No Goblins Allowed :: slur question

Word filter loosely based around things you'd be able to say on TV.

GobO_Slobad wrote:

Word filter loosely based around things you'd be able to say on TV.

are you defending it or merely explaining the practice

A case can be made for 'bitch' (which is sometimes used positively, eg "bitchin'"), but I think the use of it as a slur far outweighs this.

The MPAA is also notoriously sexist, homophobic, and prudish in its outlook, and TV and movie ratings reflect that bigotry. It's not a very good standard to go by.

why should I have my vocabulary limited for a stupid reason

as much as you may wish that was true, it's not

Let me ask this question: Why do you feel the need to use those words anyway when you have an already very large vocabulary at your disposal?

The MPAA is also notoriously sexist, homophobic, and prudish in its outlook, and TV and movie ratings reflect that bigotry. It's not a very good standard to go by.

The fact that users are now bringing it up as something that makes them uncomfortable, which was the entire rationale behind censoring "***," is enough to at least spur discussion, which you seem to be kind of implying isn't going to take place, Fire.

Honestly, as far as my concern goes is the fact that limiting my options of word choice in fiction can cause such a total pain in the ass.
There are some words that I cannot think of even being useful in that context, but there are others that do get censored that are incredibly inconvenient to try to work around.

GobO_Stormageddon wrote:

Ko wrote:

why should I have my vocabulary limited for a stupid reason

IMO if you're using those words then to me your vocab is already limited

profanity is used in poetry and prose and music very often to, in my opinion, really really great effect.

GobO_Stormageddon wrote:

Let me ask this question: Why do you feel the need to use those words anyway when you have an already very large vocabulary at your disposal?

Fundamentally, I prefer more options rather than less, and I don't consider offense to be a decent enough reason to outright disallow something.

I don't really feel the need to use those words exactly, nor do I particularly care about freedom of speech on an Internet forum about a card game and mathematical pretend time, but meh.

why should I have my vocabulary limited for a stupid reason

IMO if you're using those words then to me your vocab is already limited

as i stated it's my opinion

Author:	GobO_Slobad [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:07 am ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
Word filter loosely based around things you'd be able to say on TV.

Author:	iamajellydonut [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:10 am ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
GobO_Slobad wrote: Word filter loosely based around things you'd be able to say on TV. So, why can't I say "**" or "" or "" or "**"? Edit: Turns out I can say that last one. I can also say "dyke".

Author:	GobO_Slobad [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:17 am ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
door (dooooooooooor) wrote: GobO_Slobad wrote: Word filter loosely based around things you'd be able to say on TV. are you defending it or merely explaining the practice Explaining the thought process behind it. US television usually doesn't allow that much cursing and stuff so if it's alright there is probably fine here. It's not perfect by any means so we can be open to discussion of what should and should not be filtered. @Jelly, surely you understand context based meanings of words.

Author:	Ko [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:43 am ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
door (dooooooooooor) wrote: A case can be made for 'bitch' (which is sometimes used positively, eg "bitchin'"), but I think the use of it as a slur far outweighs this. I think you are wrong

Author:	GobO_Fire [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 6:59 am ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
"Words you can't say on TV" was our primary criteria. Then we looked at words to see if they had a "legit" meaning along with a slur or curse meaning. That's why, for example, dick, dyke, and pussy aren't in the filter - even though nobody ever uses pussy cat except to get a giggle as though they were a 14-year-old boy. "Bitch" passed the first test - it was used on network TV at least as far back as the late 70s, early 80s when it was used in an episode of MAS*H. "Bitch" also passes the second test. Even ignoring the "female dog" definition of bitch - which, again, nobody but 14-year-old boys looking for a giggle uses - bitch has the use Door mentioned. It also can be used to mean complain (ie, "bitch and moan" about something). For those reasons, it was left out of the filter. Just because something is not in the filter doesn't mean it's always OK to use. If you call somebody a bitch you're probably going to get your post edited. The words "whore" and "slut" are more tame than bitch, and both can have conversational purposes beyond being used as insults. edit: to give some context for how they could be used... "Slut shaming" is a very valid (and mature) topic to discuss, especially if talking about something such as the Steubenville Rape case from this past summer. There are other uses of "slut" too, but I'm desperately in need of caffeine... "Whore" is a legit word to mean streetwalker. The fact that it has a negative connotation to it doesn't change the legit definition. "Whore" is also used in vernacular to mean somebody who does something to excess. See the second definition at Urban Dictionary. Both words are just like bitch or dick or dyke - use them in the proper context, and all is fine. Go around and insulting somebody by calling them slut or whore and you can expect to be edited.

No Goblins Allowed http://862838.jrbdt8wd.asia/

slur question http://862838.jrbdt8wd.asia/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=465	Page 1 of 8

Author:	KeeperofManyNames [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 9:50 am ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
The MPAA is also notoriously sexist, homophobic, and prudish in its outlook, and TV and movie ratings reflect that bigotry. It's not a very good standard to go by. You could make the argument, and people did if you recall, that "**" has legitimate uses. If you were sympathetic to my argument that such uses were trumped by the hateful nature of the word's use in other contexts, making it more valuable to filter the word as a show of intent, you should be sympathetic to such arguments here. Also, I'm sorry, but "whore" is never not a derogatory word. That's just an incorrect argument. There's no "legitimate" use in the sense that there's no use that isn't denigrating to people in the sex industry. Whether or not you think it passes your first criteria is a different story, but yeah, sorry, it's not "legitimate" just because lots of people who aren't sex workers use it. Again, you could just as easily say that "" is a legitimate word to mean homosexual. The fact that it has a negative connotation to it doesn't change the legit definition. Except... the negative connotation is all that matters. The fact that users are now bringing it up as something that makes them uncomfortable, which was the entire rationale behind censoring "**," is enough to at least spur discussion, which you seem to be kind of implying isn't going to take place, Fire.

