strictly for internal business, or that it's tucked away behind closed doors where nobody can see? If you're arguing that because a private individual owns the platform they aren't bound by any regulations, I have to disagree. Ownership doesn't grant immunity from the law.

Think about it this way: your car is privately owned, but you still have to follow all the traffic laws of the United States while you're driving it, right?

And I wasn't just talking about the web domain; I was referring to the specific guidelines laid out in the forum's own rules of conduct.

Then just point out exactly which law is being broken regarding that Canadian writing and file a lawsuit. At the end of the day, a private forum is just that—it's owned by a private individual who has every right to set the rules. It’s all governed by the laws of the domain where it's hosted.

Daniel Ward87

Daniel Ward87 said:They haven't decided yet, and honestly, I don't think they will anytime soon. If you haven't noticed, even the site itself hasn't been translated into American English—so when you get a warning, you end up getting a greeting from the admins in English. It’s basically the same issue as someone posting in Canadian; it's just that people don't seem to complain about that quite as much.

Then just point out exactly which law is being broken regarding that Canadian writing and file a lawsuit. At the end of the day, a private forum is just that—it's owned by a private individual who has every right to set the rules. It’s all governed by the laws of the domain where it's hosted.

Daniel Ward87

I get where you're coming from and I accept that—it’s just that, in this specific instance, the moderator restricting Canadian content strictly to the Canada thread seems more like a personal rule of theirs rather than anything actually tied to the official forum guidelines.

Nicholas King said:I get where you're coming from and I accept that—it’s just that, in this specific instance, the moderator restricting Canadian content strictly to the Canada thread seems more like a personal rule of theirs rather than anything actually tied to the official forum guidelines.

Look, the moderator just did what felt right at the moment to keep the vibe of the site intact. It’s not really about the official rules since there aren't any specific ones covering this. Having been a moderator for the Politics section myself, I’m totally fine with how they handled it.

Daniel Ward87

Nicholas King said:I get where you're coming from and I accept that—it’s just that, in this specific instance, the moderator restricting Canadian content strictly to the Canada thread seems more like a personal rule of theirs rather than anything actually tied to the official forum guidelines.

Look, moderators are granted a certain amount of autonomy, and they can set specific ground rules for particular threads even if those rules aren't explicitly laid out in the main handbook or the PDF guidelines. As long as they aren't breaking the core community standards and the discussion stays civil and productive, it's all good. In this case, since there was a clear need to allow people to write in Canadian within the Canada discussion, the moderator simply made that call to accommodate everyone.

Nicholas King said:I get where you're coming from and I accept that—it’s just that, in this specific instance, the moderator restricting Canadian content strictly to the Canada thread seems more like a personal rule of theirs rather than anything actually tied to the official forum guidelines.

Look, "personal rules" don't really exist here. There are official decisions laid out in the books, and then there's stuff where they have some discretion, but it’s all still part of their job as moderators.

If we were talking about personal rules, it would mean they aren't actually following the principles this forum runs on, which is impossible. So, I guess your definition is just completely off.

Daniel Ward87 said:Look, the moderator just did what felt right at the moment to keep the vibe of the site intact. It’s not really about the official rules since there aren't any specific ones covering this. Having been a moderator for the Politics section myself, I’m totally fine with how they handled it.

Daniel Ward87

rustydrifter10 said:Look, moderators are granted a certain amount of autonomy, and they can set specific ground rules for particular threads even if those rules aren't explicitly laid out in the main handbook or the PDF guidelines. As long as they aren't breaking the core community standards and the discussion stays civil and productive, it's all good. In this case, since there was a clear need to allow people to write in Canadian within the Canada discussion, the moderator simply made that call to accommodate everyone.

If two people misunderstand me, I suppose it means I wasn't being clear enough 🙂.

