Fram was right to be angry. That it showed in his post is, as I said in the grandparent comment, only bad for him and the message he was trying to convey. And n

Fram was right to be angry. That it showed in his post is, as I said in the grandparent comment, only bad for him and the message he was trying to convey. And notice that you are calling him arrogant while saying "If it hasn’t penetrated by now I don’t think it will" to me. To be honest the fact that profanities themselves are not the thing that bothers you is even more unsettling to me than if it were the case. Suppose your standards (what they are is not at all clear to me) were imposed on Wikimedia projects. Who would be capable of judging by them and making heads roll? And what would be implications for free speech? One thing that has not been noted up to now in the discussion, is that even if T&S has, say, decided to impose standards like your's on Wikipedias (which does not appear to be the case, although as I have said already, everything regarding their action is murky), how would it be fair to arbitrarily, without notice or warning start imposing them on Fram specifically. Again, while you are attacking Fram you are spinning the discussion away from greater issue of a charity corporation being nontransparent to the extreme in making heads roll in the community its value is based on. How are the Wikimedia project communities (some call it a movement, actually) supposed to keep their spirit necessary for volunteering with such arbitrarily capricious and totally unexplained bans happening?