This "Vulgar" warning is probably one of the broadest ones. Anything anyone on this forum says can be taken the wrong way, and I know a lot of you are going to start using this warning frequently even when it's not deserved.
I think the difference is Graphic more about media, such as photos and videos (Though I guess that can go with Explicit?), and Vulgar is more word-based. But, oh well.
I've gotten Graphic for a post that had no pictures or a gif
Hey I asked for a reverse like yesterday but I'm guessing a mod didn't see it. But yeah, I really don't think I should've gotten a WP for this. I wasn't swearing in my own words and I also didn't use that gif to offend anybody either. If posting a gif like that is warnable, I honestly did not know. Couldn't have I at least gotten a reminder instead?
I think it helps people understand why they received the warning. A lot of time people come in here and ask why they got WP's etc, or don't understand which part of their post is warnable, having more specific categories makes it easier. For example if you got vulgar, you'd know you said something suggestive or gross. Whereas if you got explicit, you'd know it's probably for a picture or something you posted.
And "Graphic" could involve something that isn't necessarily vulgar or explicit (i.e. violence, death, etc.). Having specific categories makes it easier for the mods to assess those points as applicable.
Mods: When are you going to put in the rules that nicknames like "Rhenna" are warnable? A member was banned because of using it and it's not fair.
Quote:
Nicknames — 1 point, expires in 30 days
You have mangled the name of a celebrity, public figure, brand or ATRL member into a stan name or a hater name.
