Swearing [Archive] - SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

Sailor Steve

04-01-16, 06:40 PM

A new sub-topic has sprung up in another thread, and I thought it best to move it here.

Because this abbreviation could mean a lot. Of course it means something specific - but if a person knows that anyways, like the always mentioned children (what child browses this board!?), I wonder why it is still a problem when a kid knows these words anyways (and kids today do... except maybe home-schooled and living in isolation... sooooo... home-schooled).
From my understanding Neal came up with that rule when his daughters were indeed that age, and read the forums all the time.

What if I say "N-Word"? Is that infraction-worthy as well because I 'masked' a bad word? Well then how could one ever talk about this? One could never post in the GT section stuff like "Wow, today at the gas station that lady went apes.... (see?) and threw lots of n-words around just because bla bla... story ends..."

*infraction!*
That very question came up a couple of years ago. A member used a proscribed word and gave him a warning. Neal overturned it because the guy was quoting an article from a newspaper. I disagreed at the time but I can see where that's a problem of its own.

Also, from the other point of view, I've been asked more that once why some people seem to get away with using disguised letters for words like "b*st*rd". I have to point out that self-censoring has nothing to do with the rules, especially when "bastard" is not a proscribed word.

I also have to ask where you personally would draw the line? Allow asterisks? Allow funny "comic-book swearing"? You know, stuff like &$(*@!)? Remove the rules altogether and allow anything to pass? If you would allow asterisks but not real swearing, why not?

I don't have answers for most of those questions, but I'm curious to see what others think.

Onkel Neal

04-01-16, 08:10 PM

I keep saying that because it is the truth and you don't do anything wrong. If the rules are strict and you enforce them, you can hardly be blamed.

I don't complain about you - I just like to bitch about Subsim's rules as I believe they are way too strict. It makes perfect sense to keep this place rather clean, but handing out infractions for someone "masking" words, I mean...what? That doesn't make any sense at all.
If I say F... ! and get punished for it, I don't feel it is justified. Because this abbreviation could mean a lot. Of course it means something specific - but if a person knows that anyways, like the always mentioned children (what child browses this board!?), I wonder why it is still a problem when a kid knows these words anyways (and kids today do... except maybe home-schooled and living in isolation... sooooo... home-schooled).

What if I say "N-Word"? Is that infraction-worthy as well because I 'masked' a bad word? Well then how could one ever talk about this? One could never post in the GT section stuff like "Wow, today at the gas station that lady went apes.... (see?) and threw lots of n-words around just because bla bla... story ends..."

*infraction!*

Maybe I'm missing something, but from my PoV this kind of rule doesn't make any sense at all and reminds me of this 911 dispatcher who repeatedly hung up on a young girl calling in because her dad had a heart attack - because she said "f......g" at the start of the conversation, not knowing she is already through.

Just my 2 cents on this derailment (sorry for that... but I feel this is rather important)

I get a lot of flack from some people over my attempts to minimize vulgar language in the forum. Other people appreciate the effort to keep a level of class and civility in a public forum. Are the rules strict, or is it a matter of taste? :hmmm: It's the "one man's art is another man's trash" argument, I guess. I just want to keep this place a little classier than a YouTube or Live Leak comment section, you know.

Social morality is in a long, sad slide, I don't want to contribute to it.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=994&pictureid=8736

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=994&pictureid=8737

I mean, should there be any limits to how we conduct ourselves, or should Howard Stern and Miley Cyrus be our guides? :06:

August

04-01-16, 08:38 PM

I'd favor allowing asterisks or @#!$@#%^ as long as it contains more characters than the actual swear word (and it's not directed at anyone in particular).

IE:

What the ****?!
vs
What the **********?!

Seems to me like the latter version takes a bit of the sting out of it don't you think?

In any case though would not favor open swearing. While I have been stymied by the ban a few times myself I still think that not allowing it helps improve the overall level of forum discourse.

Aktungbby

04-01-16, 08:51 PM

Well if we subsimmers are the armchair 'military geniuses' which what we all think we are:O: **** (fourstar) General 'Stormin Normin' Schwarzkopf famously set the standard when he used the expression 'bovine scatology' instead of the mundane B.S. No need to be vulgar or violate Neal's FAQ exceedingly reasonable rules. English is a fabulous language of innumerable facets and subtleties; let's stay creative-it's actually more fun. :arrgh!:

Mr Quatro

04-01-16, 08:58 PM

I like things (meaning the rules) the way they are :up:

Too many youtube comments are just meant to flame and boy do they do that :o

But if Trump wins we will have to change the rules, right?
I mean after all the POTUS :oops:

Would this poster be considered rude?

http://files.sharenator.com/bitch_stole_my_fish_funny_picture1_bitch_stole_my_ fish-s450x661-45640-580.jpg

Aktungbby

04-01-16, 09:11 PM

But if Trump wins we will have to change the rules, right?

