OK, but even then preventing such posts covers the contingencies while censoring none.
Joel Send a noteboard - 23/11/2010 01:49:15 PM
...a) it submits a post with profanities and parses out whether the result is an error page or b) it finds a post with profanities within. This goes for pretty much all filters, as they are better implemented server-side to avoid people disabling scripts to avoid filtering.
* and a parental control program will not see more than a browser does, even less if it is not logged in.
* and a parental control program will not see more than a browser does, even less if it is not logged in.
I'll take your word for it, even if it seems odd; many things about programming seem odd to non-programmers. Still, a filter that prevents posting profanity would satisfy such checks without inhibiting anyone. I'm NOT suggesting RAFO do as other sites have, disallowing special characters or html tags within words solely to enforce language policies (although if censorship is so horrid, why can't I link porn...?
) I'm simply saying an innocuous and inconspicuous feature could significantly expand accessibility of a young site while handcuffing no one. We're not debating swearing on RAFO; that's not going anywhere (at least, I hope not). We're debating whether we should have the ability to proudly say, "This site HAS no language filter", which seems a pretty small thing for which to sacrifice dozens or perhaps hundreds of potential members. Put another way: Which do you think RAFO needs more right now, new blood, or the ability to write "shit" instead of "shit"?
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.
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.
Can we swear at RAFO?
- 22/11/2010 04:57:59 AM
1123 Views
Fuck no. Are you shitting me? There's no damn chance we can swear.
- 22/11/2010 05:01:48 AM
768 Views
You DARE presume to assault my delicate ears with your nasty coarse sailor talk???
- 22/11/2010 05:05:23 AM
769 Views
I can't think of underage users
- 22/11/2010 11:32:40 AM
819 Views
Well
- 22/11/2010 11:47:13 AM
821 Views
That's a good point of course
- 22/11/2010 11:58:37 AM
739 Views
Obviously we don't know what we don't know.</Rumsfeld>
- 22/11/2010 12:33:53 PM
844 Views
Apparently it's not high on Ben's priority list, so we seem to be fine for now. *NM*
- 22/11/2010 12:38:42 PM
378 Views
The difference is webbrowsers can't be set to automatically exlude the former from web searches.
- 22/11/2010 12:01:05 PM
805 Views
How many posts have there been with swear words in titles?
- 22/11/2010 12:45:49 PM
669 Views
Are you telling me monitors are THAT horribly inefficient?
- 22/11/2010 02:55:43 PM
843 Views
Scanning a CoC requires a human (or significantly improved parsing), whereas spidering can be dumb
- 22/11/2010 03:06:19 PM
748 Views
I figured,but checking for filter subroutines seems like it would be pretty easy.
- 22/11/2010 04:18:01 PM
861 Views
Subroutines such as what?
- 22/11/2010 04:33:05 PM
1078 Views
Well, honestly, I don't know, but I expect language filter subroutines are pretty standardized now.
- 22/11/2010 08:01:07 PM
1106 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
725 Views
OK, but even then preventing such posts covers the contingencies while censoring none.
- 23/11/2010 01:49:15 PM
769 Views
well...
- 23/11/2010 04:14:51 PM
774 Views
Re: well...
- 23/11/2010 05:26:14 PM
755 Views
Re: well...
- 23/11/2010 06:42:43 PM
730 Views
Yes, a lot of people don't seem to want RAFO "invaded" by new people.
- 23/11/2010 07:03:14 PM
806 Views
new people is not the same as children.
*NM*
- 23/11/2010 08:30:43 PM
363 Views
*NM*
- 23/11/2010 08:30:43 PM
363 Views
True, but the same principles apply to people surfing at work or college.
- 23/11/2010 09:16:30 PM
771 Views
Please.
- 23/11/2010 09:40:16 PM
787 Views
Of course they do; who do you think creates all those time sink--er, games?
- 23/11/2010 11:46:09 PM
734 Views
- 23/11/2010 11:46:09 PM
734 Views
I resent that.
- 23/11/2010 10:09:36 PM
652 Views
- 23/11/2010 10:09:36 PM
652 Views
Yeah, I may have skipped a few important people, too; sorry.
- 23/11/2010 11:44:12 PM
835 Views
- 23/11/2010 11:44:12 PM
835 Views
the whole community was younger then. It really doesn't apply to today.
- 24/11/2010 07:50:56 AM
721 Views
Unless you mean the whole internet community, it's far more applicable, but to different individuals
- 24/11/2010 02:26:01 PM
818 Views
188 f-bombs dropped in titles, $hit's used 142 times in titles
- 22/11/2010 05:01:02 PM
749 Views
Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck
- 22/11/2010 06:27:59 PM
740 Views
Yea, you're helping exclude dozens, if not hundreds of potential RAFOlk.
- 22/11/2010 07:42:58 PM
894 Views
- 22/11/2010 07:42:58 PM
894 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
781 Views
I used the search function, it was just the number of post that had those in their title
- 22/11/2010 07:45:18 PM
711 Views
*waves* Hi! *NM*
- 22/11/2010 10:17:52 PM
384 Views
Hey there!
- 22/11/2010 10:30:24 PM
938 Views
A great deal of us were underage, though.
- 23/11/2010 01:11:58 AM
814 Views
And look what a dirty mouth you got even without our help
*NM*
- 23/11/2010 08:04:06 AM
357 Views
*NM*
- 23/11/2010 08:04:06 AM
357 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
715 Views
Who cares about the cursing. In other ways wotmania did probably corrupt me, though.
- 23/11/2010 10:25:37 PM
745 Views
- 23/11/2010 10:25:37 PM
745 Views

Back off!
*NM*
*NM*