| Archive for Downsizer For an ethical approach to consumption |
| Jamanda |
SwearingWe have recently had a number of complaints about the amount of swearing on the forum. This includes the practice of using swear words but putting symbols or asterisks in place of some of the letters.Would all contributors please remind themselves of the discussion guidelines. Particularly the bit that says "profanity is strictly unacceptable. Pre 9pm TV should be the standard". |
||||||||
| marigold |
I suppose it's terribly terribly childish of me, but the no rude words rule makes me want to scream asterisks. I can't imagine that many people over the age of 13 haven't heard/used all the words and the prohibition strikes me as prudish and unrealistic in the modern world.
I'm not arguing in favour of effing and blinding for the sake of it (am I allowed to use those euphemisms?), but what's wrong with reflecting the real world where real people occasionally say a naughty word in front of the kiddies? |
||||||||
| Bernie66 |
There has to be a line somewhere, and trying to determine which swearing is ok and which isnt is too difficult and based on ones own feelings. Some words and usage that is ok with of could be completely offensive to you
To use pre watershed is a line that most can relate to even if they, or their kids are happy to and use more colourful language, innuendo etc. |
||||||||
| marigold |
So what are the pre-watershed guidelines? I don't watch TV, so my views on what is and is not acceptable behaviour are not formed by it. | ||||||||
| Treacodactyl |
The problem is where to draw the line and picking the 9pm watershed seems the best solution. We don't pick up every swearword as it's not realistic but what tends to happen is more and more creep in (even from moderators) and if left unchecked the site would end up with too many and that would put off people allowing their children to use it and it would put off adults. I've seen a few sites where there's just too much swearing and it really puts me off, I'm not a prude and I can swear a fair bit myself. | ||||||||
| Treacodactyl |
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/ifi/codes/bcode/protectingu18/ |
||||||||
| Ixy |
Re: Swearing
 Do i really have to remind you again?
|
||||||||
| Ixy |
what if we *completely* cover the word with asterisks, like the beep over censored words on radio? | ||||||||
| mochyn |
Then the child can insert the expletive of his/her choice! 
|
||||||||
| marigold |
Thanks - unfortunately the page won't load on my computer, so I'm none the wiser
|
||||||||
| JohnB |
I used the a word that might be mildly insulting to some people, but wasn't a swear word, on a forum that has automatic word censoring. It got replaced by [Censored] and gave the impression that I'd actually used much stronger language than I would have dreamt of using. I was really impressed 
|
||||||||
| cab |
While I accept that a strict list of prohibited words would have its failings, I think that the fact that Marigold has posted here saying that its confusing, and Silas has more than hinted at confusion elsewhere, is sufficient to make it clear that such a list would be a better solution. Certainly better than 'we'll make an objective judgment call after the event each time'. | ||||||||
| bagpuss |
We have no intention of introducing automatic censorship of any form on the site. We ask that people don't us swear words and we appreciate that both mods and members will sometimes forget and thats fine Its just currently everyone seems to be using more language that some find offensive so we are just reminding everyone that its best to try and avoid it |
||||||||
| Treacodactyl |
I don't think it makes it 'clear' a list would be better at all. I can see it might not always be clear just asking people not to swear but I think most people know what they shouldn't write. If you have a list people will just deliberately find words not on it and I really can't be bothered by such pettiness. | ||||||||
| cab |
If sufficient people know what they shouldn't write then this is not a problem, then as it can't be a problem this announcement would not be needed  Clearly it is perceived as a problem or this wouldn't have arisen.
You can come up with a list of words that are clearly very offensive in nearly any context, thats easy enough, but below that are dozens of terms that are less clear, and at present it isn't obvious which are allowed and which are not. Seems to me that if people weren't confused about what was allowed then this wouldn't even be an issue. You're not (I presume) trying to get people not to say 'ruddy blinking flip, smegma breath'. But thats just a presumption, I actually don't know. If my own limits for what is a profanity is close to yours you'll probably agree with me on what is or is not allowed, but its obvious that not everyone has the same limits. Don't have a list and you're pitting multiple sets of subjective views on this from a modding group against many more from those posting. Strikes me thats a needlessly confrontational way of doing things; better and less confusing would be to have an up front list to back up, inform and in some way standardise modding decisions. |
||||||||
| marigold |
Oooh we can argue for YEARS over which words are too naughty to mention - how will we do that without actually spelling out the words? I didn't actually say the policy was confusing (though it is) - it's more that I find the policy on "bad" language irritating. Swearing is a perfectly normal part of everyday speech, and whilst I agree that every-other-word-a-cuss-word is disagreeable, so is saying "sugar" for emphasis instead of you-know-what. Ah - the Ofcom guidelines have loaded at last - I can go and enlighten myself... |
||||||||
| Treacodactyl |
I think people do know what not to write most of the time so your argument doesn't hold up. I don't think OFCOM have a list, why are we so different?
