If some people want to be lazy so be it. Between funny stuff, people giving helpfull answers, and those that are doing things for the community I upvote quite a bit too but I'd go through the hassle to give a little bit of recognition. And on those occasions I find a post that irks me I might not downvote it because it's less annoying than having to go through the CAPTCHA.

Having bigots in a community makes the community extremely unwelcoming and outright hostile to those who belong to the minorities targeted by the bigots. Hence, by banning (or at least disciplining) those bigots, the community would become more welcome towards minorities.

Like I said, probably should be a form of "containment subforum" with an "Enter at your own risk"-policy. With a big warning as a stickied thread.

With this, people will know what kind of stuff they step into, and it would be catering / pandering to neither side of extremism... also, it would prevent it from spilling over to the rest of the forum, as people posting political / controversial stuff outside of this subsection will have their thread moved there, along with a verbal warning (+ more on repeated infractions).

Let me guess, you've never employed this particular strategy at the b&b, right?

It's a little different here because we have a communal breakfast. It's not a restaurant.

Bigots not only exist in the majority, but also in minorities, as very well proven by yourself being a massive bigot... so stop pretending only the minorities are concerned, as pretty much everyone can be lumped into some kind of minority if you go far enough instead of randomly lumping people into whatever label fits your messed-up agenda.

And what about when the minorities act as poorly as their so-called bigots? Should they be equally banned? Or given a free pass?

This is the part you and Telika don't get. Telika throws out the strawman of someone proclaiming "Refugees are subhuman cannibal terrorist liar criminals", yet show me were all these supposedly vast number of posts actually are.

The reality is someone says something like, "I don't think refugees should be allowed in my country because they don't know our language and won't fit in", then someone like Telika goes in and called them a racist fuck. Or like you, someone uses the word "Tranny" and you are calling them homophobic and want to get them banned.

Both of you are guilty of gross exaggeration.

When somebody uses a slur like "tranny" (or "nigger" for that matter), that is, itself, an act of aggression; therefore it should not be allowed under any reasonable set of forum rules. Hence, it makes sense that the user using the slur should be punished (and banned if the offense is repeated).
Can you identify a situation in which this has happened unprovoked?

Oh, ok. You know, I've never actually stayed in a b&b. We used to have something similar here where I live called a "boarding house" where you could sit at big tables with strangers and eat lunch and dinner. Pretty good food, but sadly went out of business after about 80 years of continuous operation. Changing times...

Just look at your post #106. You are at the very least suggesting that all people who voted Trump are racists and mentally disabled.

That is "hate speech". Any speech recklessly stereotyping a large group of people based on such a stretched assumption is "hate speech" in my book. Of course I'm sure you will provide some messed up definition of "hate speech" which somehow excludes your own hatred.

and here we go again
tranny boo boo goes in victim mode
cause nothing is ever your fault and you can never ever be wrong

Calling people who do something racist "racist" is not stereotyping for the same reason calling somebody who intentionally kills another person "a murderer" is not stereotyping. Also, my only mention of mental disability in that post is in the negative; I never said anything about whether people who voted Trump are mentally disabled. (They're racist because the very act of voting for Trump is itself racist.)

Also, I could argue that the post in question isn't unprovoked, as it is a response to zeogold's post.

gee the mental gymnastics in here are stunning trantran
at least you rose gloriously to the challenge eh ?

And why exactly do we need a political forum here? This is a serious question. Don't you think that there are better places to discuss politics? This is the forum of a company that sells computer games. Why do we have to discuss stuff like politics, religion and similar controversial stuff here? It's rather toxic and almos ever leads to arguments, insults and name-calling.