2

After reading the question, Is New York City Council considering making public urination legal?, I wish to know if question topics that promote racist views are an accepted use of this site.

(The explicit claim in the title of the question cited, that the law is being changed because people with dark skin colour perform an action frequently, is both racist and not supported by the content of the article referenced in the cited question.)

6

Firstly, for a bit of context:

At the time you objected to this question, it was only about 90 minutes old. That isn't much time for the community to react. The reaction had started, with comments and downvotes. Before two hours had passed, I had substantially edited the question. I don't think you should judge our community standards too much by the questions asked, but by how they are treated afterwards.

But, to get to the meat of your question: Yes, questions that publicise racist views, with a genuine intent to find out whether the views are supported by evidence, are an accepted use of this site.

We have not yet identified any taboo topics. (We do ask that the topic of suicide be treated carefully, and we tend to put NSFW images behind labelled links to avoid embarassment and discomfort.)

  • Thanks Oddthinking. I note that the question title has now been changed to remove the racist phrasing. Is this an accepted method of approaching a question whose title trangresses ethical boundaries? Or is it better reserved for those cases where the content of the question does not support the transgressive material in the title? – E Clair Feb 14 '16 at 1:47
  • 4
    The language of the question should be respectful, even if the referenced source material is not. This tends to be a moral issue (rather than an ethical one), so we can expect some differences of opinion on what is acceptable. – Oddthinking Feb 14 '16 at 3:39

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .