azzaman333
meh
The dots are very easy to decipher, just not as immidiately obvious as the stars.
About Forum Rules...
- Thread starter Agent327
- Start date
The dots are very easy to decipher, just not as immidiately obvious as the stars.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
No, there is not, and that is one of the reasons it was changed. We would see "****" in the post, and infract on the basis of the language used. People would then say that they didn't really post the swear word, they just posted the asterisks. Our point was that we have no way of knowing that, and they shouldn't have posted either anyway. Changing the autocensor to the dots just made some of this argument over what the user claimed to have posted redundent.
Till
Adventurer
Wouldn't it be better to change the autocensor script to automatically display a warning (after the user clicks submit, but before the post is actually entered into the database), and/or send a notification to the moderation staff?
This way the user would have a chance to change his wording, and the moderators would have evidence, if he chooses to cross the line.
This way the user would have a chance to change his wording, and the moderators would have evidence, if he chooses to cross the line.
Krill
Deity
Er...but I can just post . .. .. .. . and use the exact same excuse, right?
So what's the point again?
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
Yes, but that excuse won't work anyway, because we've never allowed it, even when it was posting asterisks.
The general point is that there is virtually never a reason why anyone needs to post swear words, whether they then get auto-censored or not. So don't post them, and by the same argument don't post the equivalent of what the autocensor would post.
azzaman333
meh
Mise
isle of lucy
I like this idea -- in fact, rather than giving the user the choice, can't it just say, "You posted the following words: ___, ____, _____. This site is family oriented blah blah blah please use different words. Thank you." And then not allow you to post if there are swear words in it?
Something like the 10-char minimum, except for swears.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
Not really, although its under discussion.
The over-riding principle is that no-one really needs to post swear words, so why shoudl they?
The current autocensor can't be set-up like that. Don't know if there is a hack for something like this....
I don't like the new interpretation of the spam rule which seems to say that a discussion cannot be made with one liners. Certainly, the forum isn't a chatroom, but discussion doesn't always have to be paragraphs long. Granted, if a post is a one word/one smiley reply, that's pointless, but that's mitigated by the ten character limit.
Also, in the OT forum rules thread, the forum rules listed and linked to are v4.1, not the latest version of v4.3. I noticed a new rule in v4.3 that I think is important to highlight in the thread.
Also, in the OT forum rules thread, the forum rules listed and linked to are v4.1, not the latest version of v4.3. I noticed a new rule in v4.3 that I think is important to highlight in the thread.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
Its not a new interpretation, its reverting to the old interpretation. There was a time when those threads would have been closed-down. The compromise is that now we give them a chance.
Point is, if there is a "what is your favourite" type thread, then it is reasonable to expect that people will actually explain their answer. The point of the forums is to share information and opinions, not PC+1.
azzaman333
meh
So I'm not allowed to express an opinion in one line anymore...
Why don't you make a flower, an elephant or something come up? It's better than dots and asterisks put together.
Mise
isle of lucy
What about replacing the swear with "I AM AN IDIOT" or something?
That would be cool.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
In some cases, a one-liner can be reasonable and relevant.
It comes down to information shared, not the arbitrary length of the post. But when there is a page full of posts and only one or two make it past one sentence, then that is normally a pretty-good indicator of a chat thread, not a discussion thread.
Sharwood
Rich, doctor nephew
I once went to a website that changed the n-word to "I am racist, please ban me."
It also changed a word that rhymes with flag but has no 'l' to "I am a repressed homosexual, make love to me with the lights out, so I can convince myself you are female, even though we both know the truth."
Okay, I made that last one up, it actually said; "I am homophobic, please ban me."
azzaman333
meh
I think it's hurting the activity in OT. I don't have anything concrete, but right now there's only 6 pages of OT threads, and it's been slowly dropping for a while. I suspect it is related to the harsher interpretation of a spam thread, or that it is at least a significant part of it.
I like that. The censor ought to diffuse the anger in the post as well as just editing out words.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
We are much, much more relaxed on spam threads than we used to be! They used to be closed pre-emptively, and things like 'random rants' weren't allowed.
And there are still 1085 pages (and counting) of threads in OT. What do you mean by '6 pages'?
