It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

About the vulgarity automatic censor

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by toreishi
how come a thread about posting the word sh¡t gets many replies when there are lots of good threads out there that deserve to be discussed more.


Not sure why it matters where people post. To each their own to post where they chose.
I personally have spent enough time on serious threads today, that a little light hearted thread is good for my mind.

With that said...you do see the very obvious irony in your response, right?!
edit on February 12th 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 12:19 AM
link   


just wanted to illustrate to the OP that if he/she really wants to get his/her point across, then there are ways to get around the vulgarity censor without making a big deal about it. or maybe that's just me, then again; i'm just not the type who keeps whining & complaining.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 02:19 AM
link   
Ahh I remember the good old days of vulgarity censorship (not on ATS), I could never write my home county without it being censored, it always came out #bria



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 03:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by toreishi


just wanted to illustrate to the OP that if he/she really wants to get his/her point across, then there are ways to get around the vulgarity censor without making a big deal about it. or maybe that's just me, then again; i'm just not the type who keeps whining & complaining.


I'm afraid that you missed one of the points. If I write in a more scientific style on a subject and quote a word in another language, am I supposed to change the spelling from what it really is in that language?

In the case I mentioned at the start it was, though, a Hebrew word. Am I supposed to use Hebrew letters that only few readers can read? And why should I not use a transliteration that scholars generally use, and even comments to the Bible? By the way, I wonder how many Biblical names would have to be "de-effed" ... Are we now to wait for "The New American Deeffed Bible"?

No, my friend, this goes quite a bit further than your comment. It has a wider scope. And why should we have to violate common spellings, anyway, to get the message through? One of the few non-eff words I know to say about this is simply: RIDICULOUS!



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 03:42 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by memyself
 


It's a small price to pay to protect the young ones from vulgarities,or those easily offended.

Also, its not that difficult to add a space or an apostrophe to a word, people will still understand what it is supposed to say.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 03:47 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by woogleuk
 


And the kids will not understand it? Quite naive ...
Protection against what? The reality of life?
Replacing it with an illusion?
What good would that do?
Nonsense ...

Furthermore you too miss the point above about truncated foreign-language words or some specific (scientific) terms.

edit on 12-2-2011 by memyself because: completion



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 04:16 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 04:40 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 04:44 AM
link   
i think i get what you're saying now. still and all, i think we're better off with the way the censor is being implemented on this site compared to the gently caressed up profanity filter on the somethingawful forum.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by woogleuk
 


Glad that I can learn from you, since you seem to know more "dirty" words than me.
Even St. James' Bible doesn't have that one in any combination.

edit on 12-2-2011 by memyself because: correction



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 05:04 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 07:21 AM
link   
I think the problem is related to net filters, but having used or even seen one working I am not sure.

From what I understand, if some words are found in a site that site may be added to a list of blocked sites, and then everyone behind that filter will be unable to see any page from that site.

But I may be wrong, as I said, I am not sure about the way those filters work.

PS: and you can write Beresh‍it, if you know how to do it.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 07:32 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Bereshìt

Yup, lol.


EDIT: OK, sort of.............
edit on 12/2/11 by woogleuk because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 09:12 AM
link   
I think the entire argument for a vulgarity censor is destroyed by phrases like the following:

I rather think that you sir, in the politest possible manner, should go and copulate vigorously with a handsaw, you halfwitted, slackjawed, dulleyed ,barely sentient genetic failiure.

I do believe, that there is nothing that could get taken out by censor alone in that phrase, although I agree it would likely result in a T&C violation if a mod were to come across it in a thread. However, Im sure we are capable of agreeing that while containing no words which are in of themselves rude , it is a thoroughly gross and insulting phrase.



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 12:58 AM
link   
There was a time in Sweden, some 100 years ago, when people, who considered themselves to be "finer" than others, used to call underpants for the woman as "unmentionables" ... Do we want to go back to such medieval idiocy?

Why should someone who talks in such a ridiculous manner be "finer" than others?
Maybe he or she just has a kind of mental disorder ... a kind of "negative Tourette syndrome" ...
Not having an urge to utter certain words, but instead to avoid them ... but just as pathological then ...

edit on 13-2-2011 by memyself because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 05:34 AM
link   
I watched a really funny film some time back called "Kenny", it was fictional, but made to look like a real documentary. They followed this Australian Portaloo (festival toilet) cleaner round his area and documented his exploits.

Anyway, there was a bit in it where he explained where the word s# came from, don't know if it's true or not, but basically in the olden days, when they used to transport manure on ships, if water got in it used to cause gases to leak from the manure and if some poor soul went down into the cargo hold with a naked flame it would cause a big explosion. So what they started doing was marking the containers with "Store High In Transit", and thats where we get S# from. True? I don't know. Funny? Yup.


I recommend the film if you can find it.



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by woogleuk
 


I don't think it's true, most of those "explanations" forget that we can trace back almost all words.

For more information look here.

PS: we can even learn something on a thread about an automatic censor.



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Nice one Ar
This bit made me chuckle.................




The expression [TSHTF] is related to, and may well derive from, an old joke. A man in a crowded bar needed to defecate but couldn't find a bathroom, so he went upstairs and used a hole in the floor. Returning, he found everyone had gone except the bartender, who was cowering behind the bar. When the man asked what had happened, the bartender replied, 'Where were you when TSHTF?' [Hugh Rawson, "Wicked Words," 1989]




top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join