Originally posted by huckleberryhounddid you alert the 'worse' posts for removal? If not surely all you are complaining about is that not every post containing swearing gets moderated. Is that not like complaing that not everyone who speeds gets a ticket every time?
From my earlier post.-
And if you're going to hit me with the "what stuff is worse" poop (i am alowed to say poop?), then just look through most of the stuff shavixmar, or sicilian smaug types sometimes.
I'm sure Darvley has obscured a couple of expletives in his time, as has HoH
It is not swearing in the Father Ted comedy, it is used in place of swearing.
"It's not swearing, it's just very close to swearing with one letter changed". By this argument all swearing must be allowed as long as it is not spelt 100% correctly - if there is to be moderation of swearing can you not see how unmanagable this stance would be?
1 edit
Originally posted by NordlysIt's quite silly, isn't it?
While I still see it as ridiculous that any swear words get moderated even when they are not used as swear words (e.g. discussing their origin or referring to literature etc.)...
I could post a number of Larkin's poems here, any one of which would get me banned.
Edit: Sod it. I might just go ahead anyway.
Originally posted by belgianfreakThe fact that i am defending the use of the word "Feck" , surely shows that i am not arguing about the non-moderation of certain words, its just that the moderation seems a bit selective.
did you alert the 'worse' posts for removal? If not surely all you are complaining about is that not every post containing swearing gets moderated. Is that not like complaing that not everyone who speeds gets a ticket every time?
"It's not swearing, it's just very close to swearing with one letter changed". By this argument all swearing must be allow ...[text shortened]... here is to be moderation of swearing can you not see how unmanagable this stance would be?
Originally posted by expressiveoutburstin his mind he may have been quoting a TV show. In his post he simply usued the words with no reference.
There's loads of it in quite a few threads at the moment, if you want to mod something, go mod the serious stuff instead of picking on someone who is remembering a tv show.
Again, if you have any posts in mind that you find offensive please alert them. Otherwise, the rule is that any post that contains swearing is liable for removal.
An example why: if a post where someone "playfully" says 'f*** off' cannot be removed than we must also allow a posts where a poster continuous tells people to 'f*** off' with no pleasent jape intended. If we selectively chose what's acceptable based on post content then we enter the 'bias' and 'subjectivity' arguments. Leniency on swearing, allowing users to control themselves, was tried and judged to fail. Blanket banning is not possible becasue a program would block words like "cocktail" and "writswatch" too. Mods checking every post is impractical. So either you allow all swearing or allow any swearing (obfuscated or not) to be removed when noted.
Originally posted by belgianfreakI've put cockroach in a post before and it got removed. Hardly punishable was it.
in his mind he may have been quoting a TV show. In his post he simply usued the words with no reference.
Again, if you have any posts in mind that you find offensive please alert them. Otherwise, the rule is that any post that contains swearing is liable for removal.
An example why: if a post where someone "playfully" says 'f*** off' cannot be re ...[text shortened]... all swearing or allow any swearing (obfuscated or not) to be removed when noted.
Originally posted by belgianfreakI appreciate the point, and the fact that the Mods do a good job FOR FREE.
in his mind he may have been quoting a TV show. In his post he simply usued the words with no reference.
Again, if you have any posts in mind that you find offensive please alert them. Otherwise, the rule is that any post that contains swearing is liable for removal.
An example why: if a post where someone "playfully" says 'f*** off' cannot be re ...[text shortened]... all swearing or allow any swearing (obfuscated or not) to be removed when noted.
But the fact that i used a different word, not the word in question, shows that i had showed some form of self censoring.
I don't like, and wouldn't like, to see a forum full of expletives, its tasteless and just not right, i accept that.
But you're Brittish so i know you've seen the program in question.
Can you honestly say that the use of the word Feck in Father ted was offensive ?? Or that banning all words that are placed instead of swearwords in this forum is even possible?
Surely the use of an inoffensive word is a better alternative to chasing down all the possibilities?