|
||||||||
| bagpuss |
Asking people to mind their language doesn't need to be confrontational and we never intended for this to put peoples backs up. We just want to people to consider when using slang terms and terms which are considered swearing in most quarters if that is something they would say in front of a complete stranger or children If you wouldn't then perhaps the language you are using is straying towards the potentially offensive, this is something we all need to consider mods included |
||||||||
| cab |
They're not very enlightening are they?
Just seems easier to me to have a list of whats allowed and what isn't, and if that means having a list of rude words in the announcements section then so be it. |
||||||||
| Rob R |
I use the guidelines of using language that I would use when talking to my gran and I think that is a good guide for all- post as if you were talking to my gran.
It does rather make a mockery of the rule when moderators are some of the biggest offenders though. Nine times out of ten it adds nothing to a sentence to use such words, but as a first impression to new comers I think it takes much away (and certainly stops me from recommending the site to some people). |
||||||||
| cab |
Yeah, but you know that when you moderate someone online for language it frequently CAN get peoples backs up because perception of bad language is so very subjective. You're putting one subjective set of rules up as better than another, and while I may well agree with that I accept that those being moderated will often not, else they wouldn't be using that language in the first place.
Walk down Kings Hedges road and listen to the language used. A lot of people use a lot of bad language to and around children. If you're asking whether people would use that language in the context you describe, the answer is that many people do so a lot of the time. |
||||||||
| bodger |
I'm yet to see a discussion where the use of the 'F' word or other such words has added constructively to its content.
There is IMO absolutely no reason for these words to be used. These words are commonly used as 'bluster' and are used to bolster the posters ego rather than to add anything useful. |
||||||||
| cab |
Yet clearly there is an issue or this discussion wouldn't be happening. As for whether or not Ofcoms guidance is much cop... Clearly, if that website is the whole sum of guidance they use, they're pretty poor. |
||||||||
| Treacodactyl |
Please not shouting either. 
That's also been raised, this thread relates to everyone on the site. |
||||||||
| marigold |
No, they aren't  .
Offensiveness is pretty subjective isn't it? It offends me when people write "effect" instead of "affect" (and vice versa), but I don't complain about it... @ Rob R - I know plenty of Grans who use fruity language, so "what would offend a grandmother" isn't much of a guideline I'm afraid. |
||||||||
| Rob R |
And many do not. |
||||||||
| stumbling goat |
this view could just as easily be put forward to introduce other forms of unacceptable behaviour, crude jokes for example. surely just because something which is unpleasant is becoming more common is not a good reason to lower standards and hasten its useage? as a rule i used to try not to use language that i would rather not explain the meaning of to my sons when they were younger. kids are exposed to a lot of unpleasantness in this world, does not mean we should not try to stem the tide where and when we can. and i think the use of asterisks is silly, better not to swear, it rarely enhances the context. imho sg |
||||||||
| Rob R |
Read my post. It doesn't say that. |
||||||||
| bodger |
Marigold, your arguement is totally out of context.
Some people genuinely struggle to use the Queens English exactly like 'wot' you do, but the choice to use obscene language or not, is a choice that is open to everyone. |
||||||||
| Cathryn |
Rob said his grandmother.
