Banning People for NOT Swearing???

[TemplarKormac]

why dont that administrator come on here and tell us why it was done instead of being like jones and running afterwards?..

Hmm, good question.

We'll find out eventually.

 

[toobfreak]

No, it will be filtered like so: ****!

BANG! Only takes 2 seconds to get an answer to a nonsensical question meant largely in jest but no actual direct, serious answers to the actual questions forced here by such a vague rule:

1). Is it OK to cuss if the words get filtered out?

2). Is it a more serious bannable offense to avoid cussing by typing similar but not offensive words (like "fricking?").

3). Is it a rule violation to say a cuss word if the filter does not recognize it as one and lets it through?

Still waiting, TK.

 

[toobfreak]

I'll have to admit, I'm curious what prompted this sudden change.

Then I would ASK. This is bullshit. Whoops! Am I going to get banned for saying that? Will a moderator throw me off a roof? Beat me with his sandals? Issue a fatwa against me? Send me to attitude retrainment camp?

Look, I've worked for multi-billion dollar corporations, I've been in charge of men's lives. This is not rocket science.

This is why I've both never offered to moderate here nor no longer donate money. THIS IS EASY STUFF.

Who is running the show here? Can one person with authority actually show up and explain things before this thread is again closed down prematurely without anything actually being gleaned nor established?

 

[toobfreak]

I'll have to admit, I'm curious what prompted this sudden change.

TK, I think you know me well enough to know I'm serious when I say this "no profanity" rule will not only not effect any positive change here (I'd put good money on it), but it is unenforceable. We don't have the staff to keep up with the rules we have now much less this one.

 

[TemplarKormac]

BANG! Only takes 2 seconds to get an answer to a nonsensical question meant largely in jest but no actual direct, serious answers to the actual questions forced here by such a vague rule:

1). Is it OK to cuss if the words get filtered out?

2). Is it a more serious bannable offense to avoid cussing by typing similar but not offensive words (like "fricking?").

3). Is it a rule violation to say a cuss word if the filter does not recognize it as one and lets it through?

Still waiting, TK.

1) To my knowledge, yes.

2) No. It is only if you use special characters to evade a word you previously knew was censored, and ignored warnings from mods about it. "Fricking" and other variants are not considered a violation.

3) No.

 

[TemplarKormac]

TK, I think you know me well enough to know I'm serious when I say this "no profanity" rule will not only not effect any positive change here (I'd put good money on it), but it is unenforceable. We don't have the staff to keep up with the rules we have now much less this one.

I am seeing if the rule can be amended.

 

[Delldude]

This is not the place for it.

Oh I agree however looking like it did.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Hmm. Check the rule now.

 

[Delldude]

Hmm. Check the rule now.

No change

 

[TemplarKormac]

No change

Are you sure? I noted that the term "certain types" was added.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I am petitioning the senior leadership for a concrete reason for this action.

We were all caught off guard, not just you all.

I will let you know what they say, if they say it.

 

[toobfreak]

1) To my knowledge, yes.

2) No. It is only if you use special characters to evade a word you previously knew was censored, and ignored warnings from mods about it. "Fricking" and other variants are not considered a violation.

3) No.

Thanks TK. That is all I needed. So if I understand you right, if you cuss profanity or disapproved words and they get caught by the filter, no harm nor foul, but if they go through and get posted anyway, that is OK as well. Maybe more words will be added over time to improve the filter.

2 is the dicey one. How does anyone know what words a member knows was previously censored? OK, I get it: a member gets warned about a word, then inserts ASCII characters like @#% or * to dance around the issue. I can understand that. Then it becomes less a matter of profanity and more a matter of trying to deny moderation. Funny thing is that I used to add such characters once in a while trying to tone down my posts for more delicate ears, not to evade anything. I guess not any more.

 

[Delldude]

Are you sure? I noted that the term "certain types" was added.

Ok, I'll check. I did notice suddenly some lightweight 'slurs' weren't ****.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Thanks TK. That is all I needed. So if I understand you right, if you cuss profanity or disapproved words and they get caught by the filter, no harm nor foul, but if they go through and get posted anyway, that is OK as well. Maybe more words will be added over time to improve the filter.

2 is the dicey one. How does anyone know what words a member knows was previously censored? OK, I get it: a member gets warned about a word, then inserts ASCII characters like @#% or * to dance around the issue. I can understand that. Then it becomes less a matter of profanity and more a matter of trying to deny moderation. Funny thing is that I used to add such characters once in a while trying to tone down my posts for more delicate ears, not to evade anything. I guess not any more.

Yeah. I know it sucks, but I wish I could tell you why. Maybe we'll know more soon.

 

[toobfreak]

I am seeing if the rule can be amended.

TK, if anyone is interested, I am a skilled wordsmith with a lot of experience in writing, editing and interpreting contracts and language. If the staff is interested, they can PM me with their thoughts and any revisions and I'd be willing to give my input and suggestions and FB for free. This is a serious offer that shouldn't be quickly dismissed: I'm offering hundreds of dollars of my time for free. Consider it a serious donation to the forum.

I'd merely tell them what is good about the rule (revision) and where it might be vague, contradictory, or run into problems for them needing a tweak in the wording, or simply better wording to simplify it and say the same things with less words and more clarity, and fewer disagreements or conflicts with malfeasant members here.

When not goofing around here, I'm actually quite skilled in drafting concise, contractual language (and used to get paid a lot to do it).

 

[citygator]

Can you post memes with bad words?

What about a link to Donald Trump saying the F word?

How bad is this gif below? Seems pretty bad but there is no sound and you cant really make out the word he is saying.

LOL. There could be a zillion loop holes. Good luck mods... I'll do my best to comply with the spirit of the rule.

 

[TemplarKormac]

TK, if anyone is interested, I am a skilled wordsmith with a lot of experience in writing, editing and interpreting contracts and language. If the staff is interested, they can PM me with their thoughts and any revisions and I'd be willing to give my input and suggestions and FB for free. This is a serious offer that shouldn't be quickly dismissed: I'm offering hundreds of dollars of my time for free. Consider it a serious donation to the forum.

I'd merely tell them what is good about the rule (revision) and where it might be vague, contradictory, or run into problems for them needing a tweak in the wording, or simply better wording to simplify it and say the same things with less words and more clarity, and fewer disagreements or conflicts with malfeasant members here.

When not goofing around here, I'm actually quite skilled in drafting concise, contractual language (and used to get paid a lot to do it).

Then your first step should be contacting me in DMs.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Can you post memes with bad words?

What about a link to Donald Trump saying the F word?

How bad is this gif below? Seems pretty bad but there is no sound and you cant really make out the word he is saying.

LOL. There could be a zillion loop holes. Good luck mods... I'll do my best to comply with the spirit of the rule.

View attachment 1227050

I don't think pictures and gifs are part of the rule...

 

[toobfreak]

Are you sure? I noted that the term "certain types" was added.

I've no time to look at this stuff right now but adding the term "certain types" sounds to only compound the ambiguity of the rule, not clarify it. This place needs someone who knows how to translate ideas into cogent written language, like me.

But I thank you for your help in the matter.

 

[toobfreak]

Can you post memes with bad words?
What about a link to Donald Trump saying the F word?
How bad is this gif below?

Stop it CG. You are trolling. You are just being deliberately obtuse and argumentative.