"Abusing" the swear filter

If you guys can't express yourselves without using swear words, I feel sorry for you. And I mean that in the nicest possible way.

Yeah, I'll swear as much as the next person, but only in appropriate venues. EoFF is a swearing-free forum for the most part. If I see inappropriate language, I edit it out. If I see lines and lines of skulls or words with symbals to trick their way around the filter, I edit it out. Why? Because it's still swearing. When a word is bleeped out in a song, does anyone still really doubt what was originally sang? Of course not. The intent is still there.

There are so much more important things to worry about than your distaste for a forum swearing filter and subsequent enforcement.

As I am basically repeating what others have said, I'll leave it at that.

My problem is with people getting dressed down because they use filtered words "too much." Not getting around the swear filters at all, leaving it as the skulls, but doing it too much to suit one person's liking. It's not breaking any rules--that's why the filter is there in the first place--but people are still getting dressed down for it. That borders on harassment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Citizen Bleys

My problem is with people getting dressed down because they use filtered words "too much." Not getting around the swear filters at all, leaving it as the skulls, but doing it too much to suit one person's liking. It's not breaking any rules--that's why the filter is there in the first place--but people are still getting dressed down for it. That borders on harassment.

---

Unless it's extremely excessive, then yeah, I think I'm on the same lines as you are.

Raist: Your request for change is denied. Live with it. I manage to get by despite a lot of request of mine being denied, so should you.

Quote:

---

There's a distinct difference between using your moderator powers in order to make the board better and using them to further your own personal preference. As I said, that's not a very good staff policy.

---

As far as I know this sort of thing isn't anything that needs to be dealt with in the open. If you have a personal problem with how a staffer is dealing with someone, raise it to an admin and we'll look into it within staff. You won't see the discussion but we'll make our own decision on how things should be done and we make sure everyone on Staff knows the rules. So, if this is a personal choice thing, send me a PM and I'll make sure it's looked into. I don't need to feed the results back to you directly, though, and for all you know it's already been looked into.

As for how one thing is more offensive than another, that's up to us, again. I personally don't see any difference between 'Hell' and 'Heck' but some do, I respect that. Same with 'flipping' and another word. Same with 'crap' and another word. But the fact remains that SOME PEOPLE do, and we made a decision over certain words and that's the outcome. Also, using $h*t is different to :skull::skull::skull::skull:. If you can't fathom that, I could go into a lengthy post detailing the differences, but I don't think I really need to. To YOU they mean the same thing, but to a newbie who just joined the board, they don't. One is readable is the main point.

Finally, you don't have to like the rules, you just have to abide by them. While we're all able to discuss it in this thread (for now), that doesn't mean the rule itself is open for discussion. We've discussed it dozens of times in the past and it's changed on probably about a dozen occasions, but I don't see the point in changing it any further. There will always be a group of people on one side of the fence complaining about the rule favouring those on the other side of it.

Why was it changed to smurf anyhow? (I actually said smurf)
We need to keep appraised of these things you know, someone was repeating something I had said one time only it had smurf in it and I was all "wtf, cause I'm short :'(" Actually I thought she was just being weird. >_>

I don't really get this though, why do you need people to know which swear you're using? It's pretty obvious most of the time, unless they're pretty much synomous, like smurfhead, people don't say things are bullsexual intercourse, or that's crapping incredable, or you crapped someone, or you had sex with your pants. Anyway, I was more or less happy with f and sh being cut out, because I don't have to change what I say to avoid getting yelled at, the board will do it for me.

But of course now you don't know if someone's calling someone a [little] smurf in jest, or a c, or a [little] sh. Which would be very rude and nasty. :eek:

Is it really that big of a deal?

Of course I have to say something about this.

Wanting be a PG forum? Look at spaceballs. The movie is PG and it the F-Bomb in it as well as every other word.

Next, I don't have a problem with editting swears(only because I can't win the battle) but when Leeza goes and edits :skull::skull::skull::skull:...that just makes not damn sense! Seriously. The word has already been editted. No need to re-edit it AGAIN. If you are going to do this then what is the point of the swear filter. Go around and edit swears all you want such as bitch, c*nt, big floppy donkey dick and other things that are not censored. But to censor a censor...whats the point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raistlin

Also, there's a big difference in posting, "that's bull" and "you smurfing smurf, smurf you you smurfing smurf smurfer." One is appropriate in a PG-13 enviroment, which is supposedly what EoFF is rated, the other is downright rude and has been a warnable-offence for as long as I can remember.

---

What, are you racist against Smurfs now? Did one steal your cane, old man?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daryl

If you guys can't express yourselves without using swear words, I feel sorry for you. And I mean that in the nicest possible way.

---

If you guys can't express yourselves without the word "the," I feel sorry for you. And I mean that in the nicest possible way.

It was changed to "smurf" because its amusing. Its hard to think of ways to discourage swearing when we don't want it.

I don't really see what the issue is, Raist. You're sad because your $*17 may become :skull::skull::skull::skull: or smurf? You... want to swear more? You think the ability to say a swear word is more important than the comfort level of your fellow members?

I don't think there's currently an issue at all with swearing being edited anyway, unless maybe its used in a really offensive context or used excessively. Even in PG-13 movies, there's a limit to how many times they can swear before it becomes R rated.