We all have our own opinion's on this one (as ever). Please just use your own judgement on it and don't swear. It doesn't need spelling out any more than that. If anyone is offended at any time then they are free to comment on the thread and contact the moderators. |
||||||||
| Bernie66 |
Its dead simple really, if in doubt. Use different language. Common sense I guess. | ||||||||
| cab |
I agree. Many do not. But thats kind of my point; the assumption behind the 'don't say words that are really offensive' is that there is a common definition of what is or is not a serious swear word. I believe that this is incorrect. |
||||||||
| bagpuss |
So you are now pulling the debate down to the fact that other people do something so I should be able to aswell, very mature People do get offended and do complain about language on the forum. We can't always predict what particular language they will get offended by nor can we predict how cultural perceptions of language will change making one thing acceptable when it didn't use to be or vice versa. Ofcom don't maintain a list because such a list would require constant reviewing and altering to reflect the current cultural mores of the time. As Ofcom don't have the time or inclination to do such a thing what makes you think that the mods in downsizer do. Common sense if what is important here, indeed peoples views of language are different which is why we are people to think about it. If they thing that a particular piece of language if reasonable and use it we aren't going to ban them or hound them of the site for doing so but if someone complains or a mod feels it mind of overstepped a line we will * out the word and start a conversation with the member about it to try and make sure everyone understands what is going on What is so wrong with that |
||||||||
| cab |
I suspect (although I don't know) that a lot of the 'bad language' used here would be posted by people who didn't doubt its acceptability when they posted. Its just how some people talk much of the time. |
||||||||
| marigold |
People use the word for a particular kind of emphasis - I have absolutely no problem with proper use of it. For example my builder friend rarely swears, but when he does it is totally appropriate - such as the time he was hosing down my yard before painting the walls - the outside tap sheared off and a jet of ice-cold water caught him square on the buttocks and he yelled the F word. A perfectly permissible use of the word IMO. The idea that anyone says the F word to bolster their ego is ridiculous .
|
||||||||
| Bernie66 |
And alot isnt, and they do now.
As always a simple statement is being dragged through dictionary definition detail on every word for the sake of ego and semantics. Is there nothing better to do with spare time? |
||||||||
| cab |
I've read that over and over, and I don't get why you believe thats what I said. Can you explain please? I used that as an example showing that there is not one accepted code about bad language; there is language that I wouldn't use to a kid and language that someone else wouldn't use to a kid, but the two may not be the same. If you want to enforce one particular code then 'language you'd use to a child' isn't a clear descriptor.
I doubt very much whether Ofcom don't have a list; I remember seeing an interview with the 'stars' of one particular sit com, and the ofcom guidance to the BBC was that they could use the 'f' word once per series, they could use the 's' word so many more times, etc. That Ofcom have a rather more abridged set of guidance on their public site without listing such words that they don't want used is unsurprising
Can't always predict what'll cause offense? Maybe not, but I'll wager that you could easily come up with a list that would cover 90% or more.
Whats wrong with it is the assumption that 'common' sense is universally the same. If it were then this wouldn't arise; clearly the 'common sense' you're referring to that should guide language use is not universally agreed upon. Whats so wrong with the opposite view, that a short, simple list devised to deal with most obscene language would give clear guidance for posters and moderators? |
||||||||
| Rob R |
That example is neither a discussion nor in the written word though. I think that is where the difference is- what we write is more considered than whaty we say, as we don't have to hit 'post', but here we do. |
||||||||
| Jamanda |
The site has simple guidelines, put in place by the people who founded it. I can think of occasions within the last week or so where I've broken them, so it's good have a reminder of what they are. | ||||||||
| marigold |
Sadly not - I should be trotting off to the supermarket with a name that some people think is a swear word, but I'm much more interested in having a debate about the use of language and what offends people... I did note that Rob said "my gran", but as I don't know his gran and he didn't spell out his gran-guidelines, I have to base my views on the grans I do know .
|
||||||||
| cab |
$41n$bur7$? T€$c0? |
||||||||
| bodger |
If I smack my thumb with the hammer , then you bet I use foul language. There's definately a time and a place for it but on a forum thats open to all ? IMO definately not. | ||||||||
| cab |
For the most part I agree with you (although personally I'll not generally be offended by some rude words). Its all a matter of what is or isn't too foul really. |
||||||||
| bodger |
You're a man of the world Cab but not everybody is. DS is an inclusive forum and we should be catering for everyone .
Surely we can get our points across and our feelings felt without swearing, whilst a large percentage of people may be completely turned off by the use of expletives. |
||||||||
| cab |
Again, for the most part I agree. But I'll bet that you, like me, know plenty of people who swear a heck of a lot more and don't consider that a bad or offensive thing? And between that extreme and the other (someone who never cusses), there is every kind of person inbetween. Hence suggesting a list of words not to be used; I'll bet that'd easily cover 90% of instances where those who are offended might be. |
||||||||
| lettucewoman |
Can you "break" guidelines? Surely you can only break rules, and I'm a tad worried that these are actually rules we are talking not guidelines. (just playing devils advocate here...although I'm not sure a forum sould have "rules"...guidelines are one thing....) |
||||||||
| Rob R |
I would sincerely hope that upon meeting my gran, or any stranger, for the first time you would not swear (or use language that could possibly be regarded as swearing/offensive) at her and in that sense I think it is a perfectly clear guide to follow. |
||||||||
| Gervase |
I find it astonishing that someone could need a list of proscribed words before knowing what to post. 
