Following on from the Notts County thread I want an explanation of why some areas are taboo on SZ but others aren't.
C C Csiders made a vaguely amusing comment insinuating that the McCann parents had something to hide under interview, and by implication were involved in the disappearance/murder of Maddy. This was allowed to pass without comment or objection.
Blue Tonic, I think it was, then made a rather more amusing comment regarding Maddy which apparently is bang out of order.
Where exactly does the line of acceptability lie? Is it OK to joke about murderers/abductors but not about the victim? Surely both is joking about the same subject matter?
Making a subject taboo is curtailing people's freedom of speech. Why should a comment be censored that is not libellous, racist or any other way illegal?
C C Csiders made a vaguely amusing comment insinuating that the McCann parents had something to hide under interview, and by implication were involved in the disappearance/murder of Maddy. This was allowed to pass without comment or objection.
Blue Tonic, I think it was, then made a rather more amusing comment regarding Maddy which apparently is bang out of order.
Where exactly does the line of acceptability lie? Is it OK to joke about murderers/abductors but not about the victim? Surely both is joking about the same subject matter?
Making a subject taboo is curtailing people's freedom of speech. Why should a comment be censored that is not libellous, racist or any other way illegal?