|
Post by madhair60 on Sept 10, 2010 15:55:17 GMT
You're not wrong there. I appreciate your saying so.
|
|
|
Post by Beeth on Sept 18, 2010 12:00:34 GMT
I request that the mods might want to review the fact that the word "bollock" isn't censored. I expected it to be in my previous post, and don't wish to be pulled up on it.
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by Warped‽‽‽ on Sept 18, 2010 12:05:43 GMT
Really?
If you were pulled on it, whoever did so would have to be a massive dick. Even with our mods (tee hee hee, I am joke) I don't think that will happen.
Also, asking for something to be censored makes me sad.
(Or, 'reviewed')
|
|
|
Post by Beeth on Sept 18, 2010 12:32:38 GMT
I don't want it to be censored, really. I just don't want to be slammed down with a warning for using a word they conisder to be offensive, but didn't have the presence of mind to see to in the first place.
Given the general userbase of this forum, I think that less words should be censored. My guidelines would be anything from "sh**" upwards to remain obscured, and everything less stronger than that to be allowed. I believe the regulars here are all sensible and mature enough, but at the same time there's always the chance of the odd nutjob coming in to spam loads of strong language and attempt to cause upset.
In fact, I think it's about time they reviewed the swear filter as a whole, and gave my suggestion some serious consideration. I mean, once over the word "p*ss" was allowed, and now it isn't. It wasn't like people were abusing the word to death, so I fail to see the reasoning behind that. I would appreciate if they did that.
|
|
|
Post by Retro on Sept 18, 2010 12:37:45 GMT
It wasn't like people were abusing the word to death, so I fail to see the reasoning behind that. I would appreciate if they did that. While at this very moment I'm a tad busy to engage in a lengthy discussion over the filter. In that specific case, "alternate urine" was indeed being used a lot by some members in some areas. The swear filter is a consistent debate and issue. It's almost like our version of American gun control in a way. I'll have a chat with some of the mods first, get their opinions on the matter.
|
|
|
Post by Tom J on Sept 18, 2010 14:25:42 GMT
Yeah, cos p*ss is an incredibly offensive word If everyone starts saying "bum" a lot, can we get that censored too?
|
|
|
Post by Super Sonic on Sept 18, 2010 16:16:16 GMT
tits
|
|
|
Post by madhair60 on Sept 18, 2010 18:21:04 GMT
taint
|
|
|
Post by Beeth on Sept 18, 2010 18:42:09 GMT
I believe the regulars here are all sensible and mature enough I stand by this comment thoroughly.
|
|
|
Post by ShayMay on Sept 18, 2010 18:47:34 GMT
poopoopoo willys bums arses
But yeah, I have no problem with the swear filter, apart from the occasional glitch, such as the ones associated with S[censored]horpe and [censored]tered - even then, it's not something I'd even give a second thought. So yeah, good swear filter. Have a gold star.
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Sept 22, 2010 13:40:40 GMT
The swear filter here has corrupted my brain into automatically translating the word 'censored' into an actual swear word - whatever the context.
|
|
Spudiator
Artist Hume
High Priest of the Religion of Football
STC-O's resident footy obsessive
Posts: 2,815
|
Post by Spudiator on Oct 6, 2010 13:31:52 GMT
Is there any way the preview button could be added to the quick reply option at the bottom of the forum pages? Would help a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Calisto on Oct 6, 2010 13:50:43 GMT
No. I've looked, and no. It's a quick reply box, the point of it is to just write something quickly I'm afraid. Ask Proboards if you really want it there.
|
|
Spudiator
Artist Hume
High Priest of the Religion of Football
STC-O's resident footy obsessive
Posts: 2,815
|
Post by Spudiator on Oct 6, 2010 16:47:31 GMT
I'm not that fussed really, I just thought it might be useful if it was simple enough to implement.
|
|
|
Post by Beeth on Oct 18, 2010 22:23:54 GMT
In the name of common sense, why is the word "f.a.g." blocked? Last time I looked, this was a British board. Please sort this out.
|
|
|
Post by Mambo's Here! Look Busy! on Oct 18, 2010 22:58:13 GMT
The obvious answer would be because it can be used as a term of offence, in both US and British slang.... and we censor words of offence.... Have you not seen the Harley episode of South Park?!
|
|
|
Post by Beeth on Oct 18, 2010 23:13:24 GMT
No. I stopped watching that garbage several years ago. And it's only become "offensive" in British slang because of American influence, anyway. This side of the pond, it means cigarette. Always has done, and always will do. I suppose we'll be censoring "ass" and "goddamn" next, are we.
