re: #288 Aceofwhat?

That’s fine. Where you were helpful was in your distinction between examples and motivations.

The discussion began with my question about whether the ban did indeed address motivations. Unless i misread him (careful caveat), Windsiagio also is concerned about motivations.

You are talking about clarifications, which I think is different and far more logical.

Did that help?

Yes. I don’t like thought-crime laws either. I don’t love getting into motivation and intent and “in your heart of hearts” crap, and it’s damn near impossible for an educator to have time to do so fairly. “Don’t call someone a fag” is a lot easier.