...do NOT e-mail the moderators or admin to complain or argue a case. Take it like a man, wait out your time,... No changing the rules!!!:Kaleun_Mad:; Sailor Steve would (righteously)'schlong' us! http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/smartdark/redcard_small.gifhttp://www.subsim.com/radioroom/smartdark/redcard_small.gifhttp://www.subsim.com/radioroom/smartdark/redcard_small.gifhttp://www.subsim.com/radioroom/smartdark/redcard_small.gif:D :O: :haha: :har: ...and we'd have to " take it like a man" per the FAQ !:timeout: :doh: :damn: http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/56823/trumps-yiddish-fighting-words-hillary-got-shlonged-by-obama-in-2008-jerusalem/#e8P3FiiZrLulEf1r.97 (http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/56823/trumps-yiddish-fighting-words-hillary-got-shlonged-by-obama-in-2008-jerusalem/#e8P3FiiZrLulEf1r.97)

Sailor Steve

04-01-16, 09:12 PM

I get a lot of flack from some people over my attempts to minimize vulgar language in the forum. Other people appreciate the effort to keep a level of class and civility in a public forum. Are the rules strict, or is it a matter of taste? :hmmm: It's the "one man's art is another man's trash" argument, I guess. I just want to keep this place a little classier than a YouTube or Live Leak comment section, you know.
That's where my dilemma starts. Nippelspanner is correct, I seem to be the only one who takes the rules at face value and tries to enforce them. Maybe I take things too seriously, but for me it's either-or. Either they are rules or they are just suggestions. If they're rules, I think they should be enforced strictly, or else people will always try to push the boundaries, and no one will know exactly what those boundaries are. If they're suggestions, why have them at all? If nobody follows them and nobody enforces them, then they have no value other than as a polite request, which anybody is free to ignore.

As I said, a dilemma.

Torplexed

04-01-16, 09:50 PM

I'd favor allowing asterisks or @#!$@#%^ as long as it contains more characters than the actual swear word (and it's not directed at anyone in particular).
.

I concur with this. The alpha-numeric keys cusswords might be best.

The old comic book connection kind of helps defuse any tension, but everyone gets what you mean.

http://pyxis.homestead.com/Ole_Cuss.jpg

Nippelspanner

04-01-16, 10:38 PM

I also have to ask where you personally would draw the line? Allow asterisks? Allow funny "comic-book swearing"? You know, stuff like &$(*@!)? Remove the rules altogether and allow anything to pass? If you would allow asterisks but not real swearing, why not?
That is basically my whole point.
I totally understand why we can't write out certain words and although I was tempted to do it a million times by now, I prefer not to litter Subsim with this and to read mostly 'clean' posts.
Also, I agree with this rule since it makes a moderators job easier.
For example.
A new forum member arrives and goes crazy with these words.
Most people, including me, would consider this rude and "unfit" for Subsim, so a mod could point to the rules and act if necessary.
This would not be possible with a 4chan-like "everything goes" rule-set.

However, I do not see the point why I can't write ****!
Where is the harm?

I didn't write anything bad.
At best I gave everyone a puzzle open for interpretation.
Really, I can't think of any reason why the use of masking would not be allowed, it just makes no sense at all to me.

I get a lot of flack from some people over my attempts to minimize vulgar language in the forum. Other people appreciate the effort to keep a level of class and civility in a public forum. Are the rules strict, or is it a matter of taste? :hmmm: It's the "one man's art is another man's trash" argument, I guess. I just want to keep this place a little classier than a YouTube or Live Leak comment section, you know.

Social morality is in a long, sad slide, I don't want to contribute to it.

[pic]

[pic]

I mean, should there be any limits to how we conduct ourselves, or should Howard Stern and Miley Cyrus be our guides? :06:
I feel you missed my actual point.
My point is not "let's cuss away!", my point is "let's not be silly!".
Things need to be balanced. If they are extreme in one direction or the other, they become crap. This goes for language too, in my opinion.

Honestly, implying or blaming people who use cuss-words of being "uncivilized" and immediately pointing towards one of the absolute extremes (Howard Stern, who is far from uncivilized btw!) is a little lazy, especially when applying a meme that actually defends one of the worst radical liars, bigots and hypocrites of our time.
You know, Stern might cuss like a sailor and sure crossed a line or two in his career when we talk taste, but he doesn't fake anything, is honest and I heard more wisdom coming out of his mouth in the 2-3 shows I have seen with him than out of Trumps dirty lying gush since...ever, so I wonder how accurate and therefore valid your examples actually are.

