UESP Forums

masser wrote:God save the queen-* pistols.

So, the more common and informal term for intercourse is censored on here? Don't you think that's a bit extreme?

Since when was this site for talking about intercourse anyhow? I believe it's been filtered from a time before there were many spam filters in place, so it would have been alot more useful then as well.

When the spam was really terrible that was one of the main words used. It was brought up recently that someone wanted to use it in place of gender, but I didn't really see any reason for taking it off the list. There are very few instances where it would be needed, and many more where it wouldn't be wanted at all.

I'd say it was another example of western societies obsession with accepting violence, over se*x - a particular American, Bible-bashing hang-up, but less common in more liberal, secular Europe.

But the fact remains that, a) it's an utterly absurd word to block
and b) there may be real spam reasons for blocking (which I don't understand)
Now, enough of the interesting stuff, here's some trivia!!

Nude - is lovely. Still miss the old ending, tho.

I find it disappointing that it is an issue.

It is more politicially correctness ...Army Training, Sir... you do not use s*x, you use Gender. Male or Female, M/F...

If you check the Age topic, you will find that 40% are 16 or younger. There are probably quite a few that are 17 & 18, maybe another 10%. 50% of the members are minors.

And minors love to use words like s*x

• Ragoth climbs on soapbox

I honesty think that it amounts to ridiculous puritanism to ban the word “séx” from the forums. It is not an expletive. It is not definitionally prurient. It is simply a word that denotes the difference between female and male or describes the act of copulation. Ooops. Maybe I shouldn’t have written that. Is cøpulatiõn a banned word as well? It is how we all got here, after all, and our ancestors for the past billion years or so. I really cannot understand why this board should be so repressed on this subject. I actually commend moderator/administrator on how quick and thorough they are to remove spam from these fora so why should “sèx” suddenly allow a spam flood? Are the terms “invêst” and “Nigëria” also prohibited? They are common in spam that I receive in e-mail. (“great opportunity to ‘invêst’ in vertical acreage in US canyons; if you send me $5000 to help get my fortune out of ‘Nigèria’”.) Even if minors read these fora, that is still no excuse to ban perfectly reasonable English words. Writing “séx” does not mean an explicit description of sêxual acts. The forums are well moderated and descriptions which are inappropriate for our younger members would be quickly removed without recourse to such blanket censorship. Solving any such problems by banning the very word “sëx” is like using a sledgehammer to crack eggs. What’s more, as this post shows, it really takes very little ingenuity to get around the censorship; I’ve already used the word “sèx” several times in this post. It would be just as easy to get around machine censorship of truly explicit or blue language. Please, let’s rid the forums of such ridiculous censorship and count instead on our members’ maturity and intelligence, as well as our truly dedicated and skilled moderators’ vigilance to keep genuinely objectionable material out of our community. Thanks.

• dismounts soapbox and moves on quietly wondering if there is even a problem with typing “mõunts”.

I'm not trying to pick a fight or anything, but ragged, to me your post seems to be saying that it's OK to give the mods more work by removing the ban on this word??

Personally I don't see it as a big issue, it's easy to get around it as you say, if you feel the need to use it. If it gets *'d out, then reading the post, it's usually still easy to tell what the word was anyhow.

If the mods and/or admins feel that they want to reinstate it, that's entirely up to them. But I really can't understand why anyone is giving them grief for something that could potentially cause them more work, and at the v. least, from what I can see, would bring them no benefit.

I find it hard to believe, considering the eloquence of expression that I frequently see here, that anyone could have really been inhibited in their posting by the lack of one 3 letter word.

weka wrote:I'm not trying to pick a fight or anything, but ragged, to me your post seems to be saying that it's OK to give the mods more work by removing the ban on this word??

Personally I don't see it as a big issue, it's easy to get around it as you say, if you feel the need to use it. If it gets *'d out, then reading the post, it's usually still easy to tell what the word was anyhow.

If the mods and/or admins feel that they want to reinstate it, that's entirely up to them. But I really can't understand why anyone is giving them grief for something that could potentially cause them more work, and at the v. least, from what I can see, would bring them no benefit.

I find it hard to believe, considering the eloquence of expression that I frequently see here, that anyone could have really been inhibited in their posting by the lack of one 3 letter word.

Don’t worry, I don’t think that you’re “trying to pick a fight”. Your reply was eminently reasonable, though I do disagree with it.

I don’t believe that I am “giving them grief” when I criticize this policy, and it certainly is not my intent to do so. I do believe, though, that, as an active forum member, I should have the right to express my opinion of forum policies, even when that opinion is critical. Since the admin/mod community have to read all posts anyway to remove spam and other objectionable material (we appear to agree that mere word filters are rather easy to fool), I suspect that their workload would not rise considerably to simply delete posts in which the term “séx” is used inappropriately. I have a bias against censorship on principle, so I consider this the preferable as well as much more elegant solution to the situation.

