Do we really have to censor Dee-Eye-See-Kay?

[Flame of Anor]

I mean, posting "Moby-****" just looks really stupid.

[Dacia Brabant]

Thank you.

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

Here's the thing though: while I agree with you that it would be nice to be able to talk about Moby-**** or **** Tracy, there are only a select few cases where this is a problem.

Without the filter, there are a ton of cases where it is a problem. And it's not possible to have one without having both.

This being the internet, and a family-friendly forum, our ability to discuss old detective stories and classics about whaling must play second fiddle to keeping things civil.

[arguskos]

Agreed, Djinn. Also, I believe the moderation staff has approved censor work-arounds in cases like Moby **** and similar innocent uses.

[gooddragon1]

Here's the thing though: while I agree with you that it would be nice to be able to talk about Moby-**** or **** Tracy, there are only a select few cases where this is a problem.

Without the filter, there are a ton of cases where it is a problem. And it's not possible to have one without having both.

This being the internet, and a family-friendly forum, our ability to discuss old detective stories and classics about whaling must play second fiddle to keeping things civil.

What of the The **** Van Dyke Show starring **** Van Dyke?

[Douglas]

Having the censor kick in for things like that is annoying and not part of its intended purpose, but there are a great many more cases where blocking that word is entirely appropriate.

Plus, it's not that hard to circumvent the filter on those few occasions when it's necessary, and as long as you do so only for such clearly non-objectionable cases as Moby **** you're not going to get punished for it.

Bypassing the filter to call someone names or discuss anatomy would probably get you an infraction pretty quickly, though.

[Dacia Brabant]

Agreed, Djinn. Also, I believe the moderation staff has approved censor work-arounds in cases like Moby **** and similar innocent uses.

Can this not be written into the board's filtering software as an exception?

[Douglas]

Can this not be written into the board's filtering software as an exception?
I'd be surprised if the filtering algorithm is complex enough to do that.

[Flame of Anor]

I really think that any post with d--k in it as a vulgarity would get reported quickly enough so as not to be a problem.

[Eldan]

I remember an old and obscure chat room that actually automatically replaced words. I was about... 12 at the time?

We had a lot of fun talking about Moby Penis, and drinking Penistails and watching Penis Tracy. To the average 12 year old, that was hilarious.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Yes, we really do. If the filtered word is being used in a non-pejorative, non-profane, entirely appropriate manner, you are welcome to use a work around such as bolding or coloring the text black of part of the word. But, in general, the word filter is intentional, if imperfect, and preferable to the proliferation of profanity that its absence would invite.