Social morality is in a long, sad slide, I don't want to contribute to it.Which is something our species claims since way back to the early days of the Roman Empire... and we still don't have sex with our lawnmowers... well OK some actually do but come on, you get my point.
Cussing like a mad sailor doesn't make you uncivilized, it also doesn't say anything about your parents or how you have been raised.
While it is true that parents don't take enough responsibility for their kids anymore these days (just talk to ANY teacher...), they can't be blamed to 100% and how one expresses himself is just one tiny individual aspect that will be influenced by everything we do and learn for all our lives.
Just saying "cussing -> road to damnation" is a little too shallow, too easy for my taste.
Over my years here, I read some very disturbing posts full of hate, bigotry and inhumane opinions... they did not contain a single sign of foul language, yet also not any sign of being civilized at all when serious suggestions appeared to drop nuclear weapons on the middle east to be done with it already, for example.

Also, how "civilized" (highly subjective) are we if we are so strict over things ("masking" and maybe rare/soft cussing) that censoring it and/or punishing the poster becomes more important than the actual message?

Is a post someone creates automatically less true, less important, less funny or less thought-provoking - because the OP used some foul language?
Is a post automatically better because someone did not?

A painting doesn't get awesome because I use super expensive paint.
And it won't become crap just because I use low-quality paint - it is still up to me and what I do with it.
In the end, it depends on the poster and what he does with his words.
(I suck with analogies and such, sorry... sorry. :shifty:)

I just want to keep this place a little classier than a YouTube or Live Leak comment section, you know.Guess we're in the same club then, no doubt! :yep:
However, I don't follow up with this if=then logic, as if only because we allow masking or even "light cussing" (example), we will end up like non-moderated YT channels.
This reminds me of the logic of some people when the gay-marriage debate was going on, painting pictures of Sodom and Gomorrah and Dooms Day... because a minority of people is now allowed to marry. :shifty:

The other way around would be:
"Neal! Not even masking foul language? What's next, a forced Grammar-Nazi-Club™ membership with a monthly subscription fee where you are the Führer and Steve your Propagandaminister?":timeout:

At least, that is how I see it.

That's where my dilemma starts. Nippelspanner is correct, I seem to be the only one who takes the rules at face value and tries to enforce them. Maybe I take things too seriously, but for me it's either-or. Either they are rules or they are just suggestions. If they're rules, I think they should be enforced strictly, or else people will always try to push the boundaries, and no one will know exactly what those boundaries are. If they're suggestions, why have them at all? If nobody follows them and nobody enforces them, then they have no value other than as a polite request, which anybody is free to ignore.

As I said, a dilemma.
Spot on.
One example could be to adjust the rules to allow masking like ****, while still not allowing writing out (actually saying!) the word in question.
This is easy to understand, follow and easy to enforce by moderators without them having to worry about a thing, since there is no room for interpretation or boundaries to push either, since things are clear.

Now, one (so you, Steve :D) might say "but right now the rules are clear as well: zero tolerance, so where is the problem?"
Steve, excellent question! :timeout:
Personally, I believe that not even allowing masking or actually harmless acronyms like WTF! are actually restricting a posters abilities of expression. This is no moot-excuse because I'm no writing talent, I'm totally serious about it.
We had our fair share of WTF! and similar words used in various topics and I find they can underline emotions of a post/poster very well, without becoming rude or bad in any way. Another example are pictures or memes we see in the funny picture thread. I found various hilarious pics in the past and while my initial thought was "I gotta put that on Subsim!", I was instantly reminded that I can't, because it contains the 'tools of the devil'.:shifty:

It's early morning in ol' Germania right now, not sure if I'm rambling, mumbling or actually make a little sense and you guys get my point of view.
Anyways, thanks for the open debate and sorry for the wall of text... ffs!
(kidding, kidding!) :D

Betonov

04-02-16, 01:10 AM

We should at least allow ''A hole'', when it's not aimed at the forum members.
Calling politicians jerks is an unwelcome understatement.

Eichhörnchen

04-02-16, 03:07 AM

English is a fabulous language of innumerable facets and subtleties; let's stay creative-it's actually more fun. :arrgh!:

I'd want things to stay the way they are, allowing those of us who want to have a bit of fun with innuendo still to do so. Some rude words do add greatly in emphasising a point, but once they're allowed then there's no going back and I agree with Neal that current standards keep Subsim a cut above and a'classier' place to hang out.

But, as with spelling, there are differences between UK and US English that create anomalies, also traditions of bawdy usage on this side of the ocean which we think of as harmless but US readers either wouldn't get and/or suspect were offensive. I know the reverse is also true, where a few fairly mild terms Americans use with impunity might raise very disapproving looks here. I've used these (I have to confess) hoping that they'd raise a titter among my mates in the UK and Oz, but at the same time get past a moderator... sorry :D

http://i.imgur.com/Ef7NcLi.jpg?1 "I never understood why I'm allowed to say bollocks..."

One other thing:

I don't want to derail by mention of the related subject of vulgarity, but just as this can involve use of bad language, it also can make use of euphemism... does that offend as well?

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2307325&postcount=16713

Oberon

04-02-16, 05:42 AM

If arresting the decline of morality is the goal then swearing is just the tip of the iceberg. :timeout:

Nippelspanner

04-02-16, 06:15 AM

One other thing:

I don't want to derail by mention of the related subject of vulgarity, but just as this can involve use of bad language, it also can make use of euphemism... does that offend as well?

