Censoring on MacOSX.com

Status
Not open for further replies.
censorship s u c k s big time.
i agree wholeheartedly with simx, this is taking things way, way, way too far. in fact, it's pretty ridiculous.
god, am i glad i don't live in the us... over here we actually are allowed to say what we want, when we want, where we want without people getting uptight about it ... weird that grown-ups should be so touchy about mere words.
 
My I point out that only a few months ago the whole forum was up in arms about how to deal with swearing/the cuss thread. Now there's censorship. Ultimately you're going to have one or the other, and I think we can all think of some good uses for most swear words. We need to decide whether adding swear words adds enough to the dialogue to make up for the fact the some users just wont like it and will object. I guess I really have no direction for this post, I just feel like the admin is getting a bad rap here for listening to our demands in the first place.
 
may i point out that i for one couldn't care less about whether people swear or not ...
honestly i would prefer threads full of profanity to censorship, but then, as i think of most people on this forum as pretty mature, no matter what their age, i doubt there would be much profanity even it was allowed...
the point is that it goes against all principles of democracy to censor what people are saying, no matter whether some other people may be offended or not. who is the arbiter of what is/isn't offensive?
is the word "saugen" less offensive than s u c k, merely because it is a different language?
is it offensive to s u c k on a sweet merely because some people's minds are warped enough to make them think s u c k means only one thing, namely fellatio?
remember: profanity is in the eye of the beholder...
words have many meanings, and if you can't deal with one of the meanings may i say that is your problem, not mine ...
(and i don't necessarily mean you, matrix agent, just anyone who finds various words offensive ... :))


**** \****\, v. i.
1. To draw, or attempt to draw, something by suction, as with
the mouth, or through a tube.

Where the bee *****, there **** I. --Shak.

2. To draw milk from the breast or udder; as, a child, or the
young of an animal, is first nourished by sucking.

3. To draw in; to imbibe; to partake.


**** \****\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Sucked; p. pr. & vb. n.
Sucking.] [OE. suken, souken, AS. s?can, s?gan; akin to D.
zuigen, G. saugen, OHG. s?gan, Icel. s?ga, sj?ga, Sw. suga,
Dan. suge, L. sugere. Cf. Honeysuckle, Soak, Succulent,
Suction.]
1. To draw, as a liquid, by the action of the mouth and
tongue, which tends to produce a vacuum, and causes the
liquid to rush in by atmospheric pressure; to draw, or
apply force to, by exhausting the air.

2. To draw liquid from by the action of the mouth; as, to
**** an orange; specifically, to draw milk from (the
mother, the breast, etc.) with the mouth; as, the young of
an animal ***** the mother, or dam; an infant ***** the
breast.

3. To draw in, or imbibe, by any process resembles sucking;
to inhale; to absorb; as, to **** in air; the roots of
plants **** water from the ground.

4. To draw or drain.

Old ocean, sucked through the porous globe.
--Thomson.

5. To draw in, as a whirlpool; to swallow up.

As waters are by whirlpools sucked and drawn.
--Dryden.

To **** in, to draw into the mouth; to imbibe; to absorb.


To **** out, to draw out with the mouth; to empty by
suction.

To **** up, to draw into the mouth; to draw up by suction
or absorption.


**** \****\, n.
1. The act of drawing with the mouth.

2. That which is drawn into the mouth by sucking;
specifically, mikl drawn from the breast. --Shak.

3. A small draught. [Colloq.] --Massinger.

4. Juice; succulence. [Obs.]


****
n : the act of sucking [syn: sucking, suction]
v 1: draw into the mouth by creating a practical vacuum in the
mouth; "**** the poison from the place where the snake
bit"; "**** on a straw"; "the baby sucked on the
mother's breast"
2: draw something in by or as if by a vacuum; "Mud was sucking
at her feet"
3: attract by using an inexorable force, inducement, etc.; "The
current sucked him in" [syn: **** in]
4: take in, also metaphorically; "The sponge absorbs water
well"; "She drew strength from the minister's words" [syn:
absorb, imbibe, soak up, sop up, **** up, draw,
take in, take up]
5: give **** to; "The wetnurse suckled the infant"; "You cannot
nurse your baby in public in some places" [syn: breastfeed,
suckle, nurse, wet-nurse, lactate, give ****]
[ant: bottlefeed]
 
Censoring is stupid. It limits your freedom.

