Exactly, and the context is months and months of posts of her saying things like eg: shemale is offensive (even though it's the term used in Thailand by the transsexuals themselves).

And so on and so forth.

If this thread was the first time, I take your point, but it's not.

So yes, context is important.

In the US is is also a slang for an automobile transmission. Though it has fallen largely out of use.

I think she is very well aware off that those rules will apply to here as well.
I might be wrong, but I think she is just trying to voice her opinion in a meaningful way, so that certain aspects are not forgotten.
That certain terms/phrases are being used different all over the world is to be expected. And from what I have seen in the recent past, she did comment on certain words, which she finds offensive and voiced her opinion.
Can this get annoying, yes for sure, BUT the same could be said about a lot of OUR posts.
Is it a reason to ban her? I don't think so at all, so long she (to say it simple) stays civil ;)

To put this into a broader more generic context: I do see all over the place posts which are fare more aggressive and similar than hers. Do those posts/posters get the same attention, no.

You see the double morale there?

And she came up with the idea/prerequisite of repeating before banning. I only included it in my OP. Credit were credit is due.

For your point I kept on purpose, you are not from Thailand, right? So you would use it out of context (unless you would be talking about a docu you have just seen or similar).

Hence: CONTEXT.

EDIT: And can we stop pinpointing on here? This discussion is to be seen in a broader context

Nobody said anything about banning her.

And I love her, she knows this.

There would still be the community manager/moderator to decide if a comment is indeed an insult/ hate speech, a hard comment but still within the borders of the ToSor just harmless fooling about.

But saying I can't complain if I'm not the direct victim is absurd. There have been whole threads here with so much racism and bullshit that I felt offended. Not because I was the direct victim, but because I'm a human being with certain values and a conscience.

I'm not thinking so much "I can't complain" as I am "my complaints don't carry as much weight as they would if I were being directly insulted". I mean, if 90% of the community's asking for a thread to be closed even if none of those people who reported it were directly involved, that should mean something.

My suggestion would be for rep to depend on rep. Rep by itself is not important, so nothing important would depend on rep. Unless you think rep is important, in which case it doesn't matter if anything important depends on it.
Yeah, I heard that one too.

Thank you, quite an interesting link.

Current IP system (IPv4) has about 4 billion addresses. Current number of devices connected to the internet devices is estimated to be about 20 billion. Blocking an IP will not block just a single user, not to mention that for most countries, dynamic IPs are the norm, not static ones.
IP checks could be used alongside different checks to verify something, but they shouldn't be used by themselves.

Small comment here.
My comment was about insults, not hate speech. True, the distinction can be difficult at times, but let me remind you that the phrase "Can I bum a fag" can be a perfectly normal one in a social setting, depending on which side of the pond you are.
If someone calls for death to all "Insert group here", that is considered hate speech, if someone tells me to go kill myself, that may or may not be hate speech. But I am the one to make said decision, not someone else.

So again, my suggestion was about insults targeted at a specific individual, not insults targeted at a group.

See above comment to Telika. If you are offended because someone calls me (specifically me, not any group I'm part of) a retard (or anything else), I would also think that's absurd.
You seem to have forgotten the GameRager incident.

oh that one was special....pir.. never mind

And that's when the community manager comes in and have to decide. I doubt that many people would report such minor stuff though. But especially in the political threads we have seen much more extreme insults that members might be willing to report. Maybe just to keep a civil discussion culture.

Let's be honest: If one can't discuss stuff in an open forum without constant insults and name-calling, it might be a good idea to prevent that person from posting anymore. Maybe not forever, but for a certain time, so he or she can think about it and learn how to discuss stuff in a civilized way.

Yes. I do agree with that. But I believe the person being insulted should be the one to do the reporting, not someone outside the conversation.

The only thing that makes the GOG forum worth posting in is the lack of heavy handed moderation.

Moderation always leads to arbitrary moderator rulings.

Introduce an Ignore button instead, so that the individual user can decide what to read or not read. I find it offensive that some third part should be the judge of what I can say to others and what others can say to me.

GameRager incident?