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2307325&postcount=16713
Well, I once made a thread with a video of a cute little boy mistaking his new toy bow for...the word you used, making his parents laugh and having a good time.
It disappeared without notice.

Take a guess.

Onkel Neal

04-02-16, 06:52 AM

If arresting the decline of morality is the goal then swearing is just the tip of the iceberg. :timeout:

Wan't it the tip of an iceberg that sank the Titanic? :D

Oberon

04-02-16, 07:12 AM

Wan't it the tip of an iceberg that sank the Titanic? :D

:hmmm: It certainly didn't help...

http://i44.tinypic.com/9r63a0.gif

Onkel Neal

04-02-16, 07:18 AM

That is basically my whole point.
I totally understand why we can't write out certain words and although I was tempted to do it a million times by now, I prefer not to litter Subsim with this and to read mostly 'clean' posts.
Also, I agree with this rule since it makes a moderators job easier.
For example.
A new forum member arrives and goes crazy with these words.
Most people, including me, would consider this rude and "unfit" for Subsim, so a mod could point to the rules and act if necessary.
This would not be possible with a 4chan-like "everything goes" rule-set.

However, I do not see the point why I can't write ****!
Where is the harm?

I didn't write anything bad.
At best I gave everyone a puzzle open for interpretation.
Really, I can't think of any reason why the use of masking would not be allowed, it just makes no sense at all to me.

I feel you missed my actual point.
My point is not "let's cuss away!", my point is "let's not be silly!".
Things need to be balanced. If they are extreme in one direction or the other, they become crap. This goes for language too, in my opinion.

Honestly, implying or blaming people who use cuss-words of being "uncivilized" and immediately pointing towards one of the absolute extremes (Howard Stern, who is far from uncivilized btw!) is a little lazy, especially when applying a meme that actually defends one of the worst radical liars, bigots and hypocrites of our time.
You know, Stern might cuss like a sailor and sure crossed a line or two in his career when we talk taste, but he doesn't fake anything, is honest and I heard more wisdom coming out of his mouth in the 2-3 shows I have seen with him than out of Trumps dirty lying gush since...ever, so I wonder how accurate and therefore valid your examples actually are.

Which is something our species claims since way back to the early days of the Roman Empire... and we still don't have sex with our lawnmowers... well OK some actually do but come on, you get my point.
Cussing like a mad sailor doesn't make you uncivilized, it also doesn't say anything about your parents or how you have been raised.
While it is true that parents don't take enough responsibility for their kids anymore these days (just talk to ANY teacher...), they can't be blamed to 100% and how one expresses himself is just one tiny individual aspect that will be influenced by everything we do and learn for all our lives.
Just saying "cussing -> road to damnation" is a little too shallow, too easy for my taste.
Over my years here, I read some very disturbing posts full of hate, bigotry and inhumane opinions... they did not contain a single sign of foul language, yet also not any sign of being civilized at all when serious suggestions appeared to drop nuclear weapons on the middle east to be done with it already, for example.

Also, how "civilized" (highly subjective) are we if we are so strict over things ("masking" and maybe rare/soft cussing) that censoring it and/or punishing the poster becomes more important than the actual message?

Is a post someone creates automatically less true, less important, less funny or less thought-provoking - because the OP used some foul language?
Is a post automatically better because someone did not?

A painting doesn't get awesome because I use super expensive paint.
And it won't become crap just because I use low-quality paint - it is still up to me and what I do with it.
In the end, it depends on the poster and what he does with his words.
(I suck with analogies and such, sorry... sorry. :shifty:)

Guess we're in the same club then, no doubt! :yep:
However, I don't follow up with this if=then logic, as if only because we allow masking or even "light cussing" (example), we will end up like non-moderated YT channels.
This reminds me of the logic of some people when the gay-marriage debate was going on, painting pictures of Sodom and Gomorrah and Dooms Day... because a minority of people is now allowed to marry. :shifty:

The other way around would be:
"Neal! Not even masking foul language? What's next, a forced Grammar-Nazi-Club™ membership with a monthly subscription fee where you are the Führer and Steve your Propagandaminister?":timeout:

At least, that is how I see it.

Spot on.
One example could be to adjust the rules to allow masking like ****, while still not allowing writing out (actually saying!) the word in question.
This is easy to understand, follow and easy to enforce by moderators without them having to worry about a thing, since there is no room for interpretation or boundaries to push either, since things are clear.