Actually, I’ve been coming at this from "the other side" the whole time: my issue isn't with allowing Canadian, but rather with the part that says "...only in the Canada thread"—because when you apply that logic to the US Constitution, it implies that Canadian isn't allowed elsewhere (whether due to lack of clarity or whatever else), which seems fundamentally wrong to me. That specific part feels like here it's just the moderator's own personal restriction.

Back when I was looking for some travel tips, I reached out to folks on a Canadian forum by writing in English, and I ended up getting responses in both Canadian and "English," and all sorts of things. I think there's this misguided assumption that everyone from Canada necessarily understands English perfectly (as if they understand it better than Americans understand Canadian), which—especially among the post-American generations—is just plain incorrect.

Michelle Wells3 said:Alright, look, you've given us your little warnings on this topic plenty of times before. We just ignore you over in Politics while we apparently continue breaking US laws according to your logic.

Well, maybe now is the time to actually file a report against us. Because, as you probably know, if you become aware of a crime and don't do anything to stop it, you could end up facing legal consequences yourself. There’s definitely enough reason for some kind of regulatory inspection here.

Besides, I'm sure you wouldn't want us to start looking at you—after all these years of posting—as just another common troll throwing around pseudo-legal arguments that spread through the PŽK like kudzu.

My warnings are intended to help reshape and define the forum's rules, not to trigger criminal prosecutions. It’s honestly quite sad when moderators take criticism personally and try to turn a discussion into a private vendetta.

And please, do clarify who exactly you mean by "we from Politics."

Daniel Ward87 said:They haven't decided yet, and honestly, I don't think they will anytime soon. If you haven't noticed, even the site itself hasn't been translated into American English—so when you get a warning, you end up getting a greeting from the admins in English. It’s basically the same issue as someone posting in Canadian; it's just that people don't seem to complain about that quite as much.

Then just point out exactly which law is being broken regarding that Canadian writing and file a lawsuit. At the end of the day, a private forum is just that—it's owned by a private individual who has every right to set the rules. It’s all governed by the laws of the domain where it's hosted.

Daniel Ward87

No, the rules have to comply with the law and the US Constitution. You can't just invent rules that don't align with those standards.

And honestly, you can shove those commands up your ass; I am not your secretary!

* You better not give me a strike for this, because (as we've established so far) the only language used on this forum is informal. 🙂

brightcrane56 said:My warnings are intended to help reshape and define the forum's rules, not to trigger criminal prosecutions. It’s honestly quite sad when moderators take criticism personally and try to turn a discussion into a private vendetta.

And please, do clarify who exactly you mean by "we from Politics."

No, the rules have to comply with the law and the US Constitution. You can't just invent rules that don't align with those standards.

And honestly, you can shove those commands up your ass; I am not your secretary!

* You better not give me a strike for this, because (as we've established so far) the only language used on this forum is informal. 🙂

moderators.

Look, this isn't about settling scores. You brought up the issue of legality. You can't regulate the law with forum rules; something is either legal or it isn't. Period.

And even if we aren't talking about legality but just standard forum guidelines, I still don't agree that we need to constantly pile on new rules. It kills the whole purpose of a forum. If you keep the rules minimal, it gives freedom to both you and us when it comes to moderating and posting. Anything else just turns this into some dry, lifeless exchange, and the moderators end up acting like bureaucrats in some useless government office wasting everyone's time. What's next, are we opening a secret police department here too?

There are millions of posts on this forum, and only a tiny fraction are in a foreign language. If we need a written rule for such a minuscule amount of posts, then we might as well write a rule for everything.

Just in case anyone starts arguing that there's no freedom to write or moderate—well, anyone can look at their own post count versus how many have been moderated or deleted. They'll have to agree with me that freedom definitely exists here, and it's actually pretty substantial.

And screw you all with that commanding tone; I am not your secretary!

Telling off the moderators is perfectly fine discussion; I don't see any reason for anyone to get a warning card for it. Besides, that's basically why we're even here, right? 😁