I voted no unless you gonna do something funny like switch the crazy GA lady with the word.
1 Like
This is possible. There is a setting that will prevent a post from publishing if it contains banned/censored words.
It’s good enough for people not to say it.
I am 100% on board with that.
What is the point of a kid safe filter? Seems insulting to those same women to be honest.
Do you mean it’s possible that every single no vote is not expressing condescension at women?
2 Likes
It was pretty stupid but probably necessary for that place.
That we think it is necessary here says a lot about this place and none of it is positive.
After the last vote it wasn’t being used much at all, and pretty much only in the agreed context and handful of threads where the community voted that it was ok.
1 Like
Yeah if that was the case I never would have known this shit was still an issue.
Well unless you saw these two threads constantly at the top of the forum. If it was used more than a tiny amount elsewhere outside of these and the UK threads, and in a sexist context, then I must have missed it.
I muted the c-word thread and don’t read the UK threads. It was in the Biden then and I give zero fucks what context watevs was using it in.
Some people certainly feel like they should be free to type what they want here.
Others feel like this one word and only this one word being singled out is reinforcing something they already suspected, that there’s a bias against UK/Ireland/non-American posters.
I think that most of that is a misunderstanding and that theoretically it could all be worked out, but it’s one of those things that in fact can never be worked out on a public forum because people will always be fighting while anyone tries to work it out and people will continually make the worst interpretations of what is posted and will constantly bring up other squabbles. Not everyone of course, but it’ll happen enough to derail anything that could help.
I dunno, or maybe not. I was hoping to figure a way to help and maybe I won’t give up.
And, now that All-in-Flynn is getting mad and I think even ChrisV is mad, I’m pretty sure it’s not just some little group that had been fighting with cuse and jman.
Ok, this is not entirely serious, but can we have the software automatically mod anyone who suggests that the word should be banned rather than filtered?
1 Like
I’m honestly missing something (inside joke from the other thread?), and I’m not trying to be snarky or argumentative. I really don’t understand how bleeping is better for those it offends.
There would literally be one bleeped word. You know exactly what was said to you.
1 Like
I don’t know if it is. I did offer possible reasons in a previous response to Yuv, like the site doing something about it might make the site seem more generally welcoming even if the posters getting filtered are still seen as unwelcoming. Or it might actually be better for people who are offended. Dunno.
The inside joke part that you don’t get is probably just me talking to myself, but I feel like people who want bans are guilty of blood-lust and want to purge people generally. Little of this is about the word itself. Also, as easy as banning sounds and as much as people are like “Oh, you wouldn’t want me as a mod, I’d ban people left and right”…well, the last person who said that made it pretty clear imo that they really didn’t want to actually be a mod and actually do it. And as little respect as I have for people with ban-lust, I have much less for people who have it, but don’t want to take the responsibility. I’m really really not talking about you, I’m ranting about lots of previous stuff/arguments.
1 Like
I feel like jmakin’s OP left out some very important context. For people who voted no on the grounds that they think a coded filter is stupid and that we should just ban people who use the c-word, that has already been voted down. That is the outcome I supported, but not enough other people did. A lot of the blame for that falls on me. I could have written a better poll and campaigned for the idea better. Many people who voted against me in that poll have suggested that they would change their vote to something like that if we redid that whole poll, but it’s problematic to hold a whole new vote just because we didn’t like the outcome.
This referendum is trying to find a third way, a way between the British Isles posters who want to use the term in a way they genuinely believe to not be sexist and directed mostly if not entirely against men (and to not be banned for it), but also allay the concerns of people who think that any usage is unacceptable and people who don’t want our search rankings harmed by algorithms that aren’t sensitive to transatlantic linguistic nuances. It is my hope that this passes, and that we see infrequent censorship of the word in British Isles threads only (and people who hate the term as well as search engine crawlers can safely ignore it), and any usage elsewhere, even while censored, is still met with swift and stiff moderator action.
I think I was indeed too hasty in deriding the no voters here, because while all of this was obvious to me, I was too quick to assume that all the no voters were aware of it and voting no anyway. It’s clear that some people in the no category would not mind just banning people for using the word while opposing the software filter. I would encourage such people to switch their vote to yes. In the current state of the forum, banning the use of the term using other mod tools has been rejected.
2 Likes
I don’t know if this helps anything but perhaps we can (in another thread) decide how often we have polls like this that have a community mandate behind them? Maybe we try this filter out for a while but commit to revisiting the issue in a month or a quarter?
Like I’ve been voting yes censor it in all the polls because on balance I think it’s pretty bad for the site, but my ideal state would be that UK people or anybody so inclined should be free to use it in UK threads. As far as I can tell, the two immediate causes of this most recent flare-up were a bump of the c-word thread and other people (not UK people) using it in our main threads. If we figure out an approach to have no spillover in the main threads (technical solutions like ggoreo’s groups or possibly category wide, instead of site wide, filters and/or aggressive moderation beyond the UK threads), and some way to never bump this topic again, maybe there’s still an end state that most of us can accept, because this vote is too close in either direction to risk losing good posters over.
It reminds me of that STNG episode where the Enterprise discovers a powerful civilization on a planet that didn’t want to be discovered, so the aliens kept giving them all amnesia and put the Enterprise off course, but the Enterprise kept finding weird clues in their logs and kept coming back to the planet until the aliens gave them one last chance to erase all the possible clues, and in the last act they just avoid the planet. So yeah, that civilization is our UK friends who don’t mind saying ■■■■ ; I think there’s a place in our universe for people who want to live on or visit that planet even if the majority of us think they’re wrong, but starship ‘All Other Parts of Unstuck’ has to avoid it somehow.
3 Likes
Fair. I’m skipping about a thousand posts from the other thread as it just kept going in a pointless circle.
I get the annoyance at my brilliant idea being proposed as novel for the 25th time since Christmas. Thanks for reading all of that mess.
2 Likes
I propose a referrndum to force place jman to jal’s ignore list and vice versa.
All will be solved.
3 Likes
This is the right answer. Allow it in the UK thread temp ban delete in the regular threads.
1 Like
Rubbish. My No vote is a vote for self-censorship, restricting the c word to UK threads and a ban for its use elsewhere.
It’s good to have such unbaised mods though.
Truth.
Go hard or go home. Either way I don’t care. I use almost no profanity on UP (and never the dreaded c-word). So it doesn’t affect my posting.
1 Like