I mean, when I say ****, does it bother anyone? :confused:
 
xoot asked:
I mean, when I say ****, does it bother anyone?
Nope. I'm perfectly comfortable with stars. ;)

Again I feel I have to point out that this is not a "freedom" issue. It's Admin's choice.
 
Yeah, is this a community of mature (mostly) Mac users, or is this sixth grade recess? Are we going to snicker whenever someone says "****" or "sex" and then have to stand in the corner, or are we going to act grown up about it and ignore words that offend us?

If "touchy" words are banned, then I think the next step should be the bar and grill going, and any off topic discussion banished. Then we can all shave our heads and go to the auditorium and listen to the morning's briainwash speech.
 
Originally posted by nkuvu

Nope. I'm perfectly comfortable with stars. ;)

Again I feel I have to point out that this is not a "freedom" issue. It's Admin's choice.

I know this is Admin's choice. But that doesn't make it right.

The word "s" "u" "c" "k" is not an offensive word in the least, and that's why it should not be censored.

Think about it this way. What if "tree" somehow became a synonym for the word "excrement", but was meant in an offensive meaning. But then the word lost its offensive meaning because of its wide usage. Should the word "tree" still become censored because of the past usage of the word, even though everyone does not become offended by it now? Why should I be forced to use "very large plant" just because "tree" used to be an offensive word at some point?

The same is true for the word "s" "u" "c" "k" "s". IT HAS A LEGITIMATE USAGE IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE (as sithious pointed out), and although it may have been "offensive" at one point, it is not in the least offensive now. So it should not be censored 1) because it has a legitimate use and 2) because it is not offensive.

While it is not that big of a problem, it still is the suspension of a commonly used word, and I feel that I should be able to use that word here on the forums.

PLEASE NOTE that I am not saying that ALL words should NOT be censored. I agree that SOME words should be censored. But not the word "s" "u" "c" "k" and not the word "p" "i" "s" "s". These are not offensive words, and I have no idea why Admin chose to censor them and why he continues to when the point has been brought up. I take issue with the fact that he feels the need to make me change my vocabulary when it is a perfectly good word.

I do not want to leave MacOSX.com, but I do not feel that I want to be a member if ridiculous rules like this are imposed on me. Like dricci said, we are all mature users here and I think we can use these two words responsibly (if there's even a way to use them irresponsibly).

To further illustrate how ridiculous this is, I don't see anyone up in arms about me evading the censorship. I still have not seen one person responding in this thread that has been offended by seeing these two words that are being censored. EVEN ADMIN DID NOT MAKE A STINK ABOUT IT. So if we can all use it, why should the censorship be imposed?
 
I think this came about shortly after some idiot made his 1st post by repeating ***** (p e n i s in case that got censored) about a hundred times and then screaming that he should never have been allowed to do it, that it should have been censored. There was also enough leakage i guess from the few folks who participated in the cus thread (or so admin claims, i never saw it) that he closed it at the same time.

i'm still trying to bite my tongue on this for now as i have some awfully strong feelings about censorship and the whole concept makes me want to use a whold bunch of those censored words. I have expressed these views somewhat tactifully in the past and the short of it that i think that censorship is far more dangerous than any of the words that get censored. Flat out - admin is very wrong on this one.

that being said, it is his site and he can be as wrong as he wants to be. the question of whether we all want to find a new place to hang out is up to us, and i'll admit i am torn. i have had a few thoughts about doing so because the vast overrunning of posts by gibberrish spouting kiddies lately. The intelligencelevel of general conversation seems to have dropped about 20 IQ points in the last month.:( and i was also tempted to when the censorship went into place, just like my friend Simone who has never been one to use abusive language in my memory.

but frankly, admin has never been that much of this site. and until his recent slanders of democrats i had the utmost respect for him. In light of those cheap shots, this censorship action just looks like more right wing control of freedoms to me, the same kind of mentality that fueled the inquisition and book burnings - deciding what is too dangerous for others and taking on the patriarchical role of protecting them from themselves (a very republican kind of thing to do i have noticed). However, it is the people here that have always made this site a place i want to be. there are many i would hate to lose touch with. there are many people that i enjoy 'listening' to what they have to say.