I really don't see the problem. I mean, really, I see a bunch of complaints about nothing in particular.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by edczxcvbnm

Next, I don't have a problem with editting swears(only because I can't win the battle) but when Leeza goes and edits :skull::skull::skull::skull:...that just makes not damn sense! Seriously. The word has already been editted. No need to re-edit it AGAIN. If you are going to do this then what is the point of the swear filter. Go around and edit swears all you want such as bitch, c*nt, big floppy donkey dick and other things that are not censored. But to censor a censor...whats the point?

---

No one does that anymore, so its not an issue.

Quote:

---

As for how one thing is more offensive than another, that's up to us, again. I personally don't see any difference between 'Hell' and 'Heck' but some do, I respect that. Same with 'flipping' and another word. Same with 'crap' and another word. But the fact remains that SOME PEOPLE do, and we made a decision over certain words and that's the outcome. Also, using $h*t is different to . If you can't fathom that, I could go into a lengthy post detailing the differences, but I don't think I really need to. To YOU they mean the same thing, but to a newbie who just joined the board, they don't. One is readable is the main point.

---

Some people are offended by jokes about Americans - let's ban those! I'm an atheist, as are other people - I'm offended by religious discussion, so let's get rid of that too. I also have this unreasonable distaste for the word "hyperbole," so let's filter it.

Quote:

---

Finally, you don't have to like the rules, you just have to abide by them. While we're all able to discuss it in this thread (for now), that doesn't mean the rule itself is open for discussion. We've discussed it dozens of times in the past and it's changed on probably about a dozen occasions, but I don't see the point in changing it any further. There will always be a group of people on one side of the fence complaining about the rule favouring those on the other side of it.

---

That's what this forum is for - discussion about the board's rules and policies and content.

Another question which has not yet been addressed: what's the board's rating: G or PG-13?

Quote:

---

If you guys can't express yourselves without the word "the," I feel sorry for you. And I mean that in the nicest possible way.

---

I love you, Doomy. That's exactly what I was thinking.

Quote:

---

Even in PG-13 movies, there's a limit to how many times they can swear before it becomes R rated.

---

Exactly, it's the policy of EoFF before the swear filter: swearing was a non-issue unless used in excess.

EoFF carries a WeDecideWhatWeAllowBecauseIt'sUpToUs rating. In other words, we make the rules, and comparisons to other rating systems are just that - comparisons. :p Cid, the admins and the CK's make the rules. Simple.

And yes, you can discuss the rules in this forum, but as far as I know it won't change much with just Raistlin and Doomgaze getting annoyed or somethin'. We counter your Raistlin and Doomgaze with Dr Unne and Leeza. :p Even edc and Bleys seem to be fine with the current state of EoFF, since their problem has already been looked into within staff before this thread was even made. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doomgaze

If you guys can't express yourselves without the word "the," I feel sorry for you. And I mean that in the nicest possible way.

---

Yeah because swear words are just as important as the word "the".

I seriously don't see where there's an issue. Saying the f-word is as important to you as the word "the"? You're stretching for reasons to complain. You think we're too strict, you think we're too lax, you think we're too uptight, but if something happens once in a while that you find fun to complain about, you want exact and unbendable rules.

We do our best to avoid unbendable rules. But you want them? We'll look into that. We'll get the board a rating, and be sure every post does not exceed that rating, no matter how funny or appropriate it may be. Offended by religious discussion? Gone. Jokes can be offensive? Gone. Because swearing is such a big issue, and we want to be sure we have a nice big list of rules so everyone's decisions of what's right and wrong can be made for them. Don't say it if you don't mean it; I'll take it seriously.

I'm mostly just annoyed because I think an issue is being made about nothing. Nothing. What do you want, Raist? You want us to un-censor shit? You want there to be no limit to how much a person can swear, as long as its censored, like on Jerry Springer or something? When was the last time a staff member edited a post you considered acceptable?

I call shenanigans on you! Shenanigans!!

Quote:

---

Even edc and Bleys seem to be fine with the current state of EoFF, since their problem has already been looked into within staff before this thread was even made.

---

Not according to what he's *beep* elsewhere.

Quote:

---

I'm mostly just annoyed because I think an issue is being made about nothing. Nothing. What do you want, Raist? You want us to un-censor ? You want there to be no limit to how much a person can swear, as long as its censored, like on Jerry Springer or something?

---

I have no problem with the current swear filter for the current reason(Google). My question remains:

1. Why do staff members(one, anyway) edit peoples' *arf* where they try to "get around" the swear filter, even though the addition of all but the *honk* to the swear filter was solely because of Google, and not because of *trumpets*? Cid even made it clear he didn't like the *train goes by*.

2. Is the swear filter still necessary to keep the *explosions and whatnot*?

My personal preference(barring any offers for money from Google, as I stated in my original post), is that of the original EoFF: swearing allowed, but not in excess. However, I fully agree with Cid's right to add words to the filter to get extra *cow stampede*. I don't support, however, *Beethoven's Pastoral Symphony* of that filter when it wasn't even added in the first place because people were *Raist complaining incessantly.... oh wait*.

Times changed, rules changed. *shrugs* Minimal complaints about the things that haven't been looked into already, so I don't see a problem. If we pleased you, we'd just have another member complaining constantly about the swearing. But you complain all the time anyway, so this way we aren't suffering any losses. *doges flying objects* :D

*wanders off*