Originally posted by belgianfreakI don't buy this argument. Most cases are quite clear. It may not always be easy to say if something was said jokingly or in full seriousness, but it's easy to see whether a word is used for swearing or if it's a quote, the word is discussed, or it's just part of an expression (like WTF). Also, there will always be posts which don't contain any forbidden words, but are nonetheless offensive enough to be removed, so the moderators will always have to make some content-based decisions.
An example why: if a post where someone "playfully" says 'f*** off' cannot be removed than we must also allow a posts where a poster continuous tells people to 'f*** off' with no pleasent jape intended. If we selectively chose what's acceptable based on post content then we enter the 'bias' and 'subjectivity' arguments.
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundif it is selective in your eyes it is likely to be for 2 reasons:
The fact that i am defending the use of the word "Feck" , surely shows that i am not arguing about the non-moderation of certain words, its just that the moderation seems a bit selective.
1) not every case of swearing gets deleted because a blocking program is too blunt and would block (for example) any use of 'wristwatch', whereas human checking of every post is impractical. Therefore an alert program suplemented by user alerts is the best compramise available.
2) some consideration of context is attempted. As Bowmann sytas, it would dbe impossible to quote much literature and songs if the swearing were 100% rules out. Although some attempt at obfuscation is welcome, would you not agree that quoting a song/poem inexactly could detract from the original meaning to such an extent as to make the quote worthless? Would you prefer that all swearing, even in these cases, were removed? Or would you prefer that people could say 'f*** off' to other users at will?
2 edits
Originally posted by belgianfreakNo, it is selective to me because i have seen several people use ob.. ob. .- that word you said- swearwords, as i mentioned before.
if it is selective in your eyes it is likely to be for 2 reasons:
1) not every case of swearing gets deleted because a blocking program is too blunt and would block (for example) any use of 'wristwatch', whereas human checking of every post is impractical. Therefore an alert program suplemented by user alerts is the best compramise available.
2) some ...[text shortened]... , were removed? Or would you prefer that people could say 'f*** off' to other users at will?
Originally posted by belgianfreakI would prefer being able to quote a song/poem exactly over obfuscating some words in them, but this seems to be a completely irrelevant question since it will be deleted and the user banned either way, no?
Although some attempt at obfuscation is welcome, would you not agree that quoting a song/poem inexactly could detract from the original meaning to such an extent as to make the quote worthless? Would you prefer that all swearing, even in these cases, were removed?
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundnot tryting to skip out, but being British it's getting pretty late so I'll try to answer your last two points:
Can you honestly say that the use of the word Feck in Father ted was offensive ??
Or that banning all words that are placed instead of swearwords in this forum is even possible?
Was teh use of Feck offensive? To me, no. To my parents, maybe. To my gran, yes. Subjectivity again. Also, if one use of 'feck' is OK then how can another user's use of 'feck off you scum' be objected to? Thgere is a dirrefernce, obviously, but not one that is clean cut enough to avoid "but you let him say 'feck'" arguments.
Banning of all words used in place of swearwords is not currenly possible. Instead what we hope will be recognised by posters is that because the use of words representing swearwords can result in the entire post being removed that they would chose to refrain from using such words instead of risking losing an otherwise good post.
Posters who don't care about losing posts and persist are warned, and if they continue are banned (not intended as a threat as all! just an explanation as to the procedure I follow if the above proves inappropriate).
I'll try to pick up again tomorrow if you want to continue
BF
Originally posted by belgianfreakFair play to you mate. If Phlabs hasn't deleted the thread LOL.
not tryting to skip out, but being British it's getting pretty late so I'll try to answer your last two points:
Was teh use of Feck offensive? To me, no. To my parents, maybe. To my gran, yes. Subjectivity again. Also, if one use of 'feck' is OK then how can another user's use of 'feck off you scum' be objected to? Thgere is a dirrefernce, obviously, ...[text shortened]... s inappropriate).
I'll try to pick up again tomorrow if you want to continue
BF
HBH