Active Users:576 Time:05/08/2025 02:57:01 PM
The difference is webbrowsers can't be set to automatically exlude the former from web searches. Joel Send a noteboard - 22/11/2010 12:01:05 PM
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.

Otherwise I see no difference, but given how many schools, businesses and homes use such filtering, I see no upside to the lack of a language filter here, and some very real downsides. Would wotmania have been the same without Clover? Sprite? Urza? They were VERY young when they joined wotmania; had current parental controls been available then they might never have known it existed, let alone become integral to it. Much the same goes for the wealth of people who were most active on the site when they were at work: Businesses that screen out sites with "offensive" content make that impossible for sites with no filter.

The question is whether automatically excluding whole swathes of the worlds population from RAFO is justified by the ability to say, "bitch" rather than "bitch". I just fail to see how it possibly could be.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
This message last edited by Joel on 22/11/2010 at 12:06:48 PM
Reply to message
Can we swear at RAFO? - 22/11/2010 04:57:59 AM 1052 Views
Fuck no. Are you shitting me? There's no damn chance we can swear. - 22/11/2010 05:01:48 AM 676 Views
You DARE presume to assault my delicate ears with your nasty coarse sailor talk??? - 22/11/2010 05:05:23 AM 704 Views
Delicate? *NM* - 22/11/2010 05:06:19 AM 379 Views
Yes? - 22/11/2010 05:37:36 AM 574 Views
I don't know, can you? *NM* - 22/11/2010 05:54:20 AM 398 Views
Why not try it an find out. *NM* - 22/11/2010 06:05:35 AM 354 Views
hell to the fuck yes! *NM* - 22/11/2010 10:51:07 AM 346 Views
I can't think of underage users - 22/11/2010 11:32:40 AM 759 Views
Well - 22/11/2010 11:47:13 AM 762 Views
That's a good point of course - 22/11/2010 11:58:37 AM 677 Views
Re: That's a good point of course - 22/11/2010 12:11:25 PM 803 Views
THANK YOU! *hugs* - 22/11/2010 12:28:38 PM 626 Views
Back off! - 22/11/2010 12:31:13 PM 679 Views
'SOK: I hugged a man (in public)... - 22/11/2010 12:35:16 PM 560 Views
I never had that issue. - 22/11/2010 05:38:59 PM 688 Views
*NM* - 22/11/2010 05:53:24 PM 412 Views
The difference is webbrowsers can't be set to automatically exlude the former from web searches. - 22/11/2010 12:01:05 PM 749 Views
How many posts have there been with swear words in titles? - 22/11/2010 12:45:49 PM 599 Views
Are you telling me monitors are THAT horribly inefficient? - 22/11/2010 02:55:43 PM 766 Views
Scanning a CoC requires a human (or significantly improved parsing), whereas spidering can be dumb - 22/11/2010 03:06:19 PM 679 Views
I figured,but checking for filter subroutines seems like it would be pretty easy. - 22/11/2010 04:18:01 PM 791 Views
Subroutines such as what? - 22/11/2010 04:33:05 PM 1006 Views
Well, honestly, I don't know, but I expect language filter subroutines are pretty standardized now. - 22/11/2010 08:01:07 PM 1021 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 659 Views
OK, but even then preventing such posts covers the contingencies while censoring none. - 23/11/2010 01:49:15 PM 701 Views
well... - 23/11/2010 04:14:51 PM 716 Views
Re: well... - 23/11/2010 05:26:14 PM 691 Views
Re: well... - 23/11/2010 06:42:43 PM 666 Views
Yes, a lot of people don't seem to want RAFO "invaded" by new people. - 23/11/2010 07:03:14 PM 744 Views
new people is not the same as children. *NM* - 23/11/2010 08:30:43 PM 339 Views
True, but the same principles apply to people surfing at work or college. - 23/11/2010 09:16:30 PM 708 Views
Please. - 23/11/2010 09:40:16 PM 710 Views
I resent that. - 23/11/2010 10:09:36 PM 588 Views
Sadface. *NM* - 23/11/2010 10:12:31 PM 354 Views
... and later additions like Ghavrel? - 23/11/2010 10:24:28 PM 753 Views
188 f-bombs dropped in titles, $hit's used 142 times in titles - 22/11/2010 05:01:02 PM 683 Views
Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck - 22/11/2010 06:27:59 PM 675 Views
Yea, you're helping exclude dozens, if not hundreds of potential RAFOlk. - 22/11/2010 07:42:58 PM 829 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 715 Views
*NM* - 22/11/2010 09:36:20 PM 686 Views
Who said anything about regulation? - 23/11/2010 01:45:21 AM 730 Views
I love how you made Adam into a positive - 22/11/2010 05:40:33 PM 747 Views
For good or ill, Adam was very much a part of wotmania. - 22/11/2010 07:40:03 PM 731 Views
*waves* Hi! *NM* - 22/11/2010 10:17:52 PM 358 Views
Hey there! - 22/11/2010 10:30:24 PM 873 Views
A few honest answers. - 22/11/2010 10:54:30 PM 614 Views
Thanks - 22/11/2010 11:07:00 PM 619 Views
Perfectly alright. *NM* - 22/11/2010 11:12:43 PM 238 Views
A great deal of us were underage, though. - 23/11/2010 01:11:58 AM 756 Views
And look what a dirty mouth you got even without our help *NM* - 23/11/2010 08:04:06 AM 330 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 650 Views
Who cares about the cursing. In other ways wotmania did probably corrupt me, though. - 23/11/2010 10:25:37 PM 684 Views
*sniggers* - 24/11/2010 02:27:22 PM 562 Views
Has anyone actually voiced that concern? - 24/11/2010 02:28:23 PM 669 Views
yes. - 22/11/2010 12:05:23 PM 613 Views
True. - 22/11/2010 06:45:58 PM 674 Views
I love how the original poster hasn't responded to any of this. - 23/11/2010 03:11:58 AM 660 Views
Probably still in shock. - 23/11/2010 01:52:01 PM 690 Views

Reply to Message