Plusnet - Please overhaul the swear filter?

[#1]

I came across this one on tbb and I wondered how this swear filter would handle it http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1087858/Wild-cat-blamed-28-sheep-die-string-bloody-attacks.h... and it doesn't bother it unlike the tbb swear filter

[#2]

Quote from: techguy

I think it is but remember that PN is, when all is said and done a business and so things have to be put in place to prevent offence to users or damage to PN's reputation or worse, lanfing them in legal hot water. While you or I (along with most of the users of the forum) use it responsibly and would  not dream of doing such a thing, you have to legislate for the minority that would so I suppose I can see both sides. What we don't want to happen is for the rules to be relaxed, someone to cause an issue (who may register just because the rules have been relaxed and they just want to sound off) and the facility to just be withdrawn or us to lose the goodwill of the comms team and others who contribute to solve our problems or just generally engage with us, right?

I don't necessarily want to relax the rules and despite what some appear to think I am not campaigning on the basis of getting one word removed from the filter.
I don't think it is unreasonable for users to want to have some say in how the forum is censored, we all know that there are words that probably don't need to be included in the filter and there are some not in the filter that should be!
I am not happy that the review has taken place behind closed doors when it was meant to be open to interested parties. It is definitely beginning to look like a case of 'All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others'.

[#3]

It's ultimately up to PN as it runs on their system.
I suppose its just a case of watch this space.

[#4]

I would have thought the best part of 2.5 months was long enough for space watching.

[#5]

I agree wholeheartedly but nothing can really move forward now without PN staff intervention if the mods consider it done and dusted.

[#6]

I'm a relative newcomer to these forums, even though I've been with PN for years. I've always preferred usenet, which to me is like running free as compared to wading through the treacle of forums 
I have the greatest respect for Chilly and the other mods. I wouldn't have the patience to do that job. But fortunately there are no moderators as such on usenet. And the PN Ngs are free of abuse and trolling even without them.
Just checked, and I can use that B word in it's proper context with no problem in the Ngs......

[#7]

I think (but do not know) that they wanted to make this a bit more sanitised than usenet so a kid could not stumble over anything objectionable.

[#8]

Quote from: techguy

I think (but do not know) that they wanted to make this a bit more sanitised than usenet so a kid could not stumble over anything objectionable.

I object to the word "kid" being used in this context.

[#9]

Having words blocked by the swear filter doesn't actually prevent anyone using these forums. On the other hand, allowing words to be used which some people find offensive would definitely be a problem. The other problem of course is that as the filter looks at individual words and not the context. The moderators have stated (and there's no reason to disbelieve them) that the word concerned has been used in an inappropriate manner in the archived forums. Before the word could be removed from the filters it would be necessary for all 560429 posts already made on these forums to be checked and edited if necessary.
Filtering needs to be at a level where only the abnormally sensitive would object. A committee to agree whether words to be banned or not is a good idea, but anyone who is pushing for words to be removed from the filter should be automatically barred from being on the committee. We should think in terms of having a range of people so that if there are objections Plusnet can point to due diligence - so I'd like to see it include a clergyman, a primary school teacher, at least one woman past retirement age, etc.
Quite frankly I think it shows that some people are being exceptionally childish when this topic has gone to seven pages and I hope that it's stopped soon. Having given their decision I'd urge the moderators to lock this topic.

[#10]

sorry should have said child, ok geewizz?

[#11]

dont see whats wrong with Kid - from the New Oxford Dictionary - the big one!

[#12]

Apology accepted, Mitch.
Perhaps kay aye dee should be added to the swearfilter.

[#13]

To continue the childish debate...... If the problem is the archive, do we actually need the archive to be available to everybody? On my own forum I have threads that are kept for reference by the Admin & Mods, but the general members can't see them. If someone wants access to the archive it is easy to grant permission. May be something for consideration.

[#14]

I think geewizz just likes a bit of mental jousting.
He's an argumentative little blighter  :), bit like me at times.

[#15]

no he's not