SCIENCE
5000+
Baaaad to the bone!
Heaven is other people.
Posts: 5,744
|
Post by SCIENCE on Jun 10, 2014 13:59:17 GMT
p.s. I feel like filtering "Nazi" would be funny about now, but maybe I'm just drunk. I've been tempted to make it "upstanding german citizen" Let's not. I would find it highly offensive to still equate the modern German citizens with the Nazis. |
|
|
|
Post by dakini on Jun 10, 2014 14:04:03 GMT
I've been tempted to make it "upstanding german citizen" Let's not. I would find it highly offensive to still equate the modern German citizens with the Nazis. "upstanding German citizen of the early 1940s"? |
|
Dipshit
3000+
Scum
I am a lying, cheating, married asshole
Posts: 3,583 
|
Post by Dipshit on Jun 10, 2014 14:08:45 GMT
I've been tempted to make it "upstanding german citizen" Let's not. I would find it highly offensive to still equate the modern German citizens with the Nazis.  but no, seriously, I'm not actually going to. Although I will not deny that part of the amusement I get with the current filter is the sheer over the top lunacy of conflating a feminist movement, even the highly radical fringe, with the acts of the nazis. |
|
|
|
Post by dakini on Jun 10, 2014 15:57:35 GMT
Oh shit, can you word filter "misandry" to be "WON'T YOU THINK ABOUT THE MENZ?!" all-caps are optional. The interrobang is not.
|
|
Ranchan
500+
Sssh...I'm not here.
Posts: 588
|
Post by Ranchan on Jun 10, 2014 16:59:01 GMT
But to be serious for a moment: 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. "I don't use the n word to describe ALL black people, just the angry ones with the baggy pants, listening to rap music, doing drugs and committing crimes!" is an argument I find profoundly unpersuasive. And especially given comment in another thread: The refrain of "don't worry, I'm just using it against those I don't like!" goes just about as far with me as one would expect. I'm sure there are people in the world that only find the n word a fitting pejorative against those that disagree with their view of how african americans "should" behave, and would never dream about using it to describe the "proper" types, but I'm not about to release that particular term based purely on the assurances that they only mean it to describe the WRONG kind of black people. What a ridiculous comparison. Is "black people" an ideology now? Mate, sort it out. |
|
|
|
Post by Poli on Jun 10, 2014 18:50:03 GMT
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. Not at all - this isn't the kind of place where there's ever a "final word." Right now, it's just what NA said - the people who like the filters appear from the conversations we've had both to outnumber and out-passion the people who don't, and as long as this remains true, we'll likely keep 'em. |
|
Dipshit
3000+
Scum
I am a lying, cheating, married asshole
Posts: 3,583
|
Post by Dipshit on Jun 10, 2014 19:04:22 GMT
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. Not at all - this isn't the kind of place where there's ever a "final word." Right now, it's just what NA said - the people who like the filters appear from the conversations we've had both to outnumber and out-passion the people who don't, and as long as this remains true, we'll likely keep 'em. With that said, I would like to make, at least a few points: The femi-nazi filter was not and is not an "official censorship" as much as it is "something that made people chuckle". I'll probably take it off today, when I get a chance. Now, with that said, I have, as a forum member, as a forum administrator, and as a jew who has demonstrably lost members of his family in the holocaust, deep and profound objections to referring to groups as nazis. I'm going to mimic a post Poli made on another forum a few years back and make a point here. If you find yourself wanting to make this comparison, you need to do something first. Does the organization or ideology you're discussing actively advocate the forcible removal of members of the society to camps where they are compelled to engage in manual labor before being brutally and horrifically executed? Does the ideology you're discussing actively advocate forced human experimentation? Does the ideology you're discussing promote the systemic murder of tens of millions of people? No? Then they're not fucking nazis. And my official stance as "forum moderator" is that calling them that borders (and in some cases completely crosses) the line into deliberate provocation and flamebaiting. Again, does this group actually advocate the genocide of millions of people? If yes, then I'm cool with you calling them nazis (we don't need little cute names, just nazis will do, or neo nazis to indicate the more recent ideological perspectives). If not? I'm really truly not cool with them being called nazis. I'm really truly not. And I don't mean "advocates discrimination". I don't mean "says mean, abhorrent, bigoted and hateful things about a group". I don't even mean "actively worrisome and advocates policies that scare me". Those can be radical, sure. They can be concerning, bigoted, biased and insulting. But they're not nazis. The term "nazi" has a meaning. A terrible, disgusting, dark meaning. And one that should only be leveled at those who did things comparable to things nazis ACTUALLY did (which includes, once again, the brutal murder of tens of millions of people). I will not put up with that label being applied to anything less. Not here. Poli may disagree, but that's at least my stance on "when we can call people nazis" |
|
|
|
Post by Poli on Jun 10, 2014 19:06:42 GMT
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. 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. Fair enough. Here's my one problem with that: I don't believe for one minute that feminism is above reproach. There are many, many feminists who have said and done stupid or terrible things, many of them while acting specifically as feminists. The thing is, what they haven't done includes things like "build death camps" or "commit genocide." I do not for one minute want to stifle anyone's ability to offer reasoned criticisms of ideologies or their members (and on a personal level, I'm all for pointing out that TERFs are jackasses, because they're huge freaking jackasses), but I cannot see how that particular word fits into a reasoned criticism. It's a silly, stupid word, and I think it warrants being treated as silly and stupid. May I suggest a compromise? I'm not married to this particular filter, but in the same way you feel that putting it in place implies the admins feel feminism as a whole is above reproach, I feel like taking it down at this point kind of implies that we feel that comparing feminism to the Holocaust is a valid debate tactic, and I'm not comfortable with either of those positions. What if we changed it to something that still mocks the term itself without implying that the folks being labeled with that term are necessarily in the right? |
|
|
|
Post by Poli on Jun 10, 2014 19:07:44 GMT
Ha, freaking ninja Batmans.  |
|
Dipshit
3000+
Scum
I am a lying, cheating, married asshole
Posts: 3,583
|
Post by Dipshit on Jun 10, 2014 19:12:28 GMT
I have, on Poli's comment, at least changed the filter to "radfem" which seems to be at least a somewhat common phrase used to denote the same "group of people" as the other. As I said, while the "amazonian goddess" thing was a joke, I do legitimately have significant issues with calling ANY group or individual who advocates anything less than systemic genocide "nazi"
|
|
|
|
Post by Poli on Jun 10, 2014 19:18:44 GMT
I have, on Poli's comment, at least changed the filter to "radfem" which seems to be at least a somewhat common phrase used to denote the same "group of people" as the other. As I said, while the "amazonian goddess" thing was a joke, I do legitimately have significant issues with calling ANY group or individual who advocates anything less than systemic genocide "nazi" I actually don't love that particular change, but we can talk about it privately. Suffice it to say that for the moment - i.e. at least until DI (or someone else with similar feelings) replies - that filter will change from "Amazonian goddess" to SOMETHING but not go away entirely. |
|
Dipshit
3000+
Scum
I am a lying, cheating, married asshole
Posts: 3,583
|
Post by Dipshit on Jun 10, 2014 19:21:23 GMT
I have, on Poli's comment, at least changed the filter to "radfem" which seems to be at least a somewhat common phrase used to denote the same "group of people" as the other. As I said, while the "amazonian goddess" thing was a joke, I do legitimately have significant issues with calling ANY group or individual who advocates anything less than systemic genocide "nazi" I actually don't love that particular change, but we can talk about it privately. Suffice it to say that for the moment - i.e. at least until DI (or someone else with similar feelings) replies - that filter will change from "Amazonian goddess" to SOMETHING but not go away entirely. stop being such a nazi! |
|
Ranchan
500+
Sssh...I'm not here.