As for this not being the US, you are wrong on that one nkuvu. The server and owner of it reside in the US, and therefore this site is subject to US law, to state law and to admin's local law. It is also protected by the bill of rights. However, admin has the option to set rules as he sees (within the law) as this is privately owned and not a public corporation.

I would simply beg of you admin, to let this board go back to taking care of itself. It worked wonderfully for a long time. and punishing the abusers with suspensions as you have done in the past makes more sense than starting down the road to lack of personal freedoms and lack of responsibility.

i would like to see Simone stay regardless of the outcome. I am sure i will unless this thread gets closed, in which case i will likely begin packing my browsers and either going back to my real life or finding a new forum as well. for it is one thing to censor objectionable words, and entirely another to censor intelligent discussions about censorship.
 
Time for the admiral to weigh in :p

ok here is how it stands and how *I* understand the whole matter

1) I dont like sensorship---- HOWEVER....
you have to consider several issues and facts:

a) The admin, for two years was REALLY linient on how the forums were run, threads were locked once in three blue moons, and there was no way of getting banned. -- This was cool and it allowed our community to thrive.

b) Sometime ago several people came, this was the wave of "hoolingan" immature types of kids that wanted to just come on here and jerk off and BS the boards. I wont name names, everyone knows who I am talking about.

c) These individuals, and a few others, *perverted* the cuss thread which was started in the first days of macosx.com, and created a monster out of something that was supposed to be lighthearted and humorous, to add insult to injury they used that thread as a means of postcount boosting.

d) Some of these individuals were reprimanded but brought back.

e) The language from teh cuss thread, no matter how playful and friends among the members, spilled over into other areas of the forum, and we all witnessed it, and this not only brings down the integrity of the boards, it also brings down OUR integrity as posters who post on this board, its not JUST the admin's reputation here, but ours as well.

f) Finally, these boards are not public, us posters, cannot set policy, the only person that can set policy is teh guy who pays the bills, and that is the admin. If you dont like the sensorship you dont have to stay. However, its not like he is sensoring words like democracy, free trade, and whatever, he is sensoring swear words. Our vocabulary is WAY bigger than S U C K, F U C K, and other such colorful words.

---------- further edits -----------
After reading Ed's comments I needed to reply. The admin did take cheap shots at democrats, I am not a democrat, nor a republican. however I am more conservative than liberal. I did not think that cheapshots were called for, however you cant judge someone *just* on that. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.


secondly when people cry ** sensor sensor** after a man utters p e n i s in his first post... what is there to do? Now that you have it you dont like it?

These boards have no clear cut rules, which other boards that I frequent have. If we had rules, we would have no need to sensor, however we could kick off members which repeatedly broke them, or broke them in their first x amount of posts. We need a few more mods on here perhaps to supervise the boards while the admin or the mods are away.

-----------------------------------------

just my 2 cents

Admiral
 
Originally posted by simX
PLEASE NOTE that I am not saying that ALL words should NOT be censored. I agree that SOME words should be censored. But not the word "s" "u" "c" "k" and not the word "p" "i" "s" "s". These are not offensive words, and I have no idea why Admin chose to censor them and why he continues to when the point has been brought up. I take issue with the fact that he feels the need to make me change my vocabulary when it is a perfectly good word.
I misunderstood you, simX -- I thought you wanted all censoring off. Which I don't think is appropriate given that this is a public forum available to anyone. It doesn't really matter how mature our members are in general. There are some people who are not mature who could be looking at this site, and f**k (you know, frak ;) ) is not appropriate according to the rules not only of Admin but also of American society. And unfortunately this is an American forum and therefore has to conform to American rules.

I think that websites in general fall into a grey area as far as rights and responsibilities go. As I mentioned, this is an American forum (yes, I agree with that, Ed) but it is also in some respects personal property. I am not sure of legality here (IANAL) but I am under the impression that the visitors to this site do not automagically get the full rights of an American citizen. But at the same time Admin has to follow American regulations and is responsible if something goes amiss.