Now, one (so you, Steve :D) might say "but right now the rules are clear as well: zero tolerance, so where is the problem?"
Steve, excellent question! :timeout:
Personally, I believe that not even allowing masking or actually harmless acronyms like WTF! are actually restricting a posters abilities of expression. This is no moot-excuse because I'm no writing talent, I'm totally serious about it.
We had our fair share of WTF! and similar words used in various topics and I find they can underline emotions of a post/poster very well, without becoming rude or bad in any way. Another example are pictures or memes we see in the funny picture thread. I found various hilarious pics in the past and while my initial thought was "I gotta put that on Subsim!", I was instantly reminded that I can't, because it contains the 'tools of the devil'.:shifty:

It's early morning in ol' Germania right now, not sure if I'm rambling, mumbling or actually make a little sense and you guys get my point of view.
Anyways, thanks for the open debate and sorry for the wall of text... ffs!
(kidding, kidding!) :D

I probably did screw uop and misunderstand where you're coming from, I will read your reply thoroughtly this afternoon when I get home, thanks

A week off is coming up in 6 hours.... yay!

Skybird

04-02-16, 07:21 AM

You can play foul by calling names and using certain improper words, and you can misbehave by acting underhandedly and using poisonous rhetoric tricks and traps.

Of the two, I take much greater offence from the latter. The barb goes much deeper, the trick is meaner, the wound hurts more.

As long as this discrepancy between foul words and underhanded rhetorics is not properly considered, I do not give overly much for rules just banning words. Fouls words are the lesser evil.

Platapus

04-02-16, 07:41 AM

Social morality is in a long, sad slide, I don't want to contribute to it.

I will join in... :D
First and foremost, this is Neal's forum. He gets to make the rules. If the rules are unacceptable to me, I won't voluntarily participate in this forum. There is no freedom of expression on a privately owned forum.

That being said, and acknowledged....

If the goal is to protect and preserve social morality (think of the children) then in my opinion, swearing is the least of the problems here in GT.

Here in GT we have individuals denigrating other members based on their religious beliefs; their political beliefs; their personal philosophy beliefs. Personal attacks and denigration is common.

These type of comments, in my opinion are far more damaging to the morals because they stigmatize people and over generalize groups.

That's what I want the moderators to monitor. Not the occasional swearing. Now if a member were to engage in gratuitous or rampant swearing, sure, pounce on them... especially if that is one of Neal's rules. His site his rules.

But please don't do it under the guise of enforcing moral standards, when much worse, and much more damaging comments become common place.

Which is really more damaging to the morals of our members

1. "Conservatives don't care about babies after they are alive"
2. "Typical Liberal, They don't care about the country"
3. "You can't be a Muslim and an American"
4. The word "damn" used in a sentence

Why would number 4 be moderated while 1,2,3 and many more, and worse, examples, be allowed to be posted?

What is the priority of moderation and what should be the priority?

Only Neal can and should answer that. But I, respectfully, would like an answer and to have the forum rules updated so that members know what the rules are and the moderators know what the rules are and can enforce them equally and consistently.

I am all for moderation, and I want moderation. I visit one un-moderated forum and it is horrible. But, as a member of this forum, I want consistent moderation and i want moderation on the truly offensive posts.

Jimbuna

04-02-16, 07:44 AM

My personal 'Moderators' opinion.

This is a really interesting topic/discussion and one I have discussed with Neal on occasion but a great many times more with Steve (Both in person and on Skype).

I can identify with the pros and cons of a few of the comments posted but two that particularly stand out imho are below:

Neal
I just want to keep this place a little classier than a YouTube or Live Leak comment section, you know.

Social morality is in a long, sad slide, I don't want to contribute to it.

Eichhörnchen
I'd want things to stay the way they are, allowing those of us who want to have a bit of fun with innuendo still to do so.
Some rude words do add greatly in emphasising a point, but once they're allowed then there's no going back and I agree with
Neal that current standards keep Subsim a cut above and a'classier' place to hang out.

A moderator whilst being aware that Neal prefers they act with as 'light a touch' whenever possible must also take into account that any actions they take are open to scrutiny by all forum members and as such must walk that fine line with the knowledge that they can never please everyone all of the time.

With the above in mind I try to adhere to the basic principle that this is Neals house and as such I agree with the FAQ & Rules as set out and in this case, this line in particular...

Always stay on the conservative side if you have any doubt. This forum is family safe.

All the above is obviously currently open to discussion and debate as well as potential change but I honestly don't see the need to change the wheel if it isn't broken.

Don't misinterpret the above as coming from somebody that is opposed to change because it is most definitely not.

STEED

04-02-16, 07:54 AM

According to medical research having a good swear is good for you to release stress tension and mild anger in a face to face situation, can it work on a heated thread? :hmmm:

Maybe to a point but the elephant in the room brings us to the known fact if you can go on and on and get more heated knowing full well the person you are having a ding dong with is not going to punch you in the face as their miles if not hundred plus miles way, so in steps the mod guys to throw some water on the fire.

Its Neal website and he sets the rules, that said I'm sure Neal believes in democracy here on subsims.

MaDef

04-02-16, 09:04 AM

Torplexed

04-02-16, 09:40 AM

Social morality is in a long, sad slide, I don't want to contribute to it.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=994&pictureid=8736

Okay Neal, I promise not to post any more girly toons. :salute:

Except for this one. :O:

http://pyxis.homestead.com/The_Old_Brood.jpg

Oberon

04-02-16, 11:47 AM

The Victoria era has a image of prudence and frigidity which it really doesn't deserve. :O:

(I'm aware that 1906 is the Edwardian era, but my point still stands)

Aktungbby

04-02-16, 12:05 PM

The Victoria era has a image of prudence and frigidity which it really doesn't deserve. :O:

(I'm aware that 1906 is the Edwardian era, but my point still stands) English is a fabulous language of innumerable facets and subtleties; let's stay creative-it's actually more fun. :arrgh!:INDEED at age 65 when I see 'em in their Victoria's Secret attire...frigidity is a genuine lifesaver!:O: http://cdn.grid.fotosearch.com/CSP/CSP993/k14790933.jpg

vienna

04-02-16, 01:41 PM

Wan't it the tip of an iceberg that sank the Titanic? :D

More than one unfortunate outcome started with the phrase: "No, really, just the tip..."...

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/d6/2e/5f/d62e5fa849f06b3ba1d0e86caa72e4c2.jpg

<O>

Dowly

04-02-16, 02:08 PM

"No, really, just the tip..."...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdXHW0DJEEU

Aktungbby

04-02-16, 02:30 PM

Wan't it the tip of an iceberg that sank the Titanic? :D
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/Tip_and_Ty_banner.jpg/220px-Tip_and_Ty_banner.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tip_and_Ty_banner.jpg) Steamship or canoe it's all the same:O: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sxf5dTL3sg0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sxf5dTL3sg0) https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/d6/2e/5f/d62e5fa849f06b3ba1d0e86caa72e4c2.jpg @VIENNA :D Yeah BBY!:up: U-666
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?pictureid=7048&albumid=815&dl=1381536131&thumb=1 (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/album.php?albumid=815)

Oberon

04-02-16, 03:22 PM

http://i.imgur.com/I6YsKEy.png

Onkel Neal

04-02-16, 04:26 PM

I will join in... :D
First and foremost, this is Neal's forum. He gets to make the rules. If the rules are unacceptable to me, I won't voluntarily participate in this forum. There is no freedom of expression on a privately owned forum.

That being said, and acknowledged....

If the goal is to protect and preserve social morality (think of the children) then in my opinion, swearing is the least of the problems here in GT.

Here in GT we have individuals denigrating other members based on their religious beliefs; their political beliefs; their personal philosophy beliefs. Personal attacks and denigration is common.

These type of comments, in my opinion are far more damaging to the morals because they stigmatize people and over generalize groups.

That's what I want the moderators to monitor. Not the occasional swearing. Now if a member were to engage in gratuitous or rampant swearing, sure, pounce on them... especially if that is one of Neal's rules. His site his rules.

But please don't do it under the guise of enforcing moral standards, when much worse, and much more damaging comments become common place.

Which is really more damaging to the morals of our members

1. "Conservatives don't care about babies after they are alive"
2. "Typical Liberal, They don't care about the country"
3. "You can't be a Muslim and an American"
4. The word "damn" used in a sentence

Why would number 4 be moderated while 1,2,3 and many more, and worse, examples, be allowed to be posted?

What is the priority of moderation and what should be the priority?

Only Neal can and should answer that. But I, respectfully, would like an answer and to have the forum rules updated so that members know what the rules are and the moderators know what the rules are and can enforce them equally and consistently.

I am all for moderation, and I want moderation. I visit one un-moderated forum and it is horrible. But, as a member of this forum, I want consistent moderation and i want moderation on the truly offensive posts.

Yeah, it's too common. (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2391521#post2391521)

You want the moderators, all two of them, to manage other people's opinions and freedom of expression? I'm not sure what the solution would be to fit your wishes. It would take all of 3 seconds for the member who had his opinion censored to be accusing the moderator of bias. Let's just ban topics on politics and religion.

I will give you an answer, as best I can, as to the priority of moderation: We can discuss topics we feel strongly about, trying to make our point without attacking the person we are engaging. Attack the member's argument, not the member. That's always been my goal. Allow as much freedom to express opinions as possible and still maintain as much civility as we can.

But please, don't ask me or the moderators to clamp down on every expression you do not like. This is not a college safe space. There are a lot of members here, in addition to you, and you have to know that is too much work, and impossible at any rate, to make everyone happy.

Oberon

04-02-16, 06:51 PM

It's a shame that we lost Tarjak and CCIP on the way, Tarjak was a good bloke, if it wasn't for him I doubt I'd have made it to the Subsim York meet.

u crank

04-02-16, 07:22 PM

Growing up, my mother always told us that, "the use of profanity is the mark of a small intellect".

While the use of profanity has it's time, place, and purpose it's very hard to have a meaningful conversation, be it spoken or written, when the other person sprinkles their ideas with copious amounts of profanity. Overuse of profanity tends to have the opposite effect from what's intended.