Posts: 588
|
Post by Ranchan on Jun 10, 2014 19:25:08 GMT
I have, on Poli's comment, at least changed the filter to "radfem" which seems to be at least a somewhat common phrase used to denote the same "group of people" as the other. As I said, while the "amazonian goddess" thing was a joke, I do legitimately have significant issues with calling ANY group or individual who advocates anything less than systemic genocide "nazi" I actually don't love that particular change, but we can talk about it privately. Suffice it to say that for the moment - i.e. at least until DI (or someone else with similar feelings) replies - that filter will change from "Amazonian goddess" to SOMETHING but not go away entirely. That's an acceptable compromise. By which I mean that I'm not entirely happy but feel this is a much less thumb-nosing substitution if one has to be made. |
|
|
|
Post by Poli on Jun 10, 2014 19:34:41 GMT
I actually don't love that particular change, but we can talk about it privately. Suffice it to say that for the moment - i.e. at least until DI (or someone else with similar feelings) replies - that filter will change from "Amazonian goddess" to SOMETHING but not go away entirely. That's an acceptable compromise. By which I mean that I'm not entirely happy but feel this is a much less thumb-nosing substitution if one has to be made. Cool. I have actually changed it away from "radfem" (simply because "radical feminism" is a pretty big tent and I think that could get confusing and create posts that read things like "I don't mind some radfems, but I really hate radfems" or similar) to a phrase that I hope successfully comes across as poking fun at the filtered word without implying that anyone who would be labeled with said silly word is necessarily in the right. I hope that still works. |
|
Dipshit
3000+
Scum
I am a lying, cheating, married asshole
Posts: 3,583
|
Post by Dipshit on Jun 10, 2014 19:36:30 GMT
femimeanie
eta: yes
|
|
panicberry
7500+
Phantom of the Opera
God save the Berry!
Posts: 8,150
|
Post by panicberry on Jun 10, 2014 20:34:41 GMT
Yeah, I thought that the Amazonian Goddess filter was done in the same spirit as the Russian sex kitten filter. 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. You missed a week. I had to change my own name. It doesn't feel right. |
|
Дьяково
6250+
Weird, but acceptable
Posts: 6,688
|
Post by Дьяково on Jun 10, 2014 20:52:42 GMT
Not at all - this isn't the kind of place where there's ever a "final word." Right now, it's just what NA said - the people who like the filters appear from the conversations we've had both to outnumber and out-passion the people who don't, and as long as this remains true, we'll likely keep 'em. With that said, I would like to make, at least a few points: The femi-nazi filter was not and is not an "official censorship" as much as it is "something that made people chuckle". I'll probably take it off today, when I get a chance. Now, with that said, I have, as a forum member, as a forum administrator, and as a jew who has demonstrably lost members of his family in the holocaust, deep and profound objections to referring to groups as nazis. I'm going to mimic a post Poli made on another forum a few years back and make a point here. If you find yourself wanting to make this comparison, you need to do something first. Does the organization or ideology you're discussing actively advocate the forcible removal of members of the society to camps where they are compelled to engage in manual labor before being brutally and horrifically executed? Does the ideology you're discussing actively advocate forced human experimentation? Does the ideology you're discussing promote the systemic murder of tens of millions of people? No? Then they're not fucking nazis. And my official stance as "forum moderator" is that calling them that borders (and in some cases completely crosses) the line into deliberate provocation and flamebaiting. Again, does this group actually advocate the genocide of millions of people? If yes, then I'm cool with you calling them nazis (we don't need little cute names, just nazis will do, or neo nazis to indicate the more recent ideological perspectives). If not? I'm really truly not cool with them being called nazis. I'm really truly not. And I don't mean "advocates discrimination". I don't mean "says mean, abhorrent, bigoted and hateful things about a group". I don't even mean "actively worrisome and advocates policies that scare me". Those can be radical, sure. They can be concerning, bigoted, biased and insulting. But they're not nazis. The term "nazi" has a meaning. A terrible, disgusting, dark meaning. And one that should only be leveled at those who did things comparable to things nazis ACTUALLY did (which includes, once again, the brutal murder of tens of millions of people). I will not put up with that label being applied to anything less. Not here. Poli may disagree, but that's at least my stance on "when we can call people nazis" ... <.< >.> So... We can't call you a Nazi when you're being mean? *pouts* |
|
|
|
Post by desperatemarlas on Jun 10, 2014 21:14:08 GMT
For what it's worth, I'm happy with this outcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 10, 2014 21:18:46 GMT
For what it's worth, I'm happy with this outcome.
