MS Update for Week Ending 6/25/03

Well I'll bow out because I have no interest in participating in this.

 

Learner, you're not helping.

Sapient, since there is no way at all that the rule will be changed, why was it changed in the first place? The acronym was aloud for so long, who decided one day that it should be made against the rules? If it was Josh, does he have the final word over evrything?

I have no interest in participating in Drama.

Since when was this drama? It has been a discussion, and always will be.


Edit-Spelling

 

Whether or not it was allowed before doesn't really matter. It's not allowed now. And besides, why do so many people want to push towards the crude when we see it in just about every corner of life?

 

Sapient, please understand this, I've said it a lot, I am not asking for a crude board. I never said I want to be able to curse up a storm, and never wanted to take a Jay and Silent Bob approach to it, I'm merely questioning why a harmless acronym was banned.

 

Since when was this drama? It has been a dicussion, and always will be.

it's 'drama' for those who WANT it to be 'drama'. :rolleyes

There are plenty of places to talk with a potty mouth and about Star Wars at the same time if you so desire. But this isn't one of those places. So please lean more towards the choir boy talk even if it takes a bit of effort to do so. That's the rule.

sape, i know that. but i think specific aspects of the rule are unreasonable.

i also think you are being too 'black and white' about it all. people aren't asking for a crude messageboard, people are asking for reasonable censorship of language.



and now i must get back to working on my plan to takeover the world... mwahahahalololo etc. etc.

 

this is exactly what i was saying!
no one here denies the validity of the swear word ban on THESE boards.........as has been mentioned by myself, and others it is the policy of this board and lucasfilm in relation to Star Wars.........but that is entirely different from banning words that imply a connection with the actual bad words.......

now tell me this, does the administration have a problem with the emotion that a swear word conveys, or merely the fact that it is accepted as "bad language" by the public at large?

because as i see it, wtf is a polite way of saying something that is generally not seen as a polite word..........now to me, a perhaps foolish person this should be encouraged.......if you can stop people using crude language, and instead using words or phrases that are deemed polite, this should be a good thing?

it seems to me that a policy to ban by implication is petty (not implying that the administrators themselves are petty) in that it will cause annoyence beyond any possible utility it might bring while creating work where it is not necessary.......do you really want to have to moderate the way people think? always looking for negative implications in language or tone? if that is your idea of productive use of your time, then so be it

 

Why do you need to have the f word in any form? What thought can you not express some other way using the +/- 1,000,000 other words in the English language?

Now if we were taking away your ability to say "the" or "a" or "Gandolf is teh cool," I could understand the problem. But the f word and its derivatives? ? Give me a break.

 

no, give ME a break...

Why do you need to have the f word in any form? What thought can you not express some other way using the +/- 1,000,000 other words in the English language?

meaningless. has no bearing on the real issue. if anything it's a cop out. yet you guys keep repeating it.

Now if we were taking away your ability to say "the" or "a" or "Gandolf is teh cool," I could understand the problem. But the f word and its derivatives? ? Give me a break.

again, meaningless. that is a piss poor opposing argument.

you say people shouldn't have any problem making antiseptic posts, and i say PEOPLE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO MAKE ANTISEPTIC POSTS TO BEGIN WITH.

you're right, i can talk in a manner that would never ever be anything less than peachy and sunday school appropriate. is anyone even arguing against that point?

just because it is possible to obey a rule does not make that rule reasonable. there is no difference between typing 'WTF' and typing '***'. they are both censored versions of the same idea, they imply the same thing and they both imply profanity. yet the former is breaking a rule...an unreasonable rule.

i don't think there has yet been a good solid arguement in support of this rule that wasn't predicated on 'because josh said so' or 'you should be able to obey his rule'. speaking of Teh Josh, why doesn't he come out and explain (convincingly) his adamant desire for this ridiculous, unreasonable, and unnecessary rule? no, he has no obligation to do so, but it would be nice to see if the guy has any clue what people are saying about this rule and if he can argue for his own rule. i have no respect for people who say 'because i said so' as the reason for something. i'm sure there are many people here who would like to hear from the man himself about why he thinks this rule is necessary and not unreasonable and ridiculous.

 

PiaS, you hit the nail on the head with that last paragraph, nice job.

Why do you need to have the f word in any form? What thought can you not express some other way using the +/- 1,000,000 other words in the English language?

I highy doubt that if I threw in any of the million words that barely any would make sense in context. Try "What the ****" for example. Would replacing the F word with "car" make any sense? "What the car?" How about "What the vanilla?".

Speaking of ridiculous rules made by Josh, what's with the Slash rule? It's a damn shame that someone who owns such a successful website has such hypocritical views on the matter.

 

Speaking of ridiculous rules made by Josh, what's with the Slash rule?

I've found through experience that arguing with religious people about such things is a waste of time.

Josh is as Josh does. There is nothing we can do about it.

 

PiaS: I agree completely with your last post.

-Evan

 

what's with the Slash rule? It's a damn shame that someone who owns such a successful website has such hypocritical views on the matter.

bring up slash and this thread will be closed. Just thought you should know.





about acronyms: yes, they're short ways of saying nasty and evil things that corrupt people's minds. But the whole point of them is so you don't *have* to post the nasty and evil things that corrupt people's minds. Besides for the fact that one f-word does not an R-rating make.



P.S.: Can you please ask Josh if it wouldn't be too much trouble for him to post on his own board? kthxbye.

 

What thought can you not express some other way using the +/- 1,000,000 other words in the English language?

No one is arguing to be allowed to use "****." However, the thought expressed is one that can't even come close to being replicated by the rest of the English language. When someone swears, you generally take notice, because it conveys more than "clean" words alone can. That's the whole point of swearing.

"WTF," however, has been internet slang forever and, at this point, people post it not even realizing that it might be against the rules. It's not done with any malice. It's done to convey roughly the same meaning as swearing without actually swearing.

Amazing.

 

Looks like another textbook case of the over-moderation the JC is suffering from.

Can't you guys find more productive ways to spend your time than patrolling the boards for acronyms like "WTF"? Surely this isn't anything vaguely resembling a pressing issue? ?

Edit: speeling

 

I think of WTF as the equivalent of "shoot" or"freak".
_jOBO

 

[image=http://www.thebaronsmen.org/graphics/Much%20Ado%20About%20Nothing.jpg]

 

Peace! I will stop your mouth.

 

> Surely this isn't anything vaguely resembling a pressing issue?

Pressing enough for you to take time to comment on it.

As you will recall, having been a mod when the discussion took place, it was something the site owner asked us to moderate. As it happens I'd already decided it wasn't to be used in the games forum, so it didn't effect my moderatin in the slightest.

No-one actively wastes time looking for 'wtf' to moderate, but if it is found while reading the boards it is edited. It takes about 5 seconds per time, and eventually (as in games) people get the idea and write 'wth' instead.

 

"As you will recall, having been a mod when the discussion took place...."

No, I don't remember it or commenting on it because it's seems like such a non-event I've erased it from my memory and replaced it far more important material....like the recipe for zesty potato and salmon rissoles.

Isn't that "wth" offensive to Christians jp-30? ?

 

"i don't think there has yet been a good solid arguement in support of this rule that wasn't predicated on 'because josh said so' or 'you should be able to obey his rule'. speaking of Teh Josh, why doesn't he come out and explain (convincingly) his adamant desire for this ridiculous, unreasonable, and unnecessary rule? no, he has no obligation to do so, but it would be nice to see if the guy has any clue what people are saying about this rule and if he can argue for his own rule. i have no respect for people who say 'because i said so' as the reason for something. i'm sure there are many people here who would like to hear from the man himself about why he thinks this rule is necessary and not unreasonable and ridiculous."


I agree with this too. This comes off as an arbitrary exercise of power. Let's see how many people jump through this hoop!

On one hand moderators are asking us to post like reasonable, mature adults but on the other we're being treated like children by parents who would come down harshly on a 5 minute curfew violation.

So why should we act like adults if we're not respected as such?

A lot of people come on the internet because they feel this is a place for honest (which is sometimes cruel) and open discussion. We already have enough rules in the real world that dictate what you can and can't say. Since when did the "anonymous" world of the Internet become such a place where the slightest remark earns the strongest rebuke?

If this is a genuine Star Wars community I'd like to believe that our thoughts and feelings matter in some way.

 

> Isn't that "wth" offensive to Christians jp-30?

No.

 

Isn't that "wth" offensive to Christians jp-30?


Well this is one Christian who isn't offended by "wth". But I fail to see what point you're trying to make.

 

The standards have never changed; was in effect when I came here in 2000. There was a lax in enforcement at one time, but it wasn't used that much back then. Now, it's become a situation.

 

Spike: The point is clear. Why replace something that may offend a few people with something that may offend a few people? Why say "This might offend parents, don't say it" with "This might offend Christians but feel free to say it instead".

There's always going to be someone somewhere that doesn't agree.

 

> There's always going to be someone somewhere that doesn't agree.

So be it. A line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere.