QUOTE(McKhaos @ Apr 20 2008, 09:50 AM)

Not really. That would apply to a "dumbass" situation. This is more of a "retarded" situation. See rule 57Q for more information regarding that.
57Q is a little ambiguous on the whole "retarded" situation. I went ahead and looked through the bylaws, and under Section IV, Paragraph 1.3, I'm "hitherto authorized to make following references in cases of debauchery, retardation, and/or questioning of sexual preference:
- Umberto and following agents
- Clark's sexual tendencies
- Phix's 'massive 14 inch penis - caveat: must actually demonstrate phallic imagery ergo cock and balls placement on screen
- Xenu
- Expression of lament over death of caturday
...
- Anything aforementioned member "nismo" has been involved in, from sexual activity to general lack of sexual activity
- PENDING LEGISLATIVE APPROVAL April 20, 2008: South African political state
Any situation neither conforming to nor appropriately befitting to these laws may be examined under Section V: b00st is a douche."
So I'm getting this a little mixed up. I'm pretty sure that I'm missing some bylaws regarding the targeting of specific members in specific situations, but extreme Jewish stereotypes are more vague, as they don't really fit under anything in Section IV or V.
Should I focus my inquiry on the DS' Statuates and Laws-in-Process, or is this more a question for the Admin Justices? Mitlov, you've got a background in this particular area, under area would this fall?