I love to be a paradox. I am all for free speech and being able to say whatever you want. But I also am all for appropriate time and place. I see the censorship issue in this case as less of "protecting them from themselves" and more of "protecting my own behind". And having said all that, I do think that the two words in question should be removed from the censored list, but the overall censure of foul language should continue. I don't feel the need to use those words myself, which is perhaps why I don't think this is a huge issue, but neither do I believe that anyone would get in trouble for having those words censored.
 
Originally posted by simX
To further illustrate how ridiculous this is, I don't see anyone up in arms about me evading the censorship. I still have not seen one person responding in this thread that has been offended by seeing these two words that are being censored. EVEN ADMIN DID NOT MAKE A STINK ABOUT IT. So if we can all use it, why should the censorship be imposed?

This reason that I stated before but nobody addressed ALONE makes it ridiculous to censor the words "s" "u" "c" "k" and "p" "i" "s" "s".

Originally posted by AdmiralAK
f) Finally, these boards are not public, us posters, cannot set policy, the only person that can set policy is teh guy who pays the bills, and that is the admin. If you dont like the sensorship you dont have to stay. However, its not like he is sensoring words like democracy, free trade, and whatever, he is sensoring swear words. Our vocabulary is WAY bigger than S U C K, F U C K, and other such colorful words.

Did you not read what I said?

The word "s" "u" "c" "k" HAS A LEGITIMATE USAGE IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. I do not need to change my vocabulary to something "WAY bigger" just because admin thinks a legitimate English word should not be used. Would you like the word defined for you again, just so you can be assured of its usage?

To illustrate my point, from here on, AdmiralAK, I decree that you can not use the word "need". Because you have such a "WAY bigger" vocabulary, surely you can evade this ridiculous censorship I have imposed upon you. :rolleyes:
 
OK OK
What is all this talk about leaving. I think you're blowing this way out of proportion. Yes it ***** that that gets censored, but I won't lose sleep over it.

For the most part, I agree with Ed about policing the site ourselves (I aluded to that earlier.) This, however, I think is totally out of line:

but frankly, admin has never been that much of this site. and until his recent slanders of democrats i had the utmost respect for him. In light of those cheap shots, this censorship action just looks like more right wing control of freedoms to me, the same kind of mentality that fueled the inquisition and book burnings - deciding what is too dangerous for others and taking on the patriarchical role of protecting them from themselves (a very republican kind of thing to do i have noticed). However, it is the people here that have always made this site a place i want to be. there are many i would hate to lose touch with. there are many people that i enjoy 'listening' to what they have to say.

This is not a war. Don't make it one.
 
my friend dlookus, perhaps you would care to explain to me what was out of line about the part of my post you quoted. was it criticizing admin? was it pointing out that censorship is a parental type action that implies the censorer knows more about what is right and wrong, good and bad than the censoree? was it acknowledging that the people here at this site, like the ones engaging in this discussion are the primary reason for being here? I would really like to know what you find so appalling about my statements.

I would also respond to your comment about this not being a war - well in some ways it is to me, one i have been fighting since an early age. The war for freedom, for personal control, for personal responsibility, to be able to have access to whatever materials i so desire, regardless of someone else's opinion of them. There have been countless words of wisdom lost thru time because someone else decided to censor them - by burning them, by killing those who wrote them or even spoke them. there are scant fragments of the religious teachings of my faith left because of these kinds of act.

now i know you will say i am overreactting and perhaps i am, but censorship is one of those things starts small and grows. One person censors a few words, another sees it as justification to censor a few more and the cycle goes on til we have people burning Harry Potter books and worse. people stood idlely by and thought it was nothing to get concerned about when the nazi party rose to power. Eventually they realized it was something they should have reacted to when it started, not after it was too late. so anytime i see censorship installed where it wasn't before, i get scared. very scared.

and i think one of the most ironic things about this whole censorship thing is that admin and others have voiced their concern over kids reading this kind of stuff. but the kids here are the ones abusing these kinds of words. in real life, teens talk this way. nobody is really being protected. now admiral has a point about the reflection on us all in a professional aspect. but that goes back to each of us representing ourselves in the way we would like to have others view and respect us. Those who don't know how to do that will get a much faster lesson from their peers than they will from a censorship programming option. And for God's sake, as long they don't spill over into serious threads, who really cares how these kids talk amongst themselves in their 'chat' threads? I sure don't.

