Petition to have the censor changed back to the old one.

Short answer, yes. I'll refer you back to Fenix's post;

And for the rest, I'll refer you back to Fenix's and my posts;

Looking at the reaction so far, I should probably explicitly inform everyone that the two previous statements are sarcastic. Also looking at the reaction so far, no-one will read this part of the post, everyone will take it seriously and rage even more.

 

Sarcasm?
REALLY?
I wouldn't have guessed that was sarcastic.

The effect is the same though, you are criticizing people for wanting their software to work out of the gate as opposed to being released with a side of flypaper like EA does it.


I ask again though, what was wrong with the previous censor?

 

and my posts were sarcasm too =]

badonkadons jizz-in-pants meaow lolzers ftw =]

 

I'll just thank the first guy.

 

Well judging from the fact that I had to repeat what had already been said twice before, I don't see you as being in a position to ridicule my overly explicit approach.

The gaming analogy simply does not hold. If you're particularly keen on it, then consider yourself as a participant in our Beta, so congratulations. Believe it or not, this forum isn't some huge company. If something new is to be implemented, there will more than likely be glitches, and there's absolutely nothing new about that at all. If you're truly finding it that hard to get over these temporary problems, then take a break from the forums. I'll email you myself when it's been fixed.

And yes, there was a problem with the previous language censor. The problem was that it didn't stop anything at all. Believe it or not, there's little difference between "**** YOU!" and it's uncensored counterpart. As such, simply asterisking the word fails to remove any insult or hostility, and there have been several examples in the past where arguments have escalated too far, resulting in members being offended by the language used by others, despite the fact that it was 'censored'. Case and point, the old censor didn't actually accomplish anything.

With this new system, if anyone goes so far as to swearing, the new censor will make a mockery of their post. It's a deterrent, not a cover-up. Hostility will instantly be dispersed, and insults will be reversed. The old censor didn't do that, so in answer to your question, that was what was wrong with the old censor, and this is why we have the new system.

Also, the only people hindered with this system will be the ones who are swearing, which is how it should have been in the first place. You're only at a loss if you're trying to use language that has been deemed inappropriate for these forums, and just because it has generally been lenient in the past doesn't mean it's alright to use that language. Again, the only reason anyone would have something against this change would be if they were wanting to use language that was deemed inappropriate for the forum, which is a direct violation of the rules anyway.

I'd also like to point out here that any attempts to bypass the language censor will be punished. Actions will be taken against any attempts to get around it, such as 's*lf c*nsoring' and putting tags in the middle. The language censor is in place for a reason, that reason being to censor language. If you're consciously trying to get around it purely so you're able to swear, not only are you a very sad individual, but you are consciously breaking the forum rules, and will reap the consequences.

 

I just think he wants to know WHY it was so neccesary to implement this. I would also like to know that, by the way. What's wrong with asterix signs? It's not like people were cursing a lot more lately. or finding ways around the cencor. There was nothing wrong with it. :s

Edit: just read the rest of Itzas post. If you honestly believe that mocking people will calm them down, then I think you made a big mistake. Further, at least you couldn't know for sure what people meant with the old version. Wheter you like it or not, it's now a lot less difficult to know what word somebody wanted to use. Altered or not, it's still there, and it's clearer then ever what it means.

Just warn people not to use language you think is out of line on these forums. If they don't listen, ban them for a while. Why mess with a system that has proved to work on hundreds of forums? Increasing the amount of cencoring just pisses people off, and makes them leave to other forums. Besides, are other sites of the .org network also implementing this?

 

Firstly, this is in the wrong section - it belongs in the site discussion board. Secondly, I would like to file an informal report of everybody who has misused thanks. I know you have the freedom to thank any post that you see fit, but this is just larking around; and more importantly, this is just to give people incentive to sign the petition, dark. That's like giving reps for everybody who voted in your public poll the way you wanted them. I suggest you take back all your thanks before possible consequences happen. Remember Christmas.

As for the topic, I myself find the current substitutions bad. I'm convinced that if the words to be put in by the censure rhymed with the word being filtered out (and would also be the same word category as the most common use of the word) it would get the point across to people who want to get it in a funny way, and at the same time do the job fine. I've posted this in the original discussion thread but I'll second it here as well that the filter should only censor complete words.

 

@ Aurora. People have been swearing and getting around the censors, and is a problem. Certain language has been deemed inappropriate for use on the site, and a censor that doesn't properly censor that language is pointless.

You've got it all backwards with the mockery. It's the people who are trying to verbally attack others who will be mocked and belittled, and so they should be. It's not as though the poster will see how they've been censored and will calm down, it's that the receiver will be protected from verbal abuse and an automatic punishment is issued for swearing at others.

As for not knowing what was meant before, it honestly doesn't take a genius to figure it out, and on top of that, the aggression still came through. As for now, no, it's not easier to . How are you saying it's easier when nothing more than a draft list has been made yet?

As for your last piece of advice, that's already started happening, from me, at least. Also, just because however many other forums, etc, use the default asterisk system, it doesn't mean it's the most effective system. Most would purely be used superficially. It doesn't actually deal with the problem of why language needs to be censored in the first place.

I seriously don't get why any of you would be angry unless you're wanting to swear at others. If you're not swearing, you've got nothing to worry about.

 

I just spend 20 minutes on typing a text wall here, but the stupid vb glitched again. Maybe I will type it again in the evening. For now I just want to say thank you for clearing this up. However, I still think this isn't the best method. I might pm or post it later, but now I'm not feeling lucky enough to avoid the glitch.

(Type something, go advanced, correct spelling, then post, it seems that I have a 30% chance of getting a blank screen with no way to recover my post. Must be caused by the latest Opera Mini server upgrade. Nothing I can do about it.)

 

It might not be the best method, but hopefully it will be better than the usual asterisks. Obviously, if it isn't, it can be changed back, but that's the point of testing it.

Sorry to hear about the glitch. Usually just hitting 'Back' recovers it for me, but if not, I'd advise getting into a habit of copying your posts before sending them, or perhaps going to Advanced first might help. If not, it's probably best to get a spellcheck add-on, so you don't have to check it via the Advanced menu.

If you decide to type it up again, I'll try not to nitpick, so you don't have to go into the same level of detail as you would have had before.

 

Going "back" brings back my text, but it just gives me the blank screen again after pressing post. Very annoying. Perhaps I should make it a habit not to type in the quick reply box. :/

Anyway, second try of typing this. Still going to be shorter then my first attempt, but it should be good enough. Let my parents walk the dog today...

The problem with having a cencor system in place, is that it doesn't completely remove foul language. It's that simple. No matter how you cover it up, the words are still there. Compare it to cat food. The packaging looks innocent and good enough to pick up, but you know damn well what disgusting goo is trapped inside.

I would go for the Dutch system, as I like to call it. No cencor at all in this country. Not in written for, nor on the news. When a person goes to far, he or she is given a warning by the authoroties. (not going to check my spelling this time) The words won't be covered up. It's called freedom of speech. However, the situation changes after a warning. The authorities keep a close eye on that person. Nothing will be published without permission, or he will be cut off from writing in public sources. Want to continue? Start your own blog or magazine.

This can also be applied on vbulletin boards. I have done it myself in the past. When a person goes to far, give a warning. Crossing the line again? Then go to the admin control panel, and check "needs mod permission". Not sure if it's written exactly like that, been a while since I was an active mod.

That basically prevents posts from a person to show up right away. A mod first reads it, then it will be up to the mod to allow the post. Or not, obviously. If the user makes QUALITY posts for a while(( (not random banter, even without foul language) let the user post by itself again. Going bad again? Banhammer!

 

yo the old asterisks may be back but i dun remember seeing this problem b4:

assuming
class

 

*does the dance*
It posted. Finally.

One more thing to explain. You might ask: why go through all that trouble? Well, that's simple. People won't notice what's going on. Instead of being bothered by semi-cencored words all the time, mods make sure that it simply doesn't get the chance to be posted again. People see the language, and know the matter is being taken care of. This prevents others from posting even more offensive words in return. Further, it allows for a more personal approach. People know that there isn't going to be a computer that's going to cencor them. If you go to far, the mods will come for you, and you WILL be in trouble

Compare it to speeding tickets. Paying a fine isn't that big of a deal to most people. Nobody comes to talk to them and tell them why they are wrong. Automated responses lead to repeating the samd mistakes over and over again. That's how countries make money.
That changes when you force people to think, talk to them, and let them know they are being watched. Like when people are send to an AA meeting or something similar. It changes their behaviour, instead of just punishing them over and over again.

So I hope I made myself clear this time. Cencoring might be easy, but it's ineffective in the long run. Invest some time in a problem to make it go away, instead of trying to find an easy way around the problem. It's what makes the difference between a community where people can be friends, and one where people get annoyed over time, and then explode at each other. I have seen it happen more often then I would like.

 

I got down repped for this? Seriously?

Also, the reason I hate it so much, is I copied a AIM log of a friend and I, and posted it, he was naturally pretty angry at what happened, but I was in hysterics. The censor, so screwed up the meaning of that post, that people were laughing at that, instead of the actual meaning itself. And formatting it afterwards was annoying.

 

Wow I was expecting a better reasoning than that. A censor is not there to stop a textual assault on another member. A censor is there to censor out words people believe to be inappropriate. To actually censor arguments and verbal assaults requires intelligence which currently can't be given to a computer system at the moment, so all you are doing right now is making things worse for us. I was under the impression that the job of moderators were to moderate

Verb

to moderate (third-person singular simple present moderates, present participle moderating, simple past and past participle moderated)
(transitive) To reduce the excessiveness of (something)
(intransitive) To become less excessive
(transitive) To preside over (something) as a moderator
(intransitive) To act as a moderator; to assist in bringing to compromise

If people get into a shouting match, you aren't supposed to make a censor that blocks their screams, you are supposed to give the offenders a whack upside the head those, and warn them to shut the hell up before you ban them for breaking forum rules. I should also point out that censoring does not change a verbal attack. Even if it says, "Well, I have no pants you" people will know that is the censor working, and they will know someone just posted a verbal assault; in fact the person being assaulted might respond in kind, which does nothing to fix the situation. Besides, in the statement "**** you!" the **** part is usually not the part that is offensive, the whole of that sentence is offensive due to its intent, and no amount of censoring can remove intent

Bad programming is no substitute for good moderation. I understand you can't be omnipresent and omniscient, but you are going to have to do what you can, if you can't do that, then talk to Jon and have him appoint some section mods to help. If you aren't willing to do that then step down and have Jon appoint someone who is willing.



Anyways, bad ideas aside, the main reason I am annoyed is because the censor you picked is very badly programmed. Right now it censors the middles of words, see my first post in the topic, assault is censored, what kind of crap is that?

 

Should I point out you guys are now beating a dead horse? The mod was implemented because someone suggested it and we thought it sounded like a good idea. Jon found a mod and implmented it. It didn't work how it was suppose to (it made every post lower case beyond everything else), add to that DNS problems that were preventing him from even trying to fix it and you have the beggining of the problem. I did what I could to reprogram the mod so it was case insensitive so it would atleast have a fair chance at evaluation. Obviously it needs some more work to run perfectly and we are currently back to the old censor until I or Jon can put in the nessecary work (which is somewhat low on our priority list given what we are currently working on).

 

Well obviously I dislike it for the other bits too, but what I said was a last straw sort of thing. Know what I mean?

Good luck trying to get them to appoint section mods, I've suggested it multiple times, suggested specific people, just plain asked for moderation of some specific area. No effect. So just stop wasting your energy there.

Edit: -facesmashes LK for posting during the time that he posted-

I realize that it's gone, but the discussion is still going on. You can't actually expect people to stop discussing something cause of a temporary change can you?

 

Well it's permanent until we have someting that can emulate the current level of censorship (including a better word bank, I didn't like the words replaced with sentences either). if I coould find the PHP for the current vb censor I could easily emulate it, but that is not to high on the prioirty list and it doesn't take into account the bad word replacement bank either.

 

wait wait wait...

what was the new censor?

 

It changed foul language into weird sentences that insulted the person who cursed. It kinda backfired.