Arwen-Undomiel.com
http://arwen-undomiel.com/forum/

A-U Revival: staff/administration
http://arwen-undomiel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=21130		 Page 3 of 5
Author:  ErulissëEnethNîn [ January 21st, 2011, 4:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
An idea though might be to make the forum PG-13. After all, that's the rating for the Lord of the Rings films and it wouldn't surprise me if the Hobbit follows suit.

I'm not saying that 'adult talk' should be allowed on the board, but it's kind of a pain being closer to 30 than 20 and have to mind what I say to the extent that I might as well be a kindergarten teacher. Again, I'm not saying the board should be all 'mature' all of a sudden, but it would be nice to be able to talk to your peers like you would talk to your peers. Most of us are adults, or on the verge of becoming adults.

And while I can understand swear words being censored, do we really need to keep the censor on LM@O?
Author:  Johnny's Fan [ January 21st, 2011, 4:46 pm ]
Post subject: 
Lol, yes. There are some words censored which I find quite amusing. I've never understood why the alternative word for a mule or someone's bottom is considered a beeped word. :teehee:

But if removing certain words from the censored list then means people would want other more offensive words removed as well and a whole "why one rule for one and one for another", then it probably won't be worth it. But I can't see that happening personally.
Author:  Aramel Elyanwe [ January 21st, 2011, 4:57 pm ]
Post subject: 
I also never understood why the word "cr.ap" is beeped out either - I've been using that word for as long as I can remember. :teehee: I think just the silly little words like that should be allowed, but no full-on cursing. :no: And also, PG-13 would be a welcome change from PG, in my opinion.
Author:  ErulissëEnethNîn [ January 21st, 2011, 5:27 pm ]
Post subject: 
I think there is quite a clear line as to what words would be ok to 'uncensor' and what words should remain censored. If we're going to change it to PG-13, one could always look at each censored word and go "would this be ok in a PG-13 film?". The f-word, the s-word and the c-words for the male and female genitalia are obviously going to remain censored and anything else of equally vulgar or obscene character. I just don't think @ss and cr@p are censor-worthy. Not even d@mn, but I might be alone there, haha.
Author:  Larael [ January 22nd, 2011, 1:17 am ]
Post subject: 
ErulissëEnethNîn wrote:
I think there is quite a clear line as to what words would be ok to 'uncensor' and what words should remain censored. If we're going to change it to PG-13, one could always look at each censored word and go "would this be ok in a PG-13 film?". The f-word, the s-word and the c-words for the male and female genitalia are obviously going to remain censored and anything else of equally vulgar or obscene character. I just don't think @ss and cr@p are censor-worthy. Not even d@mn, but I might be alone there, haha.


Wonderfully said, Eru. [And I certainly don't think you're alone on d@mn. ;) ]
Author:  Caunion cyn Britannia [ January 22nd, 2011, 2:02 am ]
Post subject: 
Now that this has been brought up, it does make you wonder what words are censored and what aren't.

Having just tested it, you guys do realise that after me thinking the first fourteen derogatory insults off the top of my head, only one was censored. I tried seven racial slurs, three homophobic insults, one word that actually means the one that's censored (someone who masturbates), two words that describes an idiot, and a bodily function that gets rid of excess nitrogen. Now what concerns me is that words like "d@mn" and "cr@p" are censored but words that actually do insult people's identity, whatever they may be, aren't.

For those who are curious, I used words that described an Italian-American, a Chinese-American, an African-American, a British, a Japanese, and a Pakistani. Okay granted, almost all of them with the exception of three have another definition and I highly doubt anyone is going to call anyone here racial slurs but it is worth looking at it.

Oh and yes, I used the "n-word".
Author:  Johnny's Fan [ January 22nd, 2011, 2:24 am ]
Post subject: 
In all the years I have been here on AU and someone has swore and earned a beep, you can read the line and tell what the beeped word was. Never have I ever realised the beeped word was a racial insult or something personal.

I mean, that would be just too much to cover. People swear. It's a very, very common thing ranging from kids stuff to more obscene things. I don't believe personal insults are going to be used to the point where words have to be censored in case of. Has it ever happened here? With all the different people we have had passing through all these years?

Personally, I would just presume that Arwen has got all the obscene ones covered, the ones that could be used in a nasty way towards members and ones that may offend.
Author:  Caunion cyn Britannia [ January 22nd, 2011, 3:14 am ]
Post subject: 
Umm, JF, I'm sorry but I did try the most obscene ones and those flew right past the radar.

I know some words like "guinea" or "tan", derogatory words for an Italian American and a British respectively, won't be censored simply because they also mean other things. But unless someone really wants to use an Old English word for kindling, I see no reason why "faggot" shouldn't be censored.

ALSO! I tried other slang words for referring to the *beep* and vagina. You'll be surprised what you can get away with calling people here.... Food for thought!
Author:  Aredhel Ar-Feiniel [ January 22nd, 2011, 3:28 am ]
Post subject: 
Caunion cyn Britannia wrote:
ALSO! I tried other slang words for referring to the *beep* and vagina. You'll be surprised what you can get away with calling people here.... Food for thought!