but i guess as long as we are having this enforced upon us, i will amuse myself with it by reading threads with a silence where the dots are and imagine i am watching an r-movie on TV that has been edited so 6 yo's can watch it:D
 
you know, when politics get into conversation it always causes problems. i think that as members we are given the privilge of posting here and participating. If admin wants do censors on the boards, then he can, its his board. as basic members and not admin's we don't have decision making powers in that kind of situation.

but it is a good topic to argue over:D
 
On this topic, I have always thought that the use of inappropriate language had no place on the boards. As has been pointed out, within the last six months we have seen an increase of posts by juvenile posters. Sadly, one of the forms of entertainment of such members was to see just how offensive they could get (with post count obsession running a close second).

As a Democrat (a.k.a. Demostupes or Demodupes, both of which are by far the most offensive terms I've seen on the boards to date) I am completely against the idea of censorship. I would have liked to have seen us as a group force members who had problems with inappropriate language to shape up in order to fit in (most likely the same type of peer pressure which started them using such language to begin with). The use of offensive language seems to be a way of getting attention, and as these young members started to fit in they seemed to drop the use of it.

As a social group, it is natural for some to be noticed more than others. It is also natural for some to want to be noticed by others and to use what ever means they think works (like language and post counts) to get recognition from the group. From experience we have seen that members can fit in and feel like productive parts of the groups even if they started out using negative means when senior members take the time to acknowledge them.

I would say that the banning of members has worked (even if it was needed more than once to get the point across). I would say that the censoring of some words is actually helpful to those who lack self control. And I would say that Admin has infact gone to far censoring common words (if it appears in a standard dictionary, then it really has no place being a banned word). The examples that Simone pointed out fall into the definition of common words by my understanding.

To date I have not seen any words converted in any of my posts, but I think I would stand (or rather walk, as the case maybe) with Ed if I started to feel that common language was deemed inappropriate in this forum. Like Ed, I have been disappointed with the juvenile behavior and the shameless attempts to grab attention over the last few months. When I consider who I really am here to talk with and the fact that some of the people who started out that way are now productive members (whom I consider friends), it makes it easier to go looking through the pointless posts to find the ones worth reading. Lets face it, we have had some real great post here and I believe there are many more to come.
 
i agree Coach.

and satanicpoptart, will you still fell the same way when 'satan' or 'satanic' get added to the list of censored words? see, the point is not to just brush it off if it doesn't effect you. if you take that approach, sooner or later it will effect you. see, in this case, Simone's best line out of his signiture has been censored. now it doesn't really effect me, but it does my friend Simone.
 
Now, I may not be as experienced as many of you out there, but I have also been at the forums for most of its existance. Only recently has the issue of cersorship been such a hot topic. If some users in this board have used vulgarity as a means of gaining attention, why not, at least in the short term, allow censorship to continue, to demonstrate to these users that this place will not pay attention to or tolerate that type of beahavior. The same goes for those who spam the boards looking for high post numbers. Most users will be quick to oblige if you simply point out that this board does not weigh heavily on #'s, and has no ranks. Tell them that the quickest way to gain the respect of fellow users it to be intelligent and humorus.

Ed, I must disagree with you, though undoubtably you have had more experience with censorship than I. I fail to see how the censorship of a few cuss words will lead to the ultimate censorship of certain ideas. If that time ever came to be, I believe that there is enough of the upstanding type of user here to make a difference. Admittedly, the censorship of those few words is bizzare, and most likely unneeded. But in reality, how much usage is gained from those words? A little bit of suffering on our parts could do much to clean up this site. I must say that I feel the only reason this has become such a political argument is that many members resent Admin's democrat-bashing thoughts (which I have not read.), he too has ter right to express these ideas, try to be accepting. Once he starts censoring pro-democrat and anti-republican retoric, you will have found yourself a new ally, until then, I'm going to join a few other people in asking the forum as a whole to cool it off, step back, and see how things work out on their own.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top