Ditto. And relieved. Thanks guys.
|
|
Oviraptor
3000+
I smell like cabbage..
Did someone say space?
Posts: 3,693
|
Post by Oviraptor on Jun 10, 2014 21:43:18 GMT
Works for me.
|
|
SCIENCE
5000+
Baaaad to the bone!
Heaven is other people.
Posts: 5,744
|
Post by SCIENCE on Jun 10, 2014 23:12:43 GMT
Not at all - this isn't the kind of place where there's ever a "final word." Right now, it's just what NA said - the people who like the filters appear from the conversations we've had both to outnumber and out-passion the people who don't, and as long as this remains true, we'll likely keep 'em. With that said, I would like to make, at least a few points: The femi-nazi filter was not and is not an "official censorship" as much as it is "something that made people chuckle". I'll probably take it off today, when I get a chance. Now, with that said, I have, as a forum member, as a forum administrator, and as a jew who has demonstrably lost members of his family in the holocaust, deep and profound objections to referring to groups as nazis. I'm going to mimic a post Poli made on another forum a few years back and make a point here. If you find yourself wanting to make this comparison, you need to do something first. Does the organization or ideology you're discussing actively advocate the forcible removal of members of the society to camps where they are compelled to engage in manual labor before being brutally and horrifically executed? Does the ideology you're discussing actively advocate forced human experimentation? Does the ideology you're discussing promote the systemic murder of tens of millions of people? No? Then they're not fucking nazis. And my official stance as "forum moderator" is that calling them that borders (and in some cases completely crosses) the line into deliberate provocation and flamebaiting. Again, does this group actually advocate the genocide of millions of people? If yes, then I'm cool with you calling them nazis (we don't need little cute names, just nazis will do, or neo nazis to indicate the more recent ideological perspectives). If not? I'm really truly not cool with them being called nazis. I'm really truly not. And I don't mean "advocates discrimination". I don't mean "says mean, abhorrent, bigoted and hateful things about a group". I don't even mean "actively worrisome and advocates policies that scare me". Those can be radical, sure. They can be concerning, bigoted, biased and insulting. But they're not nazis. The term "nazi" has a meaning. A terrible, disgusting, dark meaning. And one that should only be leveled at those who did things comparable to things nazis ACTUALLY did (which includes, once again, the brutal murder of tens of millions of people). I will not put up with that label being applied to anything less. Not here. Poli may disagree, but that's at least my stance on "when we can call people nazis" Stalin is like a nazi then  |
|
TSM
5000+
Ableist Kinkshamer
Posts: 5,195 
|
Post by TSM on Jun 11, 2014 0:23:21 GMT
I have, on Poli's comment, at least changed the filter to "radfem" which seems to be at least a somewhat common phrase used to denote the same "group of people" as the other. As I said, while the "amazonian goddess" thing was a joke, I do legitimately have significant issues with calling ANY group or individual who advocates anything less than systemic genocide "nazi" Just to be clear, I don't think that TERFs or radfems deserve the title 'femimeanie'. I don't think the comparison is as inappropriate as some may think, but that's not the same thing as saying TERFs are nazis and it's besides the point in any event. I'm not wedded to the term - in fact, I actually really dislike it precisely because it's been poisoned and because it's inaccurate. I'm perfectly happening with this compromise. I'd be happy even without it, but this is fine by me. |
|
Wikkiwallana
6250+
Resident Troll
What the hell is going on?
Posts: 6,835
|
Post by Wikkiwallana on Jun 11, 2014 1:27:24 GMT
I'm still pretty much a newbie to the forums, seeing as how I'm only a few months in, and I was never around for whatever fiascos may or may not have happened over the usage of certain terms, but all I can really say is this: We're all (mostly) adults here, or at least, we can act like ones, right? Surely we won't stoop to the level of adolescents and will be able to use some words appropriately without filters, right? But then again, I wasn't part of such a fiasco. So do what you must, I suppose. And in what context might it be 'appropriate' to verbatim use a highly offensive slur? I honestly can't think of any situation where it is needful. Scunthorpe? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 11, 2014 4:45:46 GMT
I'm perfectly content with this.
You are all allowed to carry on with your business.
|
|
parkus
2500+
A surface is that which has length and breadth only.
Posts: 2,503
|
Post by parkus on Jun 11, 2014 5:33:49 GMT
Dunno about y'all, but I think that shit's funny. "Russian Sex Kitten" and so on
|
|
Grenartia
3000+
Colonial
Rogue Elephant Centaur
Posts: 3,823
|
Post by Grenartia on Jun 11, 2014 14:21:29 GMT
As discussed in recent posts by Ranchan and myself (thebatcavern.freeforums.net/post/100478/thread), the word filters have apparently been expanded. "Femin*zi" is now "Amazonian Goddess."
I think it time we re-think and abolish the word filters. We are -- by the nature of TBC itself -- all mature enough to use language responsibility. If one of us slips, others can be counted on to rebuke the error. If the slip is egregious, a word from our Mods should handle it. But preemptive censorship is not needed.
We have had several recent discussions about non-filtered words where posters have had to go to additional trouble to use filtered words (in a responsible, non-derogatory, academic manner) by adding or changing characters. That is just silly to require.
If someone is using a word that is objectionable, let those of us who object challenge them on it and debate its propriety like the adults we are. Censoring such words is both a bit insulting, but, more importantly, stifles discussion about the use of such words that might persuade those who would be filtered that they should not use the term in the first place.
Let's get rid of the filters. At a minimum, let us not expand them and let us not replace words in a clearly biased & contrived manner. Personally, I feel like there's good arguments for and against filters, and that if we're going to have filters, and we can't personalize them, they should at least be as fucking hilarious as possible. Oh right, I have to add something of vital importance here about my usage of slurs: They're foreign to me. Let me clarify: I don't know the weight behind it from an emotional level. Intellectually, yes, I know using the C-word is wrong. But since I'm not from a culture where the C-word is wrong, it doesn't have the same emotional baggage as it has for other people. When I am fake mad, I tend to swear in all kinds of different languages (perkele, basz meg, vaffanculo). Yet when I'm actually angry, I can only swear Dutch. I'll withdraw my support and will abstain in this discussion. Yeah. It seems to disproportionately piss off North Americans. North Americans prefer arses, like dumbass and asshole and asshat. I prefer various variations of "fuck", but "ass" will do just fine when I can't use "fuck". I'm still pretty much a newbie to the forums, seeing as how I'm only a few months in, and I was never around for whatever fiascos may or may not have happened over the usage of certain terms, but all I can really say is this: We're all (mostly) adults here, or at least, we can act like ones, right? Surely we won't stoop to the level of adolescents and will be able to use some words appropriately without filters, right? But then again, I wasn't part of such a fiasco. So do what you must, I suppose. For what its worth, this forum is barely a year old, if that, IIRC. So you only having been here a "few months" isn't as meaningless as you think. I don't know that more have been added or if they were not noticed before because no one tried to use them. Again though, I'm not objecting to discussion. I am here, talking about it. Which is fine! And I didn't mean to imply that you were, my apologies for doing so. On the subject at hand though, I don't think we should filter words like faminazi. It's unnecessary. I also tentatively support eliminating, or at least cutting down on our filters, but I think we'd need the full