Well they're also synonyms for a rooster or a cat. Maybe someone just loves using those words... instead of rooster... or cat. Lololo
Author:  Eä [ January 22nd, 2011, 4:20 am ]
Post subject: 
Interesting study, Caunion. :P

I don't think there has been a problem with name-calling over the recent years - and if there were that would have been a pretty clear offense anyway. And this is probably why those words haven't been censored. It isn't so much the actual words but how you use them in a sentence. ;)

I wouldn't mind that we had a group going over the censored words though, once we get the list. Just 3-4 people with different opinions to check the list again to see if it needs updating. You guys seem to have a reasonable discussion on it. :)
Author:  Will [ January 22nd, 2011, 8:27 am ]
Post subject: 
Caunion cyn Britannia wrote:
I know some words like "guinea" or "tan", derogatory words for an Italian American and a British respectively, won't be censored simply because they also mean other things. But unless someone really wants to use an Old English word for kindling, I see no reason why "faggot" shouldn't be censored.


Perhaps all those words to insult people are not censored, because such insults are not tolerated here anyway. So if someone would swear or insult in such a way, it might only happen once because he/she would be warned right away by the mods.
While words, that are censored, might actually be frequently used in some 'innocent' conversations, but just are censored for the sake that it's not appropriate on here.. ;)
Author:  Johnny's Fan [ January 22nd, 2011, 12:42 pm ]
Post subject: 
No Frosty. I meant the obscene swear words that are you know, the normal ones as it were. I don't believe everyone will even know the words you typed.

^ I agree with you Will. I'm guessing most of the censored words are ones that would crop up in conversations and are beeped because some may not like the language.
Author:  Arwen the webmaster [ January 22nd, 2011, 9:35 pm ]
Post subject: 
Thoughts, if you want them.

Having added my share of the censored words to the current filter something like six years ago, I can safely say that my personal standards for what I'd now deem censor-worthy have certainly changed. Obviously the (former) moderating team has had varying levels of comfort with swearing, so some things that some moderators didn't necessarily find offensive were added to the filter by others who did object. On the subject of racial slurs that are "usable" (as well as any other possibly-offensive terms that aren't censored), I can only say that it's probably because most of us didn't think of those terms off the top of our heads (aww, we were such an innocent bunch :teehee: ), or that we've never had the issue of anyone using them.

So, this isn't my domain anymore (haha! domain! domain name! wow, I'm a dork...), but just as a side note, I would be perfectly comfortable with your choosing to take some of the currently censored words out of the censor (d@mn, cr@p, etc.). The average age of A-U members has certainly increased, and I don't think many people would be offended by this change (although The Hobbit will bring in a new generation of fans, some on the youngish side - some of them probably weren't even BORN when FotR came out, how's that for a scary thought to make you feel ancient...). And if you want to make it a PG-13 forum, then by all means look up language standards for PG-13 movies and use those as a basis for what people can and cannot say. (As another side note, current internet laws in at least the US say that a child under 13 can't give out personal information without parental consent, which means no joining forums. The current A-U signup form requires that new members under 13 obtain this consent before joining, but changing the rules to "no members under 13 period" isn't really much of a shift.)

On the topic of administration in general, I still suggest that you make clear what sort of rules/guidelines you'll be following before anyone considers becoming a moderator. Becoming a moderator because you want to see a bunch of changes in the way the forum is run and think you have the best shot changing it from the inside causes issues. It's never been pleasant when we've had moderators go against the team and start to moderate things according to their personal standards :(
Author:  Eruraina [ January 22nd, 2011, 11:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
Glad to see you helping us out here, Arweb!

With the subject of the blocked out words. When it comes to ratings, it seems like even those have changed and become more lax. Like what would have been considered a rated R movie way back when(no specific time period on purpose) might be rated PG-13 today. Or at least that's what it seems like. So I like Arweb's suggestion of looking up what exactly rates a movie, at least when it comes to the swearing. My personal opinion would be not to mess with the blocked words. BUT that might be because I grew up in a household that didn't care for swearing and because I'm probably one of the youngest to be contributing to the conversation, and I'm pretty sure the youngest in all the revival threads.

^And your part about the age made me chuckle in a guilty way because I was a few months short of being 13 when I joined the forum... though I did have parental consent. But I do know some kids that fake their age on websites to be able to join and other things. So unless people fess up their age, this rule is really hard, if impossible, to enforce.

So far, though, the only thing about the rules that has been discussed to want change is the beeped out words, and the rule about discussing politics/religion. And I"m pretty sure I've stated how I feel about both subjects now...
Author:  Tar-Vanimelde [ January 23rd, 2011, 8:39 pm ]
Post subject: 
I don't know how helpful looking up the PG-13 rules will be, since those ratings allow the f-bomb to be dropped twice a movie, along with certain other words that wouldn't be appropriate. I definitely agree with the words that have been mentioned, however.

However, I don't think any other rules should be changed. THey've worked out very well so far.
Author:  Eruraina [ January 26th, 2011, 1:57 pm ]
Post subject: 
@Tar: True true.



Okay, so... should we maybe get a list of members together willing to be mods/leaders so that the current mods/admin can maybe "interview" them to see if they fit the bill to be new mods.
Page 3 of 5 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/