Author:	trappedslider [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 11:23 am ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
KeeperofManyNames wrote: The MPAA is also notoriously sexist, homophobic, and prudish in its outlook, and TV and movie ratings reflect that bigotry. It's not a very good standard to go by. Only if you don't share or agree with those standards

Author:	The Butt [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:19 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
Im glad that not all dubious words are filtered. That would not be bitchin'

Author:	shadyphoenix [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:04 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
Censorship of language is completely, utterly pointless and asinine.

Author:	Ko [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:36 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
yeah, too bad no one cares about that

Author:	GobO_Stormageddon [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 7:41 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
Let me ask this question: Why do you feel the need to use those words anyway when you have an already very large vocabulary at your disposal?

Author:	Ko [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 7:43 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
why should I have my vocabulary limited for a stupid reason

Author:	Ko [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:46 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
as much as you may wish that was true, it's not

Author:	shadyphoenix [ Sat Oct 05, 2013 9:30 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
GobO_Stormageddon wrote: Let me ask this question: Why do you feel the need to use those words anyway when you have an already very large vocabulary at your disposal? Fundamentally, I prefer more options rather than less, and I don't consider offense to be a decent enough reason to outright disallow something. I don't really feel the need to use those words exactly, nor do I particularly care about freedom of speech on an Internet forum about a card game and mathematical pretend time, but meh.

Page 1 of 8	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Barinellos [ Sun Oct 06, 2013 12:21 am ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
Honestly, as far as my concern goes is the fact that limiting my options of word choice in fiction can cause such a total pain in the ass. There are some words that I cannot think of even being useful in that context, but there are others that do get censored that are incredibly inconvenient to try to work around.

Author:	GobO_Fire [ Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:29 am ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
KeeperofManyNames wrote: The MPAA is also notoriously sexist, homophobic, and prudish in its outlook, and TV and movie ratings reflect that bigotry. It's not a very good standard to go by. I do agree here, as a general statement. It's one of the better reasons to avoid references to film ratings when discussing stuff that should or shouldn't be around the boards - what the MPAA allows James Cameron to use ("OMG! Boobs!") are verboten for other film makers, for example. Now, that said... while the rating systems are inconsistent (if you want to be nice) or rigged (if you're a cynic), the FCC is pretty consistent about what it fines broadcasters for. And so that's where the "it's allowed on broadcast TV argument comes from. Quote: The fact that users are now bringing it up as something that makes them uncomfortable, which was the entire rationale behind censoring "***," is enough to at least spur discussion, which you seem to be kind of implying isn't going to take place, Fire. Frankly, if I was looking to squelch discussion, I would've locked the thread and simply said no. Barinellos wrote: Honestly, as far as my concern goes is the fact that limiting my options of word choice in fiction can cause such a total pain in the ass. There are some words that I cannot think of even being useful in that context, but there are others that do get censored that are incredibly inconvenient to try to work around. This is a decent argument, but it also extends to words like the f-bomb. I don't know if that was covered by your second sentence or not (probably). So while "artistic license" is something we'll keep in mind, if the final decision is that whore and/or slut should get filtered then it'll be like the f-bomb - something you have to work around in fiction. And to be clear, it is under discussion. Shortly after this thread was started a thread was started in the mod forum to discuss. The ultimate decision is up to Bun - this is her site. All we can do is point out the pros and cons to adding it to the filter, and the best way to do that is to keep this talk open.

Author:	tony3 [ Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:25 am ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
door (dooooooooooor) wrote: GobO_Stormageddon wrote: Ko wrote: why should I have my vocabulary limited for a stupid reason IMO if you're using those words then to me your vocab is already limited profanity is used in poetry and prose and music very often to, in my opinion, really really great effect. Barinellos wrote: Honestly, as far as my concern goes is the fact that limiting my options of word choice in fiction can cause such a total pain in the ass. There are some words that I cannot think of even being useful in that context, but there are others that do get censored that are incredibly inconvenient to try to work around. shadyphoenix wrote: GobO_Stormageddon wrote: Let me ask this question: Why do you feel the need to use those words anyway when you have an already very large vocabulary at your disposal? Fundamentally, I prefer more options rather than less, and I don't consider offense to be a decent enough reason to outright disallow something. I don't really feel the need to use those words exactly, nor do I particularly care about freedom of speech on an Internet forum about a card game and mathematical pretend time, but meh. Ko wrote: why should I have my vocabulary limited for a stupid reason It's not a big deal. Stop complaining about it and just don't swear. It's really not that hard.

Author:	Cyclone_Joker [ Sun Oct 06, 2013 1:20 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: slur question
GobO_Stormageddon wrote: IMO if you're using those words then to me your vocab is already limited lolno. GobO_Stormageddon wrote: as i stated it's my opinion Cool. You're wrong.