Active Users:410 Time:04/03/2026 08:50:03 PM
That's a good point of course ironclad Send a noteboard - 22/11/2010 11:58:37 AM
It was the family friendly argument at WOT that brought the swear filter. We've been rather open about it here at RAFO so far, at least until someone takes it to ridiculous degrees. I don't get what the difference between f*ck and fuck's supposed to be anyway.


Places of work, schools etc can have firewalls that block sites without swear filters or stop people going onto the messageboard if it has swearing in post titles (I recall that giving people problems at wotmania, where words that weren't caught in the swear filter were enough to be blocked by school networks, "sex" for example stopped someone, Tim it might even have been, from going to the Comm boardif it was in a post title)

Basically the difference is that the former is much less likely to stop someone being able to access the site, which is probably not a bad thing if people want the site to survive and grow;)


Then again, we won't make people write "S*x survey" as subject line to avoid collisions with filters, so it seems to work with the way it's handled right now. At least I think we didn't hear anything about someone being unable to access the site regularly. And people at school should pay attention anyway, not surf the net :approve:
*MySmiley*

You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.
Reply to message
Can we swear at RAFO? - 22/11/2010 04:57:59 AM 1115 Views
Fuck no. Are you shitting me? There's no damn chance we can swear. - 22/11/2010 05:01:48 AM 752 Views
You DARE presume to assault my delicate ears with your nasty coarse sailor talk??? - 22/11/2010 05:05:23 AM 763 Views
Delicate? *NM* - 22/11/2010 05:06:19 AM 406 Views
Yes? - 22/11/2010 05:37:36 AM 628 Views
I don't know, can you? *NM* - 22/11/2010 05:54:20 AM 424 Views
Why not try it an find out. *NM* - 22/11/2010 06:05:35 AM 386 Views
hell to the fuck yes! *NM* - 22/11/2010 10:51:07 AM 367 Views
I can't think of underage users - 22/11/2010 11:32:40 AM 814 Views
Well - 22/11/2010 11:47:13 AM 814 Views
That's a good point of course - 22/11/2010 11:58:37 AM 734 Views
Re: That's a good point of course - 22/11/2010 12:11:25 PM 859 Views
THANK YOU! *hugs* - 22/11/2010 12:28:38 PM 683 Views
Back off! - 22/11/2010 12:31:13 PM 733 Views
'SOK: I hugged a man (in public)... - 22/11/2010 12:35:16 PM 621 Views
I never had that issue. - 22/11/2010 05:38:59 PM 749 Views
*NM* - 22/11/2010 05:53:24 PM 434 Views
The difference is webbrowsers can't be set to automatically exlude the former from web searches. - 22/11/2010 12:01:05 PM 800 Views
How many posts have there been with swear words in titles? - 22/11/2010 12:45:49 PM 660 Views
Are you telling me monitors are THAT horribly inefficient? - 22/11/2010 02:55:43 PM 839 Views
Scanning a CoC requires a human (or significantly improved parsing), whereas spidering can be dumb - 22/11/2010 03:06:19 PM 739 Views
I figured,but checking for filter subroutines seems like it would be pretty easy. - 22/11/2010 04:18:01 PM 850 Views
Subroutines such as what? - 22/11/2010 04:33:05 PM 1072 Views
Well, honestly, I don't know, but I expect language filter subroutines are pretty standardized now. - 22/11/2010 08:01:07 PM 1097 Views
The point is that there is nothing that a browser* will see of such a filter unless... - 23/11/2010 08:56:37 AM 720 Views
OK, but even then preventing such posts covers the contingencies while censoring none. - 23/11/2010 01:49:15 PM 764 Views
well... - 23/11/2010 04:14:51 PM 766 Views
Re: well... - 23/11/2010 05:26:14 PM 748 Views
Re: well... - 23/11/2010 06:42:43 PM 724 Views
Yes, a lot of people don't seem to want RAFO "invaded" by new people. - 23/11/2010 07:03:14 PM 799 Views
new people is not the same as children. *NM* - 23/11/2010 08:30:43 PM 362 Views
True, but the same principles apply to people surfing at work or college. - 23/11/2010 09:16:30 PM 768 Views
Please. - 23/11/2010 09:40:16 PM 779 Views
I resent that. - 23/11/2010 10:09:36 PM 646 Views
Sadface. *NM* - 23/11/2010 10:12:31 PM 380 Views
... and later additions like Ghavrel? - 23/11/2010 10:24:28 PM 811 Views
188 f-bombs dropped in titles, $hit's used 142 times in titles - 22/11/2010 05:01:02 PM 744 Views
Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck - 22/11/2010 06:27:59 PM 733 Views
Yea, you're helping exclude dozens, if not hundreds of potential RAFOlk. - 22/11/2010 07:42:58 PM 889 Views
Watch out. The CIA is watching you post that. And then they're going to arrest EVERYONE. - 22/11/2010 08:09:07 PM 773 Views
*NM* - 22/11/2010 09:36:20 PM 742 Views
Who said anything about regulation? - 23/11/2010 01:45:21 AM 787 Views
I love how you made Adam into a positive - 22/11/2010 05:40:33 PM 848 Views
For good or ill, Adam was very much a part of wotmania. - 22/11/2010 07:40:03 PM 789 Views
*waves* Hi! *NM* - 22/11/2010 10:17:52 PM 382 Views
Hey there! - 22/11/2010 10:30:24 PM 931 Views
A few honest answers. - 22/11/2010 10:54:30 PM 678 Views
Thanks - 22/11/2010 11:07:00 PM 677 Views
Perfectly alright. *NM* - 22/11/2010 11:12:43 PM 265 Views
A great deal of us were underage, though. - 23/11/2010 01:11:58 AM 809 Views
And look what a dirty mouth you got even without our help *NM* - 23/11/2010 08:04:06 AM 355 Views
All I can say to that is that people who think cursing on RAFO/WoTmania corrupts the youth - 23/11/2010 10:13:26 PM 704 Views
Who cares about the cursing. In other ways wotmania did probably corrupt me, though. - 23/11/2010 10:25:37 PM 737 Views
*sniggers* - 24/11/2010 02:27:22 PM 621 Views
Has anyone actually voiced that concern? - 24/11/2010 02:28:23 PM 722 Views
yes. - 22/11/2010 12:05:23 PM 674 Views
True. - 22/11/2010 06:45:58 PM 741 Views
I love how the original poster hasn't responded to any of this. - 23/11/2010 03:11:58 AM 719 Views
Probably still in shock. - 23/11/2010 01:52:01 PM 744 Views

Reply to Message