For me, I can sometimes, though certainly not always, tell what a word was when it is * ed out. Sometimes I can’t though, and the whole point of the post can then become unclear to me. I doubt that I am alone in this.

Ultimately, I feel that fora belong to all their members – that they would die without members – I feel that it is my right to offer criticism where I deem it necessary. It is also your right, Weka, and all other members’ right, too. As a (generally) responsible member of this forum I feel that it is also my responsibility to express my criticisms, concerns, and suggestions with the intent of, and because, I want to make these fora a better place for discussion for all of us.

I hope that this clarifies my position sufficiently.

Of course it's all of no consequence to me because I know how to bypass filters on PHPBB forums. Hahahaha.

r wrote:Of course it's all of no consequence to me because I know how to bypass filters on PHPBB forums. Hahahaha.

Wait, are you saying it's actually possible to write "sex" without having to resort to funky symbols??!!

Btw, the word f***ing (since I am a nice girl, I won't type it out) isn't banned here, although the non-gerund version is. I say that's the word we should substitute in sentences where we'd ordinarily use "sex"

r wrote:

masser wrote:God save the queen-* pistols.

So, the more common and informal term for intercourse is censored on here? Don't you think that's a bit extreme?

After a year here, "r" just finally noticed. This shows that the censor is not affecting the normal "Regular" Members from enjoying the forum with that word being censored.

The word is in the censor, due to spammers & bots. It is also in place for the drive-by, I need help members, who don't know the rules, or take the time to read them. Their only concern is getting a quick response to their problems, and getting back to playing. They are gone, never to be heard from again.

There are probably 2-3 times (or) more drive-by members, than there are Regular Members. This is nothing against those Regulars. Most have posted here for a while, and do not even know that word is censored, since they do not use that word.

This is not a General Forum, where that word would get used alot. This is a Forum for a Game Series, that has nothing to do with that word. Having that word censored does not affect any of the Regular Members from having discussions on the Game, and getting their point(s) across.

Being a Moderator is not a job. We do not get paid. We volunteer our time, to help make the Forum a better place. We want everyone to be able to enjoy the time that they spend here. That includes us, the moderators. If it does get to become a JOB, becuase we have to spend our time editing other people replies, then it tends to no longer be fun for us.

I think that it would be alot better to have an automatic censor, then to have the moderators embarass members, because their reply was edited.



Thank you for pointing that out. I will spend the evening adding more words to the censor. I really never paid much attention to the censor. I thought that it was not necessary. Obviously I was wrong.

Not every imaginable word and the work-arounds are in the filter, because they haven't been a problem. I suggest not making them one!

If you think about it, what are the most used words by spammers; I'm sure you'll come up with this particular word as being very near the top of the list and that is why it is in the filter.

Jeff wrote:
I think that it would be alot better to have an automatic censor, then to have the moderators embarass members, because their reply was edited.

An autocensor highlights the problem even more and I believe encourages members to self censor words using asterisks and symbols. The moderators would have just as much work editing posts.

I can honestly say I have seen very little problems on these boards with the use of bad language. I can only put this down to efficient and effective moderation, and a good member base.

Personally? I think it's an outright disgrace. This is unjustified oppression, and dare I say it - persecution - of those who wish to speak about the subject in depth, or even superficially. It discriminates against some of the brightest, most humane members of this board, whose communal discourse simply relies upon the S word being in frequent use. That we, lovers of the finest television show about killing vampires, cannot even use one of the definining adjectives in its title without autocratic cencorship, is an outrage. And I shall be complaining forthwith, to any and all bodies who may listen.

I hope to bring forum-based pressure groups from other BtVS forums - of which there are legion - to deluge these servers, and bring the fascist haters of Joss Whedon to justice! Who was behind it? Come on! It was DorostheConquerer, wasn't it? I just knew he would push this matter... I just didn't think he would go this far...

It begins here, with this one word; Sla*er. But where does it end? With B*ffy? Or even J*ss Wh**on? Ba**ards all of you!!
... ...
... ...
...no wait. What? Oh THAT word? I couldn't care less. Just as long as they don't censor, y'know, anything really important.

I'm with you Tourist. Death to the whedon haters!! :Twisted Evil:

So..... how did we get on this topic?

Forget it. It is one of the reasons I don't visit the "general" topic anymore.

It probably is a good thing to leave it in place. Go watch any myspace video and scroll down to look at the comments. Yeah, thats a lot of spam. Nobody likes spam.

On top of that, i find it entertaining dancing around the word because i have the maturity of a 15yr old.

If you want to see bad use of censors go to the official guitar hero boards, they had "murder" and "sex" blocked out. Now you might say that's no problem, but what if you wanted to discuss songs in the game such as Anarchy in the UK - Sex Pistols or Miss Murder - AFI.

tl;dr. Problem there, no problem here (well why not write sexpistols).

Jeff wrote: After a year here, "r" just finally noticed. This shows that the censor is not affecting the normal "Regular" Members from enjoying the forum with that word being censored.

The word is in the censor, due to spammers & bots. It is also in place for the drive-by, I need help members, who don't know the rules, or take the time to read them. Their only concern is getting a quick response to their problems, and getting back to playing. They are gone, never to be heard from again.

There are probably 2-3 times (or) more drive-by members, than there are Regular Members. This is nothing against those Regulars. Most have posted here for a while, and do not even know that word is censored, since they do not use that word.

This is not a General Forum, where that word would get used alot. This is a Forum for a Game Series, that has nothing to do with that word. Having that word censored does not affect any of the Regular Members from having discussions on the Game, and getting their point(s) across.

Being a Moderator is not a job. We do not get paid. We volunteer our time, to help make the Forum a better place. We want everyone to be able to enjoy the time that they spend here. That includes us, the moderators. If it does get to become a JOB, becuase we have to spend our time editing other people replies, then it tends to no longer be fun for us.

I think that it would be alot better to have an automatic censor, then to have the moderators embarass members, because their reply was edited.

Thank you for pointing that out. I will spend the evening adding more words to the censor. I really never paid much attention to the censor. I thought that it was not necessary. Obviously I was wrong.

I feel the need to respond again to the pro-censorship arguments that have been posted as this thread continues. I feel the strongest reaction to Jeff’s post, as quoted above, so I will respond to it directly, however, I make my comments in a general sense and to all forum members, for I am responding not to any individual’s opinions so much as to the issue of censorship, especially blanket machine implemented censorship, itself.

“The censor is not affecting the normal ‘Regular’ Members from enjoying the forum with that word being censored.” So this justifies it? Freedom of speech is not about defending grandma Polly Pureheart making short little public speech (or letter to a message board) about how she really thinks daffodils are sweet when they bloom in springtime. Even the censors of tyrannies are not bothered by the innocuous. The true test of freedom of speech is when it’s used to say something controversial or something that the powers-that-be find objectionable. This situation is a case in point.

As soon as censorship falls on the members of these forums, they are effected. I don’t think its reasonable to say that censorship is acceptable before people notice it either, anymore than it’s acceptable to dump toxic waste into the drinking water until someone first shows symptoms of poisoning.

I have already addressed the issue of spammers and bots. As to the issue of “drive-by members”; with the greatest respect this is nothing more than a red herring. So called “drive-by” members don’t post in the general forum or in broad reaching topics where censored terms are most likely to be used. They post in specific game threads and ask specific questions like “where do I find the Awesome Sword of Monster Slaying” or “what is the secret trick to defeating the Foomie Goonies”. It is the regular members of the boards who keep the discussion alive that are effected by this censorship, make no mistake.

And, in fact, this is a general forum. It says so right on the topic page. This is not the Morrowind or Oblivion forum, those are clearly marked by other links. This argument is just a misdirection. The general forum is “General discussion forum for games, life, and other stuff.” It says so right on the forum main page.

I categorically disagree with the statement “it would be alot better to have an automatic censor, then to have the moderators embarass members, because their reply was edited.” The automatic censor censors posts regardless of meaning or intent. In fact it treats all uses of the word “séx” as if it were used in the most provocative and prurient way possible. Moderators, on the other hand, can easily tell the difference between a post where someone uses a term legitimately and someone who uses it in an obviously improper or trolling manner. If someone does the latter, they should not be surprised having their posts edited/deleted and they ought to be embarrassed by their conduct. Treating everyone as if they are spammers or trolls, on the other hand, is offensive and insulting. I say instead, that members be treated as innocent until proven guilty, and as capable of behaving (and using language) appropriately and responsibly in an adult and reasonable until proven immature and unworthy of such respect.

Somewhere on this topic, the statement was made about censorship and other rules existing to make users feel more comfortable on these forums. Well, since this topic has come to the fore, and since some those who most actively moderate have expressed support for blanket censorship and treating members as though they are incapable of using the language responsibly, I feel a good deal less comfortable here than I have, at any time since I joined.

I cannot respond in particular to how moderators feel about having to act personally about offensive language or offensive posts, as I am not a moderator. I am sorry if some feel that reviewing individual posts for such subject matter would make being a moderator less fun. I would suggest, respectfully, that I think the idea that being a moderator is about responsibility, not about fun. It is a voluntary position. If discharging the responsibility associated with it, without recourse to using machine censors that treat board members as childish and unable to discuss topics responsibly, then the moderator can resign their position. This is not intended to be an inflammatory statement; it is an honest expression of my opinion.

I see that some members of these forums are aware of how to monkey wrench the autocensorship that filters words from these boards. I don’t know how to do this. My point, though, is that I shouldn’t have to learn. I shouldn’t have to use keyboard tricks to use the words I choose as appropriate to my statements. I should be trusted to behave responsibly unless I demonstrate that I cannot. In short, I should not be censored by a machine filter.

Finally I have to respond to Jeff’s last paragraph in particular, and in this case I am responding to his specific statements and not in a general way to the issue. Now, I cannot read another’s intentions, merely their words. It strikes me, though, as an intentional provocation to respond to a discussion on the merits of censorship and whether it should be eased or removed, to instead state that one moderator in particular will, without recourse to further discussion, unilaterally make the censorship more severe, instead. If this was not your intent, Jeff, I certainly stand to be corrected.

In closing, I again make the argument that we, the members of this online community, should be trusted to use the language appropriately unless and until any of us, as individuals, demonstrate that we cannot. Then, in such a case, steps can be taken to remedy that individual situation without affecting the rights of the rest of us. I want to continue to feel comfortable as an active member of this community, and more, I want to feel respected as a member of this community, unless I do something to lose that respect. The maintenance of autocensorship, for the many reasons I have enumerated, erodes both that sense of comfort and respect. I call upon those who maintain the UESP forums to change this policy and eliminate this form of censorship.

Since these boards are privately owned, there is no right to free speech here. It's as if we were invited to someone's home, and they asked us not to curse. If someone continues to disrespect their host, the host has every right to kick that person out of their home.

If the mods say the censorship will help them, that's their call. I disagree, and I find it ridiculous that copulation is treated as a worse concept than the mass slaughter that comprises a TES game, but they are under zero obligation to listen to any of us. I trust myself to use good judgment when it comes to language, and I fully expect to get my posts trashed and/or get myself banned if I try to circumvent the filter for the purpose of being obscene. (No, I don't feel guilty writing out Sex Pistols, but if the mods decide to ban me for that, I guess that's their right.)

Edit: As to why I disagree with the censorship, here's my reasoning:

1) very few spam posts make it onto this board now that bots can't post links
2) the word filter doesn't prevent posts from making it onto the board, it just modifies how the post is displayed
3) if a bot does manage to post, the thread will still need to be locked by a moderator, regardless of whether it has any words filtered out of it or not.

So as far as I can tell, the word filter doesn't reduce the number of spam posts on the boards, nor does it reduce the workload that these posts produce for moderators, since the threads still need to get locked. Since it doesn't seem to accomplish either of the goals that the moderators have given as reasons to keep the ban on the word s e x, I don't see any reason to keep it.

I don't doubt that the situation was very different before the link-posting ban was implemented, but at this point I believe it would be ok to lift the filter on that particular word.

Furthermore, the word itself is not a curse word, it's not obscene, and it is often more correct to use this term instead of the word gender.

Does it really bother you that much when someone censors a few choice words? It embarrasses you? I dont mean to sound offensive or rude, but i am amazed at how this decision is affecting people. I could care less.

Personally i would rather there be a censor for terrible grammar. I dont even mean spelling, just something to get rid of all the responses that are like, "lolzzz u 2 haxorzz."

Deandra wrote:Since these boards are privately owned, there is no right to free speech here. It's as if we were invited to someone's home, and they asked us not to curse. If someone continues to disrespect their host, the host has every right to kick that person out of their home.
...<snip>...
Furthermore, the word itself is not a curse word, it's not obscene, and it is often more correct to use this term instead of the word gender.

Thank you, Deandra, for such a well thought out and well argued post. I agree entirely with what you say. You reiterate several of my points with great clarity, and make even more forceful and independent points of your own. I would add that, for myself, I have never advocated cursing or obscenity on this forum; I have criticized what I believe to be an unnecessary and arbitrary form of censorship by a machine which neither makes sense, nor is at all effective. Otherwise, all I can say is “hear, hear.”

..........................________________

leroybrown wrote:Does it really bother you that much when someone censors a few choice words?

Umm. I guess it does, yeah. Neither myself nor others would spend all this time and effort composing replies to this issue, for or against, if we didn’t.

This is a really strange but very interesting subject.
But I think everyone at the forums would agree
Coulsonji should not get involved

Vesna wrote:So..... how did we get on this topic?

Forget it. It is one of the reasons I don't visit the "general" topic anymore.

Yeah, it's also one of the reasons I don't visit "this entire forum" anymore.