|
|
|
Post by Retro on Oct 19, 2010 0:17:18 GMT
No. I stopped watching that garbage several years ago. And it's only become "offensive" in British slang because of American influence, anyway. This side of the pond, it means cigarette. Always has done, and always will do. I suppose we'll be censoring "ass" and "goddamn" next, are we. The word in question is of a significantly higher offence level than "ass" for example. It being a homophobic insult as opposed to just minor slang for a part of the body. We also have a significant American readerbase, as such, we have to bear their culture in mind as well as ours.
|
|
|
Post by Balls on Oct 19, 2010 4:25:56 GMT
The weird thing about the swear filter and censoring the offensive words is that it blurs them all into one and, in a way, you can kind of get away with saying horrible stuff.
Like, if there was a gay person on here and someone said "yeah, whatever, [censored]", they could be calling them any swear word, or possibly the cigarette slang thingy word that I obviously can't say.
And no one would know about your secret intolerance...
|
|
|
Post by Nam on Oct 19, 2010 8:35:39 GMT
The weird thing about the swear filter and censoring the offensive words is that it blurs them all into one and, in a way, you can kind of get away with saying horrible stuff.
Like, if there was a gay person on here and someone said "yeah, whatever, [censored]", they could be calling them any swear word, or possibly the cigarette slang thingy word that I obviously can't say.
And no one would know about your secret intolerance... It used to be that the offensive words like the f word, and the s word would come up as [censored], whereas words which you couldonly use in an insulting context, such as the n word, came up a [ban this user]. Doesn't seem to be the case now though. the N word at least comes up as [censored]. I always thought [ban this user] made sense. Most people slip a casual [censored] or [censored] into there speech, some without realising, but genuine racial slurs never slip into casual dialogue, leaving the only intent to use them as ofensive, hence labelling them as [ban this user] instead of [censored], and thus calling attention to the fact that someone has deliberately used a racial slur.
|
|
|
Post by madhair60 on Oct 19, 2010 9:41:54 GMT
"Ban this User" was too reactionary anyway. You [censored] [censored].
|
|
|
Post by Balls on Oct 19, 2010 13:01:00 GMT
but genuine racial slurs never slip into casual dialogue, leaving the only intent to use them as ofensive, hence labelling them as [ban this user] instead of [censored], and thus calling attention to the fact that someone has deliberately used a racial slur. Yes and no. Every time I've ever seen the "ban this user" message, it's been in a post where it's clearly out of context. Examples would include quoting, language discussions, theoretical scenario descriptions and, in the case of the gay f word, alternate meanings.
Thus, the actual "ban this user" message was rendered useless, as these words have been used from time to time on this forum- out of context and inoffensively- so never has anybody been banned based on that message coming up.
Never had a problem with the filter differentiating between the more offensive words the milder let's-face-it-no-one-here-is-offended-by-the-recently-censored-p-to-the-iss-and-other-words-to-the-point-I-don't-see-why-they-bother-anymore catagories, just not with that particular message.
It should say "[SUPER CENSORED]" or something.
|
|
|
Post by Retro on Oct 19, 2010 14:53:17 GMT
The original intent of the "ban this user" was decided before I joined the mod team way back. Although I believe that the presumption is correct in that it was to identify people who were genuinelly being racially offensive.
Over time however, we've not seen a single case of racist behaviour in that degree, so the concept of having to deal with it gradually became lower priority, hence some other words just ended up as [censored]. In a sense, them all appearing as the same can remove the confrontation entirely. A user could be a racist in their head, I don't think thats our duty to change or hunt down to ban. So long as they are not doing so to others on the forum.
|
|
|
Post by Super Sonic on Oct 19, 2010 19:20:25 GMT
F A G should probably be uncensored in the sense that if someone was using it in a homophobic manner, other users would see and, hopefully, report it. If they're using it in a non-derogatory manner then it's still available for all to see.
|
|
|
Post by madhair60 on Oct 19, 2010 21:58:56 GMT
The history* of "Ban this User".
"Ban this User" was implemented by me a long time ago, to differentiate between harmless, but forbidden swearing and dangerous, risky racism.
A few years later I changed my mind on it, and shortly thereafter most everything on the banned words list corrected to "[censored]".
*I'm almost certain this is how it went down - please, mods, correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|