Word censorship.

[Trlsmn]

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.

 

[SonicBlue03]

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.

...

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.

 

[Joe Link]

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.

 

[spider]

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.

 

[SBC97281]

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

 

[CommandoJoe]

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.

 

[spectra]

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

 

[spengo]

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.

 

[drew]

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.

 

[sigman]

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?

 

[Redcap]

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.

 

[Sasquatchvnv]

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?

 

[techieguy]

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

 

[TANSTAAFL]

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!