The swear filter

[paulcalloway]

This post is particularly directed at Bo Carlson since he's inquired but some of the rest of you may wonder as well.

As it happens, the vbulletin software has some default nasties set up in the swear filter. I didn't realize they were in there. I'm not opposed to removing them but I nor do I see a big rush of complaints about the swear filter either.

This isn't a barroom, nor is the hallway of a 2 bedroom house-trailer. I'd certainly not want to censor a Civil War veteran's letter if he chose to employ colorful language. But when was the last time we saw such a letter posted here? Much less one posted by Bo?

What do you all think, use the filter or not?

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Being the Sinks and all...

Hallo Kameraden!

IMHO, swearing/profanity should be banned except for sharing original letters.

IF the purpose of this Forum is to promote serious academic and intellectual discussions of the Civil War, then the atmosphere should be academic not bar room, and the flavor scholarly not saloon.

IF the Forum is to open to viewing by others who already have an agenda that we are toothless, inbred, hate mongers glorifying the Dead Past and Lost Causes and defiantly carrying on the Unfinished Seevah Wawah- we should not endeavor to fit the stereotype and load the guns used against us.

IF the Forum is open to viewing by folks of all ages and genders, we should rise above our baser natures and instincts.

And, I want to hear longshoremen and sailors swear and profane, I'll go seek them down on the docks not at the library... (or to those other fora- everything has it time and place).

Besides the nature of swearing at the time of the Civil War was typically of a different manner than that of today, but that is another longer genteel discussion. Darnation!

Others' mileage will vary.

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt

[Kykeydet12]

Re: The swear filter

pards:
i agree , My father tells me that " the use of profanity shows a weak mind ". this forum is (from what i understand it ) is a means to help reenactors and the public understand the civil war , and it's soldiers , civilians and all those that the war had an affect on . profanity should only be allowed in the use of original material and if there is profanity in it the source should be sited and the moderators should be accesable to it to prove it to be true.
we should put a charicteristic on this forum that allows a choice of censorship to all members , and to non-members there should be no choice, all non-members should have a cencorship setting that cannot be changed until they join this forum as an active member and can decide upon registration whether to have the option or not. my 2-cents

[DougCooper]

Re: The swear filter

Kurt said it. Profanity does not add value to any discussion and is anathema to decorum and civility. Let's take a 19th century view.

[Bill]

Re: The swear filter

I voted for no profanity, but I also think the definition of profanity should be pretty limited. The old joke about the seven words you can't use on Television comes to mind as a good guide. As an example, you can't use the word "screw" on the Reenactors Forum. Sometimes it's pretty difficult to discuss Civil War weapons without using the word "screw".

[va-yank]

Re: The swear filter

I am not sure that the filter makes a distinction between primary source material, and contemporary swearing. My vote is, leave the filter off, with a no profanity allowed rule clearly posted. This has not really been a problem on this board in the past, has it?

I think we all know what NOT to say. Knowing what you should say is another matter.

[Stonewall_Greyfox]

Re: The swear filter

I am all for using the swear filter. Many of us tend to fall from grace at times. And it sure would be nice having someone here to help us not embarrass ourselves by way of the language we use. Short of original letters, materials, etc...or anything short of a Period language use I say keep a filter.

Paul B. Boulden Jr.

RAH VA MIL '04

[Jeffrey Przewozniak]

Re: The swear filter

I SAY BULLY FOR A SWEAR RULE!!

Thanks for addressing a concern I've had for some time.

The use of certian language on this forum has at times, been downright disgusting. I agree with Curt. We nee to remember that both sexes, young and old read this forum, as well as many people under the age of 17.

If we want to be looked upon as gentlemen, we MUST conduct ourselves accordingly.

Now, "rule vs ban" raises another question. Would the software here be able to lift the ban on certain posts, so we could present letters, etc.? There's not an option on the poll to let original documents fly, so I didn't vote. I am in earnest,

[ElizabethClark]

Re: The swear filter

None of the options really fits my view: like others here, I don't see profanity as an intelligent means of discourse, and so don't see it having a place in discussions here.

However, some amount of profanity, vulgarity, and blasphemy (different sorts of nasties) does occur in primary resource material. A filter will not distinguish between quoted materials or new discussion.

As such, I would prefer that members bridle their own tongues, and not resort to a filter. There are several other forums where all manner of language is happily tolerated, and anyone needing to vent their vocabulary might find relief there.

I'm not against the occasional damn or hell... pointless vulgarity is out of place, and profanity that attacks other members violates the rule of "being polite in discourse."

[NY Pvt]

Re: The swear filter

I say do not censor. I am not for swearing, but I feel that it should be up to the individual him or herself not to swear. It is not as if we are talking on this board. We are typing and have plenty of opportunities to change a word before it gets posted before everyone sees it. If a person uses inappropriate language to where in “offends” the members of the forum then I am sure the post/and or person will be taken care of.

Also, which words are “swear” words. I am sure we all have different opinions. Such as would “I’d be damned.” swearing? I don’t consider it to be, but what does that filter think. I guess we will find out when I post this.

[Secede1863]

Re: The swear filter

My opinion is to allow swearing in original letters and qoutes and to censor the mother of all swear words (as in the poll).

Unless it is used to discriminate someone or offensivley put-down someone I see no problem with the common swear word in letters and qoutes.

Thats Just my Humble Opinion.

Andrew Stebbins

[Charlie]

Re: The swear filter

I think it has been mentioned more than once in this thread so far but it seems to me the real issue is that at the end of the day, swearing really has no place on this forum, unless in the context of an historic piece of material. I don't think it should even be an issue. As Curt says, this is not a barroom, but a forum to exchange ideas about the ACW and all that entails. Why should anyone be swearing at all. Being a native NYer I have certainly uttered my share of profanities on any given day, but i don't recall ever using one on this or any other forum. The times when I most see profanities on this site is when someone is unhappy with a particular post, or what has been posted in regards to a prior post. Surely these things can be discussed without cursing at eachother. It certainly doesn't stenghten your argument and tends to make you look like a foob.
Paul, you shouldn't have to have the swear filter on. People should be grown up enough to filter themselves.
Just my two cents.

[adam_oswalt]

Re: The swear filter

I agree with what Curt and the others have said about swearing, but I disagree with the use of a filter that would censor members. Okay, there are a lot of people who think swearing is wrong. I don't. It has to be a pretty nasty word to offend me. Yes, it is wrong to use swear words in a scholarly discussion, but is it wrong to use it in a less than scholarly discussion in the sinks? I would like to reserve my right to call someone an asshole, as long as it's in the appropriate place.

Ultimately, it's up to Paul. I've cast my vote and given my opinions. Maybe a better method would be to use the "report this post to the moderators." (is that button on the new boards?) Or just tell the person that does the cursing that you are offended by his/her post. Personally, if someone told me they were offended by my use of a word, I would edit my post and remove the offending word. And if the moderators think that the poster in question has offended too many people, ban him/her from posting.

Well that's my opinion. Take it how you will.

Adam Oswalt

[Bill Shea]

Re: The swear filter

I'm of the opinion we should police ourselves. If a member is profane the moderators should stike the thread and warn the member to keep it above board.

I realize that the moderators also shouldn't have to be on the lookout for such things so if a member is out of line we should remind the author of the gentle nature of some of our members and then ask the moderators to strike the thread.

I don't think software will take into the context of usage such as bolster screw or bastard file and some original correspndance will be unavailable as well.

Your humble servant,

[TeamsterPhil]

Re: The swear filter

The profanity filter software will not be able to discern the difference between salty language used by a soldier in a letter home from words written in the presnt day. I would vote to keep the software turned off and leave it on the honor system and depend on peer pressure and the vigiliance of the moderators.

I would however like to see a few words removed from the lexicon of the A-C: bagpipe, bagpipes, bagpipers, bagpiping, and any other form of this word.

Phil