list to see. Is that something that's easily accessible Poli Dipshit ? I would like to see a full list of what is filtered and what isn't (excepting, of course, the joke filters). And in what context might it be 'appropriate' to verbatim use a highly offensive slur? I honestly can't think of any situation where it is needful. An educational context, perhaps. I mean, again, we're all mature adults here. We're (hopefully) not going to be slinging around slurs around at each other, right? If we somehow do, then we are most assuredly fucked. The entire point of this place being invite only, and people being allowed to veto others is to keep trolls and just plain offensive dumbfucks out. You all forget the primary purpose of the word filters and the specific one tct mentions. My amusement. My amusement. No, seriously. It's there because I found it funny. Wasnt a broader forum decision other then it makes me chuckle. The word filters for serious purposes was more Poli's initiative than mine and she's on a plane right now, so I fear we may not have her perspective til tomorrow. I do enjoy the joke filters. Most of them, at least. The only one I didn't enjoy was "Amazon Goddess", but that was because I didn't really get it (I got the reference, I just didn't really see how it was funny) more than anything else.
Well if you don't understand my objections to seeing such words after reading this discussion, I am not sure what to say to you. Seeing that and certain other slurs bandied around would significantly reduce my enjoyment of TBC, and while I cannot speak for anyone else, I am sure I am not alone in that.
Oh, I understand that completely and I wouldn't want such a thing to happen to you or anyone. I think TBC should be a comfortable place for everyone insofar as is possible. But I just don't believe that people would use words they knew offended people that much, liberally or otherwise. As I noted a few minutes ago in General Chitchat, we have a polite and accommodating atmosphere here and I don't think that's going to stop because of a lack of filters. I think that if a word bothers someone, they could reasonably ask for it not to be used and people would comply. Personally, I think it would be fun if we had a flaming forum here. Basically, one where you can call anybody who chooses to participate anything you want, so long as that anything isn't on that person's (publicly viewable) trigger list. With the understanding that everything said is purely in jest. Oh, I understand that completely and I wouldn't want such a thing to happen to you or anyone. I think TBC should be a comfortable place for everyone insofar as is possible. But I just don't believe that people would use words they knew offended people that much, liberally or otherwise. As I noted a few minutes ago in General Chitchat, we have a polite and accommodating atmosphere here and I don't think that's going to stop because of a lack of filters. I think that if a word bothers someone, they could reasonably ask for it not to be used and people would comply. Most people probably would comply, yes. But do we have to explain piecemeal to everyone why a word is offensive? What if they don't agree and continue to use it anyway? ...then you take the matter to Moderation. You all forget the primary purpose of the word filters and the specific one tct mentions. My amusement. My amusement. No, seriously. It's there because I found it funny. Wasnt a broader forum decision other then it makes me chuckle. The word filters for serious purposes was more Poli's initiative than mine and she's on a plane right now, so I fear we may not have her perspective til tomorrow. Yeah, I thought that the femimeanie filter was done in the same spirit as the Russian sex kitten filter. I fucking LOVE the Russian sex kitten filter. 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. So, as Poli said, there are a few that are there as amusement (Russian sex kitten, femimeanie, Batman) 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. Question: Would it be possible to somehow give us all the option to make our own personal filters? I.E., I set a filter to change "buttmonkey" to "space monkey", but only I see the change. Not at all - this isn't the kind of place where there's ever a "final word." Right now, it's just what NA said - the people who like the filters appear from the conversations we've had both to outnumber and out-passion the people who don't, and as long as this remains true, we'll likely keep 'em. With that said, I would like to make, at least a few points: The femi-nazi filter was