Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 54 of 54

Thread: Word censorship.

  1. #41
    Moderator Trlsmn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    In Utero
    Posts
    10,181

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TANSTAAFL View Post
    Judge Curtis Bok said it best since 1949.



    Nothing has changed in theory, just the mediums where it applies. You aren't protecting anyone--children, mothers or pastors. Children will hear and see these words in every possible way. Like stated previously, throwing out curse words left and right makes you look unintelligent and boorish. Children can be taught this.

    jhc5 is right on every point. Sexually rooted or explicit words are the ones that rattle people to the core the most, at least for the United States. Even the Supreme Court has deemed a difference, repeatedly, between **** used in a general sense and used in a sexual manner. Things do change. **** isn't even today's #1, that's held by the anger-inciting-hair-raising ****. Who knows what's down the road.

    While frak was used to navigate around censors, it also suggested how words change and evolve over time. Once upon a time when **** was the lowly word fottere, its synonyms were jape, sard, occupy and swive. Webster and others' **** aversion sealed its fate as a curseword in our culture. It has been since and who knows for how long.

    Profanity has everything to do with our 1st Amendment. Landmark cases involving free speech derive from obscenity rulings like the classic "**** the Draft". I understand the desire to dress our best in front of political opposition. In order to be competitive with our rivals we need to not look like uneducated redneck slobs out of touch with modern society. But, in order to be competitive with our rivals we cannot appear to be sacrificing one amendment in order to protect another.
    TANSTAAFL I'm sorry but your post has been reported so I censored it. This discussion is still open for academic debate but I must insist that you refrain from avoiding the filters.
    " The right to defend one's home and one's person when attacked has been guaranteed through the ages by common law."

    - Martin Luther King

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Snohomish
    Posts
    763

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trlsmn View Post
    TANSTAAFL I'm sorry but your post has been reported so I censored it. This discussion is still open for academic debate but I must insist that you refrain from avoiding the filters.
    ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Me
    Honestly, if people get offended by someone not thinking like they do and report the posts vs. PM'ing the original poster, they're probably the LAST people on the planet that should own guns; they fall firmly into the Coward category.

  3. #43
    Moderator Joe Link's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NW Portland
    Posts
    3,606



    Default

    I appreciate you bringing this up. I'm always interested in hearing discussion regarding our policies from our members, and this is how many of our policies have changed over the years. I'll be watching this thread to see how it progresses, but at this point I'm leaning toward keeping the rule. It's in place to try to foster a family friendly environment, as well as some of the other reasons mentioned in this thread.

    Regarding the mention of my libertarian beliefs, NorthwestLiberty.com, and censoring first amendment speech here. Please keep in mind one of the cornerstones of liberty and libertarian thought is the concept of private property, which this forum is. I see no conflict there.

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Hillsboro
    Posts
    1,170

    Default

    I have one of the sickest and nastiest minds, of any person I ever met, nwfa just gets the business and mature side of it, I even use the term bubblegumming now, its like an inside joke.

  5. #45
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    36

    Default Keep It Clean

    I like the idea of keeping it clean. My kids read this stuff and having some
    good influences on language is refreshing versus the huge amount of trash
    on the internet. There are more than enough negative examples out there
    so a clean one or two is refreshing.

    -sbc

  6. #46
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    73

    Default

    I totally support the site owner's right to run his website however he wants, I wouldn't mind having the option to turn off the filter for myself though - and you could always leave it turned on by default when someone first signs up.

    I can understand wanting to keep certain things away from children, but I am not a child and don't need to be protected. Every time I see "bubblegum" I feel like I'm being patronized a little bit. And if you think that most kids have not already been exposed to much worse than anything they would find on this site, you're fooling yourself... It's up to the parent to teach them how to handle things and act appropriately. Unless you keep your kids locked up at home with no link to the outside world, they will be exposed to much more than a little hubba-bubba.... Besides, if all it takes to see the uncensored content is to hit the quote button, then what's the point of having the filter anyway? The kids will still be able to see those evil dirty little words...

    The internet is generally not a happy shiny place, if you're that worried about it then I suggest you filter the internet on any computer your children have access to and only allow Disney.com and the like. Also don't let them have any friends, because most of them have been playing GTA for several years now and know all the bad words. If you do let them have friends over, you better make sure you are there 100% of the time so they won't be swearing around your kid. Pat them down when they enter your house because they could have found their dad's old school NWA & 2-Live Crew collection and brought it over for your kid to listen to... How far do we really need to go "protect the children"? How about we simply teach them what's right and wrong and leave it at that. Regardless of what they are exposed to in the outside world, YOU as the parent will have a great effect on their behavior and attitude. BTW, I have 3 kids who are now 18+, so I have a little first hand experience...

    If they are old enough/interested in reading/researching about firearms on their own, then I think they can handle the occasional swear word - along with a little proper parental guidance... Just make sure they know there will be hubba-bubba to pay and a hubba-bubba storm if they use any of those words though.

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    The Couve
    Posts
    408

    Default

    I love the site Keep the rules the same. I have kids and have to refrain from using words I would use at work when I am at home. So why not censore yourself while on the net? I do not feel that this is wrong in any way. This site is free for people who want to visit it so please just deal with it. Yes I was a paying member but that was by my choice no one twisted my arm. I liked what I saw and gave my donation to keep things the way they were at the time. Will donate more when the funds are available.

    Keep it up Joey

  8. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    1,266

    Default

    You want to know what *I* think would be a good idea? Instead of just "bubblegum" have a list of words to choose from randomly when you filter out profanity. That would be lulz.

  9. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    OR
    Posts
    2,172

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spengo View Post
    You want to know what *I* think would be a good idea? Instead of just "bubblegum" have a list of words to choose from randomly when you filter out profanity. That would be lulz.
    +1 I like this idea. It could help break up some of the sentences which have multiple bubblegums in them.

  10. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Olympia, Wa
    Posts
    576

    Default

    How about words that arent swears. Why do those get censored? I PM a mod about it and it even censored the PM. That is 2 adults in a private conversation, why would the be censored?

  11. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lewis County, WA
    Posts
    2,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trlsmn View Post
    TANSTAAFL I'm sorry but your post has been reported so I censored it. This discussion is still open for academic debate but I must insist that you refrain from avoiding the filters.
    Ridiculous.

  12. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Port Orchard
    Posts
    762

    Default Bubblegum!!!!

    I was surprised at the censoring the first time I saw it - suddenly all the bubblegum I saw in other posts made sense. I just go ahead and type in the "bubblegum" myself these days. Who says we ain't trainable?

  13. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sunny Southern Oregon
    Posts
    645

    Default I like the word filter myself

    I can see more than enough flith on other forums which is one of the reasons why I keep coming back here! I hope that Joey keeps the flith filter in place

  14. #54
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Downtown Seattle
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trlsmn View Post
    TANSTAAFL I'm sorry but your post has been reported so I censored it. This discussion is still open for academic debate but I must insist that you refrain from avoiding the filters.
    Funny, very funny. You know it was probably a joke right? An academic debate
    under that policy makes it quite hard to bring up etymology, historical events,
    cultural taboos and so on. I guess we can attempt to refer to words through
    Korean morse code and cryptograms.

    Stated several times above, I mentioned this forum is private and I would
    harmonize with the policy. As should everyone who wishes to be a part of
    it. However, being a firearm forum I was pretty sure a topic concerning
    censorship might be interesting. I honestly do find it kind of strange
    and wondered if I was alone.

    You know, a sequence of random letters from 3 to 6 characters would be
    much more effective if you're seeking to mask the original meaning. For
    example, I could quite literally write the word bubble-gum instead of
    using the censor now.

    For example, skull bubble-gum is great fun!


Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •