Word censorship.

[TANSTAAFL]

Your site, your property, your decision. The end.

However, I'd like you to reconsider the idea of auto-censorship. Please do not take this as an outright whiny complaint but more of a thinking exercise concerning language, liberties and social taboos.

I do not see where I can turn it on for just my settings so I may view unadulterated text of other forum members, would this be possible to add? So some who are easily offended by language, have children looking over their shoulder, at work or are an older generation, etc etc can still enable it. As well as being the default for spiders which could list you as a mature 18+ site, ban-hammering you from certain engines, workplaces and schools.

I'm posting a link to a book called Fu<k: Word Taboo and Protecting our First Amendment Liberties by Christopher M. Fairman. It is absolutely fantastic and most Libertarians and Constitutionalists tend to love it. Of course it's to a search since the censor would screw up the link directly to the book.

Amazon.com: Word Taboo and Protecting our First Amendment Liberties: Books

Read More

 

[deadeye]

It works for most as you get your point across without resorting to useless profanity which usually leads to needless/childish bickering. This also leads to division amoungst members and we need to stay united in the overall common interest of firearms and the freedom to keep them.

Deadeye

 

[Trlsmn]

Profanity has it's time and place and there are plenty of opportunities on the internet to use it, I personal do have outlets for it and use it as I see fit, NWFA however is not that place.

 

[TANSTAAFL]

Ironically, banning and avoidance of the words is what gives them their very power. NWFA often quotes and mocks the firearm fear-campaigns of ignorant baboons, but that same irrational fear applies to language as well. The decline of social morals, no place in modern society, simply harmful and there are personal outlets for that.

I am not going to try and change your policy outright. Your policy is that, yours. Instead I'd like to challenge the owner to a debate: The rationality of censorship, assuming non-hateful or threatening speech, of members' words on a firearm forum dedicated to the protection of the 2nd amendment (Mission Statement #2).

I will attempt to demonstrate a similarity between creating a modern version of what Jefferson might be proud of: freedom of the press on a sensitive subject, assembly and ability to petition the Government for a redress of grievance. And how an Internet forum about firearms with censorship is harmful to the cause stated in NWFA's mission statement #2.

Of course you are free to decline and close this thread. I will not duplicate another. But I do ask you at least refrain from deleting the thread as a sign of respect for the preceding amendment. However, as someone who aims to lead a successful sister web site concerning liberty, and being a simple exercise, I hardly see the owner's renunciation of the topic.

 

[SonicBlue03]

He makes a fair point. Outside of the language, I think there are more than a few examples out there of content being removed which fell within the context of a forum or thread but might have either been a little too centrist or just counter to the mods of the time.

There is some irony in a separate forum for liberty when there's any form of censorship, yet blood curdling screams when a business or group wishes to curtail someone's personal carry preference.

 

[eldbillbo]

 

[sweetbeard]

NWFA is a babysitter for grown adults on the internet.. if you can get past that and just use the classifieds you are above the powercurve.

 

[Trlsmn]

Your experience at NWFA is what you make of it. Most of the "modding" is from user driven reported posts, thus we are doing what the users wish and those users are taking the initiative to make NWFA what they want it to be.

I can tell you with certainty that the less that needs to be done the happier we are and the more we time we get to browse the ads too.

 

[WhyteCheddar]

It is amazing to me that the utility/enjoyment of NWFA could possibly be hindered by the inability to use profanity. Having spent years in professional baseball dugouts and locker rooms, I hardly wilt at the use of hard language. It does not offend me. But seriously, I cannot see how it diminishes the site in the least way.

 

[deadeye]

I fail to see what profanity has to do with freedom of speech. I also must have missed all these types of words that were used in the wording of the constitution. Obviously you can still get a valid point across without the use of colorfull language.

 

[SonicBlue03]

NWFA is a babysitter for grown adults on the internet.. if you can get past that and just use the classifieds you are above the powercurve.

True. There's one thing this site has been exceptionally good for and that was discovering the only guy I'll ever buy future long guns from (Sully.)

Your experience at NWFA is what you make of it. Most of the "modding" is from user driven reported posts, thus we are doing what the users wish and those users are taking the initiative to make NWFA what they want it to be.

I can tell you with certainty that the less that needs to be done the happier we are and the more we time we get to browse the ads too.

I'm not sure what that says more about, the mods or whiny users. I'm thinking the latter.

"O noes! Someone doesn't think like I do! I can haz ban?"

The language thing I'm ambivalent on; but the point still ties in well with post removals.

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.

 

[xjjeeper223]

I fail to see what profanity has to do with freedom of speech. I also must have missed all these types of words that were used in the wording of the constitution. Obviously you can still get a valid point across without the use of colorfull language.

Sure, you can still communicate while using a neutered vocabulary. But you can also target shoot without high capacity magazines. Same mentality....

 

[deadeye]

Sure, you can still communicate while using a neutered vocabulary. But you can also target shoot without high capacity magazines. Same mentality....

Target shooting is usually accomplished without high capacity magazines. There is a time and place for them same as there is for the words not allowed on this site. Placement is crucial to achieve the best results rather than the empty the mag/mouth without putting alot of forthought into it.

 

[spengo]

If you want people to know what word you meant just put the first letter and asterisks. Like so: F***. A**. Then no chillins who may happen to be online will be offended.

Or if you really want to rage you could do it without finishing:
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-

 

[MarkSBG]

If you want people to know what word you meant just put the first letter and asterisks. Like so: F***. A**. Then no chillins who may happen to be online will be offended.

Or if you really want to rage you could do it without finishing:
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-

No, that is specifically not allowed:

2. Inappropriate language, images, and conversation have no place on this website.

This community is open to all ages and every member is responsible for helping us maintain a family-friendly image. This includes swear words, innuendos, etc. whether they're spelled outright or designed to avoid the inappropriate language filter (such as d$#@!). Every thing posted on this website that would be considered negative reflects back on each an every one of us as gun owners of the Northwest.

 

[MarkSBG]

Sure, you can still communicate while using a neutered vocabulary. But you can also target shoot without high capacity magazines. Same mentality....

Comparing the word filter (which covers this site only) to the outlawing of high cap mags (which effects everyone in that area) is hyperbole at best.

I have a rule: No smoking or cursing in my house. If you want to smoke or curse, step outside. My house, my rules. I am not limiting your right to smoke and curse, only your ability to do so in my house. I have that rule to create a healthy environment for my family.

Would you object to my requirement that you not curse or smoke in my house?

We don't restrict your right to curse, only the ability to use certain words specifically here. We have that rule to try and create a community that reflects firearm owners in a positive light to non-gun owning visitors. We also think that cutting out certain words leads to fewer disagreements dissolve into petty name calling.

Look at the disagreement that is occurring here. Everyone is able to articulate their point clearly without sounding like a Mel Gibson rant.

 

[The Duck]

I see both sides of the argument, their points and/or their comparisons, I am however indifferent about the topic...

The indifference only last if the filter system does not block out; boob, fart and poop jokes. A person just has to draw a line somewhere!

 

[Spray-n-pray]

I see both sides of the argument, their points and/or their comparisons, I am however indifferent about the topic...

The indifference only last if the filter system does not block out; boob, fart and poop jokes. A person just has to draw a line somewhere!

I love it!!

 

[spengo]

No, that is specifically not allowed:

Well... darn.

 

[PhysicsGuy]

Ironically, banning and avoidance of the words is what gives them their very power. NWFA often quotes and mocks the firearm fear-campaigns of ignorant baboons, but that same irrational fear applies to language as well. The decline of social morals, no place in modern society, simply harmful and there are personal outlets for that.

I am not going to try and change your policy outright. Your policy is that, yours. Instead I'd like to challenge the owner to a debate: The rationality of censorship, assuming non-hateful or threatening speech, of members' words on a firearm forum dedicated to the protection of the 2nd amendment (Mission Statement #2).

I will attempt to demonstrate a similarity between creating a modern version of what Jefferson might be proud of: freedom of the press on a sensitive subject, assembly and ability to petition the Government for a redress of grievance. And how an Internet forum about firearms with censorship is harmful to the cause stated in NWFA's mission statement #2.

Of course you are free to decline and close this thread. I will not duplicate another. But I do ask you at least refrain from deleting the thread as a sign of respect for the preceding amendment. However, as someone who aims to lead a successful sister web site concerning liberty, and being a simple exercise, I hardly see the owner's renunciation of the topic.

So you're perfectly fine with me walking into your church, home, or place of work cussing up a storm?