Word filters getting out of hand & need to stop

Now, now... Be nice(ish) he just missed the reference(s) to it.

I was just taking the opportunity to poke a little fun.

No one objects to not using some words. It's the preemptive censorship (as TCT put it) that bothers me. It just feels a little insulting that I'm not being trusted to use language resoponsinly.

And as I said, if the filter and no filter options both accomplish the same goal, then by default one should go without the filter unless there is a compelling reason otherwise. That's how I'd view stuff in general.



I thought you were referring to something else, which I had read. I was wrong. Apologies.

Well, I'd personally prefer it if people didn't use Amazonian Goddess as an actual legitimate word to use because it's not. It's something used to tar all feminists, even if one intends it to be used otherwise. Having it filter to Amazonian Goddess is at least funny.

edit: I should add that part of what makes it funny is because it reverses the intent.

edit2: I hate that I keep getting a bad gateway. *grumble*

This is precisely accurate. That one wasn't intended as a serious filter of a slur, but just as something that amused NA (and then amused me too, when he pointed out that he'd done it). I recognize that some people may be bothered by the admins' particular ways of fucking around and amusing ourselves, but things like setting up smartass wordfilters, playing goofy (and eye-searing) April Fool's pranks, and changing Ed's name roughly once a week give our forum a certain personality, I think - whether for good or ill.

And, honestly, part of why I like things like the smartass wordfilters is that, in their own silly way, they underline one of the philosophical differences NA and I had with NSG, and why we started this place. "Act like a fucking adult" may be our guiding principle, but shortly behind it for ourselves may be "...and don't act like moderation is some sort of super-serious, high-pressure job, for fuck's sake. It's just a friggin' webforum." We periodically change a bunch of common words to "smurf" or turn Ed into Zoidberg because we can, and it makes people giggle. If people are genuinely offended by the "Amazonian goddess" filter, we'll delete it, but it's really not an attempt at censorship, just an attempt to make people giggle when it pops up unexpectedly.

So, am I to understand that the final word is that the filters will remain in general and, specifically, as to at least eight slurs?  If so, that seems to be that.

Joke filters I get may come and go. I do not want this all to be too, too serious. And I get that I can get too, too serious about stuff. I object in principle to changing someone's words, but it can be funny. They may not think so, however, and it may be disrespectful to its "victims." 

Anyway, I said my piece. If the Admins wish to keep the filters, my objection is on record, but I will stop rattling my sword. If others wish to continue to object, I support them in spirit.

I've noted and previously commented on a distinct trend of people here I've come to expect much better from handwaving away any criticism of feminism in a manner not disimilar to staff writers for Pravda. In the light of this background the censorship of a word used to describe extremist feminists - that is the militant, misandrist, transphobic loony wing - is ill-judged at best, and risks giving the impression that the notion that feminism is above reproach has the official moderator stamp of approval. So yes, I'm not giggling one bit, and I'd like to give notice that the offence I'm taking is indeed genuine.

So, as Poli said, there are a few that are there as amusement (Russian sex kitten, femimeanie, strawman) and a few that are there for reasons.  Like Poli said as well, this wasn't specifically to us, anyone can float ideas, we just did it first since we were the first ones here.

Most of the amusing ones are changed semi-regularly.  As for the real ones, here's the thing.  I for one had initial reservations on the idea of filters, because I agreed with "but sometimes using the word can be useful" or "you can just circumvent it with *"  The problem, of course, is that the view's pretty good from the cheap seats.  Sure, it may be useful to occassionally be able to use the n word in a discussion, but then again, I'm not the one who has to deal with the visceral feeling that comes with seeing it.  And in the end, certain words can cause a very intense feeling in certain people, and we've made steps to at least help make a place where they don't HAVE to.  And yes, you can circumvent it easily enough, that's the point.  Certain words carry such a legacy of hate, oppression and anger that the mere display of them can cause hurt feelings and negative connotations.  Slight changes dull that blade, so to speak.

And here's the thing, I've gotten a fair share of comments from members (not going to out anybody) who have explicitly told me and Poli that they were glad to be in a place where certain words just can't be used.  And while I get there's some reservations, to this day the worst thing I've ever seen on the forum is "I'm not totally a fan, but I can live with it", but "I can live with it" does, to me, bend to "I actually really like that they're there". 

If people writ large do seem to strongly object we'll revisit, but I think, at least insofar as the big ones go, they may remain (we may change what they filter TO however, I personally have found them a bit clunky).  But as far as the general concept goes, I have to bend to those that really appreciate them, over those that don't really care for it, but aren't going to be too fussed over it.   

p.s. I feel like filtering "Nazi" would be funny about now, but maybe I'm just drunk.