#24 - Aug. 2, 2007, 6:20 a.m.
While I don't believe there is much to be gained from an involved discussion as to whether a specific term can be considered "profanity," it may help to understand some of the underlying philosophy behind our decisions in this regard. As has been noted elsewhere in this thread,
World of Warcraft supports a broad spectrum of people, spanning countries, cultures, and generations; the collective language of a game that straddles so many borders and boundaries, geographical or otherwise, is therefore expected to run the gamut of vernacular from innocent to offensive.
When it becomes necessary to pass judgment on this slang, two options are available to those responsible for making such determinations:
Option the First: Take action against anything that could conceivably be considered offensive by any given cross-section of the population, including words indigenous to a specific geographic location or potentially objectionable to any number of creeds, genuine and fabricated alike. The advantage of this option is that, theoretically, no one would be offended by the carefully moderated words of others; the disadvantage, naturally, is that players' speech -- while never "free" in the sense promised by the United States Bill of Rights -- would become so curtailed that expression would wither under the baleful gaze of indiscriminate censorship. Additionally, the potential for abuse of such a system is vast.
Option the Second: Realising the diversity of our players' backgrounds in so many regards, only take action against language that is unambiguously offensive, or on which an implicit consensus has been gathered, regardless of whence the people in question hail. The advantage of this choice is that, while terms that are generally accepted as objectionable are addressed accordingly -- as befits our stance on ensuring that truly inappropriate language is discouraged and, if necessary, punished -- words that may hold a number of connotations, each with varying degrees of propriety based on one's geographic location, have the option of falling into a moral grey area. This allows some measure of verbal freedom, as some would use such terms innocently, but maintains a level of strictness on genuinely abusive speech.
As you may have gathered, we've opted to go the latter route; we believe this strikes the proper balance between meting out justice and allowing diversity of expression. This could explain why a word one person may believe to be offensive is not necessarily deemed as such after our investigation has been conducted, though I do apologise for any confusion which may have arisen. Please continue to bring to our attention any speech (or names) you believe may constitute violations of our policies, and we shall ensure that the appropriate actions are taken. Thanks. :)