not and is not an "official censorship" as much as it is "something that made people chuckle". I'll probably take it off today, when I get a chance. Now, with that said, I have, as a forum member, as a forum administrator, and as a jew who has demonstrably lost members of his family in the holocaust, deep and profound objections to referring to groups as nazis. I'm going to mimic a post Poli made on another forum a few years back and make a point here. If you find yourself wanting to make this comparison, you need to do something first. Does the organization or ideology you're discussing actively advocate the forcible removal of members of the society to camps where they are compelled to engage in manual labor before being brutally and horrifically executed? Does the ideology you're discussing actively advocate forced human experimentation? Does the ideology you're discussing promote the systemic murder of tens of millions of people? No? Then they're not fucking nazis. And my official stance as "forum moderator" is that calling them that borders (and in some cases completely crosses) the line into deliberate provocation and flamebaiting. Again, does this group actually advocate the genocide of millions of people? If yes, then I'm cool with you calling them nazis (we don't need little cute names, just nazis will do, or neo nazis to indicate the more recent ideological perspectives). If not? I'm really truly not cool with them being called nazis. I'm really truly not. And I don't mean "advocates discrimination". I don't mean "says mean, abhorrent, bigoted and hateful things about a group". I don't even mean "actively worrisome and advocates policies that scare me". Those can be radical, sure. They can be concerning, bigoted, biased and insulting. But they're not nazis. The term "nazi" has a meaning. A terrible, disgusting, dark meaning. And one that should only be leveled at those who did things comparable to things nazis ACTUALLY did (which includes, once again, the brutal murder of tens of millions of people). I will not put up with that label being applied to anything less. Not here. Poli may disagree, but that's at least my stance on "when we can call people nazis" In as far as your basic point goes, I totally agree. I wholeheartedly agree, even as somebody who, as far as I know, had no relatives or ancestors who were victims of the Holocaust. And, that's why I only use femimeanie to refer to a very, very specific group of people, for reasons you and I have already discussed in the Gender thread. See, I like this better than the "Amazon Goddess" one. It actually makes me chuckle. Dunno about y'all, but I think that shit's funny. "Russian Sex Kitten" and so on Indeed. |
|
Dipshit
3000+
Scum
I am a lying, cheating, married asshole
Posts: 3,583
|
Post by Dipshit on Jun 11, 2014 14:29:44 GMT
To the best of my knowledge no, that's not something proboards can do on a 1 by 1 basis. But I'll poke around.
|
|
Gamerdog
2000+
Benomia/Bezombia from NS
Posts: 2,209
|
Post by Gamerdog on Jun 11, 2014 23:06:49 GMT
It's a good point to be made just how easily the filters can be avoided. In fact, there are several "silent cloaks" that can be used, for example: cunt It, to me, seems silly to specifically ban certain strings of characters without cracking down on attempts to bypass them, which obviously isn't occurring (and shouldn't). I'm sure we've all been to places where the posting of such words is actionable and attempting to bypass the filters is just as actionable (I know I have), and while that's an awful way to run a forum it's better than deliberately only blocking the specific word. There isn't any difference between the actual word "fuck" and "f*ck" in the mind of the reader, so why ban one but not the other? Random sidenote: "pussy" meaning "coward" isn't actually in reference to female genitalia. It's a shortening of the word "pusillanimous", which means "afraid of danger". www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pusillanimousEDIT: And that's not even beginning to touch the other arguments to be made, such as that banning the usage of such language implies a distrust of the forumbase by the administration, which seems sort of silly considering the lengths that Neo and Poli go to make sure this forum only has the "cream of the crop" posting in it (which, for the record, I very much appreciate). |
|
|
|
Post by Poli on Jun 12, 2014 0:02:06 GMT
|
|
parkus
2500+
A surface is that which has length and breadth only.
Posts: 2,503
|
Post by parkus on Jun 12, 2014 5:18:50 GMT
And the N-word actually comes from "niggardly" |
|