If a poster hasn't the simple gumption to work out what might not be acceptable on an open, public forum which might be read by anyone of any age then they should perhaps step away from the keyboard and find something else to occupy their time. It really should be self-evident what is expected (as I write as someone who has been lacking in the appropriate graces in the past). |
||||||||
| lettucewoman |
...and yet your sig is deliberately formulated knowing that in a previous debate some people were unhappy about doing that to a sick chicken!! hmmmmm |
||||||||
| Treacodactyl |
You seem to be basing your argument on flawed assumptions. People have been asked to not use certain words in the past and they still use them. A list would not help and I'd guess in 99% of the cases be irrelevant. As has been said, most people should be able to use a little bit of common sense. We're not banning anyone or naming and shaming, just asking people to use a little bit of consideration for others. |
||||||||
| ros |
I think it's the grey area between those words which most people would agree shouldn't be used and maybe a few that 90% wouldn't think twice about using
if it were my gran I was talking to I'd not dare even say fudge, sugar or bliddy - been known to get a slap with the walking stick for all of those - "it's not what your mouth is saying it's the word you were thinking"
Can we just be careful - we have emoticons - they are a good replacement when you are cross about something
|
||||||||
| jema |
No one "needs" to post anything that might breach posting rules on language whatever those rules are, the desire to push any forums language guidelines is simply immature.
Whilst you might get the odd naughty outburst from the odd individual, by and large those that want to push the lines must know exactly that they are doing just that 
|
||||||||
| cab |
If moderation on such is inconsistent (which on this it always has been) and the line is wavy then people will overstep it, and yes, they'll perceive that the line has moved when they see others using language that they'd been asked not to. And then we'll end up with another polite request again in the future after probably getting someone elses back up for asking them not to use language that others have used, and the whole thing starts again. The other approach is to come up with something rather more clear. Of course a list will help in that. |
||||||||
| jema |
Lists don't deal with context, and sensible modding should be forgiving of someone who slips near the boundaries once in a blue moon. On the other hand create a list and someone can always write offensive posts without using words on the list. Lists just create sticks to beat the innocent, and give information for the abusive to use to manipulate the intention of the rules. | ||||||||
| cab |
Having a list of swear words doesn't make otherwise being an ass okay (I don't get that claim, why should it?), but it does mean that there is a more clear set of guidelines as to what is or is not permissible. Having a list also doesn't mean that it should be used to be used to beat up on people either, but it does give clear guidance for anyone wanting to moderate a post for language, and it gives advice to direct those who may have contravened the rules. The problem here is not that we get a lot of people cussing and swearing, the problem is that periodically the standard of language starts to fall, and without a clear set of guidance on moderating that this seems unavoidable; but I think its entirely needless. A simple 'this far and no further' list would solve that. |
||||||||
| jema |
Clearly it would not, it would just give barrack room lawyers a stick to try and beat with. I have never heard of lists being used successfully. | ||||||||
| Gervase |
Really? It would have to be a huge list to encompass all aspects of offensive posting. One doesn't have to resort to profanity to be unacceptably unpleasant. Perhaps, cab, if you feel so very strongly about this, you might like to draw up some moderation guidelines that we could chew over?
On second thoughts, maybe not. Imagine what a waste of time and bandwidth that debate would become by the time it reached 13 pages of multiple quoting and repeated rebuttal before it was locked... So. I repeat, if you have to sit down and think 'is this acceptable?', then walk away from the keyboard. I know common sense is seen as an oxymoron by some, but it shouldn't be difficult to work out what's OK. Would you say it to the face of a stranger to whom you've just been introduced by your mother? If that's too difficult, then don't post anything. The practical advice here is useful, but to be honest I couldn't give a tinker's cuss about half of what goes on in the 'chat' threads and the 'does it matter' threads. No-one's apercus are so precious that they have to be recorded on an internet forum. |
||||||||
| lettucewoman |
You wouldn't be able to give a tinkers cuss surely???
...I'll get me coat...... |
||||||||
| Frewen Feltmaker |
I haven't read all of this thread so I apologise if this point has been raised - But I think communication via the keyboard needs to be more considered than everyday speech.
It is so easy to read something with the wrong tone, and to add swearing to the mix exacerbates that problem even more so. I think any man or woman in the street, when trying to make a decent impression moderates their language, and the same should hold true when posting
|
||||||||
| Ian33568 |
You've got a games room, how about a swearing room......
|
||||||||
| Snowball |
Thank you F.F. a perfectly sensible summation, that is difficult to argue with. |