Ramza Edit: Hello, Modly Squad types, and other JCers For many years, the boards have been a place where people for whom unbiblical words are second nature fear to tread. The justification was sound; the intent was to have a "family friendly" forum, for people aged 13 and up. However, in the period since the establishment of the boards, the online landscape has substantially changed. Primarily, I of course refer to Facebook's rise - the social media giant that has changed the way we interact online. Like here, the age requirement for Facebook is 13 years - I understand due in no small part to some US regulations? In any event, it doesn't matter - innately, Facebook does not instinctively censor profanity for a largely similar age demographic. It does, however, have options available for people to filter out content that might be offensive. I'm not of the view people who dislike swearing ought, instinctively, be forced to view it on a forum where participation acts as a release from the daily grind. It ought, instead, be an enjoyable experience for all. I also have been made aware of a number of studies inferring a correlation between words that make the baby Jesus cry, and creativity/intellect. In other words, some people swear, some don't. Can we not find a scenario that better caters to both? The current format is swearing by implication. In practical terms, "**** off" has one of two four letter words that can apply, both of which most if not all of the people reading this have already given name to in their head. So it's not that we've avoided swearing; we've just removed the location of the word to people's head, from the page. Using Facebook, or other forms of online interaction (MMOs and other video games, comments sections of most media outlets or, ew, YouTube, Twitter et al), as an example can we look at the site owner's appetite to change the policy so the following occurs: 1. The profanity ban is lifted 2. An addon is employed* that filters out profanity 3. The default setting is "on" for said filter, and 4. Users need to opt out of a profanity filter? * All this is based on the assumption that such a filter exists The counterpoint to this is, "well, don't use swear words." OK, but - it's ridiculous to try to morally police how people speak when the use of profanity has been shown to enhance certain people's creative and verbal processes. We currently de facto allow it, because context and experience translates the asterisks into actual words. We just de jure disallow it. It's bull****, in other words, that we disallow it for family reasons since everyone said the brown word in their heads while reading that censored text. Thoughts?