Just my 2 cents.

Wise words. I'll admit that when the occasion arises I can keep up with the best of them but I think profanity is over rated. I have yet to see anyone win an argument by out swearing the other guy. Writing swearwords is something I have never done. Can't do it.

As to SubSim's policy on swearing I agree with it. Just reading some You Tube comments tells me that this is the way to go.

And with the Canadian dollar the way it is that is my 1 cent worth.:O:

Jimbuna

04-03-16, 06:36 AM

Yeah, it's too common. (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2391521#post2391521)

You want the moderators, all two of them, to manage other people's opinions and freedom of expression? I'm not sure what the solution would be to fit your wishes. It would take all of 3 seconds for the member who had his opinion censored to be accusing the moderator of bias. Let's just ban topics on politics and religion.

I will give you an answer, as best I can, as to the priority of moderation: We can discuss topics we feel strongly about, trying to make our point without attacking the person we are engaging. Attack the member's argument, not the member. That's always been my goal. Allow as much freedom to express opinions as possible and still maintain as much civility as we can.

But please, don't ask me or the moderators to clamp down on every expression you do not like. This is not a college safe space. There are a lot of members here, in addition to you, and you have to know that is too much work, and impossible at any rate, to make everyone happy.

Yep, works for me and I'll be as simplistic as I can if I may....

I draw the line when name calling occurs or insults start getting exchanged but still try to allow a little bit of give and take.

'Damned if you do' and 'Damned if you don't' often springs to mind.

AVGWarhawk

04-04-16, 09:07 AM

IMO the completely written out word or &%&$*%* is not necessary and should not be part of the forum. I frequent many forums for classic cars. These forums do not resort to using uncompromising language or %&$%*&$. Swearing, although makes some feel good when angered, is not part of the good conversation, debate or needed to make a point.

I can say without a doubt that Subsim is a very docile forum compared to others I have been to.

Aktungbby

04-04-16, 10:58 AM

Actually: (it slipped my mind):oops:; one of my occasional gigs is a local card club/casino where I am the constituted authority:-? often on he night shift in all weather, usually in the parking lot. Even if you lose a tough hand, any profanity at the gaming table is expressly prohibited and you will be escorted-by me, by any means necessary- from the premises post-haste to your vehicle. The house offers 'bad beat' jackpot coverage ' so heartbreak losses are remedied at the floor managers' discretion and profanity is thus inexcusable-per the sign on the wall (FAQ if ever:yep:). My entry into the gaming area, when summoned, is regarded as a bad sign; fortunately, I've only ever had two incidents and they left w/o facing 'disturbing the peace' charges. :stare: As with rugby,:yeah: poker is a sociable-skill game played by gentlemen...and ladies...Always. Similarly,:subsim: is Neal's polite forum-the FAQ is clearly posted- end of discussion.

Eichhörnchen

04-04-16, 11:02 AM

http://i.imgur.com/4J5uxrV.jpg

"Get a wiggle on, Clive: I'd like to get home for my tea sometime tonight..."

"Start... START, why you wretched filthy thing, you!"

HunterICX

04-04-16, 11:25 AM

I don't know why there is to be an debate about this.
The rules clearly state that the use of vulgar, offensive and the use of foul language is a no-go.

Compromising with the use of alpha-numeric keys cusswords or ***** is pointless as there's already a forum language filter that does it in case someone couldn't resist the use of bad language.

If something you read on here makes you mad and the urge boils up to start swearing that's the point you should hit the log out button instead of replying with foul language as it only will result in that you give the moderators and admin a reason to undertake action.

Wolferz

04-04-16, 11:57 AM

By that definition, no word can be considered bad. It's the context in which they are used that make them bad.
Still, the use of salty language accomplishes one thing and one thing only,
It reveals the author's clear lack of vocabulary and makes the entire post subject to suspicion of idiocy and a quick invite to exit the premises.
We're all fairly intelligent folk here and it's better to be silent and thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. This becomes all too apparent when we choose to litter our posts with the excrement of our minds.

Keep it clean and we won't have all the flies buzzing around. Steve broke his fly swatter.:03::O:

August

04-04-16, 02:56 PM

By that definition, no word can be considered bad. It's the context in which they are used that make them bad.

Oh I can think of a few words and phrases that would be considered bad regardless of context. :)

It reveals the author's clear lack of vocabulary

I've known people (mostly Sergeants) who can elevate swearing into an art form and the last thing anyone would do is accuse them of being idiots.

Dowly

04-04-16, 03:13 PM

This was quite interesting:
Fry's Planet Word - "Uses and Abuses" (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xqb28e_frys-planet-word-3_shortfilms)

vienna

04-04-16, 04:07 PM

I have always had an admiration for those who can artfully use language without having to resort to "blue" words. There was an old drinking buddy of mine who was not well educated in the sense of degrees and old college ties, but very well read and knowledgeable. Once someone once asked him why he seldom, if ever, used swear words. He replied there was more satisfaction in eviscerating someone with word craft than just merely using cuss words; he compared it to fighting with a gun as opposed to a knife: the gun is quick and brutal, but essentially too quick, whereas a knife allows one to sort of slice and dice, prolonging the agony of the target...

<O>

Wolferz

04-04-16, 08:56 PM

Oh I can think of a few words and phrases that would be considered bad regardless of context. :)

I've known people (mostly Sergeants) who can elevate swearing into an art form and the last thing anyone would do is accuse them of being idiots.

Tell me about it. I used to be one of them.:salute: And a lot of them I would call idiots. :haha:

Oberon

04-04-16, 10:17 PM

I tend to swear in French or German usually, although if it's reflexive then it'll probably be in English.

Nippelspanner

04-05-16, 04:12 AM

I tend to swear in French or German usually, although if it's reflexive then it'll probably be in English.
...was.
How dare you swearing in my language!? That's bollocks!

Catfish

04-05-16, 04:44 AM

Tell me about it. I used to be one of them.:salute: And a lot of them I would call idiots. :haha:

Been there, done that. But i admit i find the US drill sergeant's hats like in Platoon utterly ridiculous. I guess you will not laugh as a recruit, but it's like putting someone in a clown's costume and allow him to torture you :-?

Nippelspanner

04-05-16, 04:46 AM

Aktungbby

04-05-16, 10:43 AM

Been there, done that. But i admit i find the US drill sergeant's hats like in Platoon utterly ridiculous. I guess you will not laugh as a recruit, but it's like putting someone in a clown's costume and allow him to torture you :-?
One guy makes his living at it! F. Lee Ermey was cast in his first film while attending the University of Manila (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Manila) in the Philippines, using his G.I. Bill (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.I._Bill) benefits. He played a First Air Cavalry chopper pilot in Apocalypse Now (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalypse_Now) doubling as a technical advisor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_advisor) to director Francis Ford Coppola (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Ford_Coppola). Ermey then was cast as a Marine Drill Instructor in Sidney Fury's "Boys In Company C." For the next few years, Ermey played a series of minor film roles until 1987 when he was cast as drill instructor Gunnery Sergeant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunnery_Sergeant) Hartman in Stanley Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_Metal_Jacket). https://www.quora.com/Do-real-life-military-drill-instructors-bear-any-resemblance-to-the-Gunny-character-from-the-movie-Full-Metal-Jacket (https://www.quora.com/Do-real-life-military-drill-instructors-bear-any-resemblance-to-the-Gunny-character-from-the-movie-Full-Metal-Jacket)
Initially he was intended to be only the technical advisor. Kubrick changed his mind after Ermey put together an instructional tape, in which he went on an extended tirade towards several extras, convincing Kubrick he was the right man for the role. Seeking absolute military authenticity for the film, Kubrick allowed Ermey to write or edit his own dialogue and improvise on the set, a notable rarity in a Kubrick film. Kubrick later indicated that Ermey was an excellent performer, often needing just two or three takes per scene, also unusual for a Kubrick film.https://qph.is.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-0355443f5a6ec64fa68ca6cac42e8faa?convert_to_webp=t rue Federal guards receive their periodic 40 hours new-contract training and range qualification from contracted Marine drill instructors...so I have a greater appreciation of the 'art form' They are excellent leaders and truthfully I never heard one actually swear. Class room discipline was tough and full attention mandatory or you were stood at your desk. @ Catfish I work occasionally alongside US Park Rangers who also wear the same (Smokey) hat...they are not ridiculous!:damn: Merely a matter of bad taste! :O:http://i1.wp.com/militaryhistorynow.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/20140826_140945.jpg?resize=266%2C300 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bayrische_Pickelhaube.jpg)en masse>http://i0.wp.com/militaryhistorynow.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/German_infantry_1914_HD-SN-99-02296-e1429329546451.jpeg?resize=560%2C373

Aktungbby

04-15-16, 10:35 AM

http://i.imgur.com/4J5uxrV.jpg

"Get a wiggle on, Clive: I'd like to get home for my tea sometime tonight..."

"Start... START, why you wretched filthy thing, you!"Save your billingsgate for the back seat BBY when your serious cranking really kicks in!:O: facets and subtleties I forgot innuendo!:shucks:

Schroeder

04-15-16, 12:17 PM

http://i1.wp.com/militaryhistorynow.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/20140826_140945.jpg?resize=266%2C300 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bayrische_Pickelhaube.jpg)

The spike actually had a purpose and wasn't just "decoration". The helmet was designed at a time when cavalry charges where still practiced on the battlefield and the spike made sure that a rider couldn't hit the infantry man's helmet dead center from above with his sabre where it would have been most likely to be breached. The spike deflected the blow on the sloped parts of the helmet which would either deflect the blow further or be able to withstand it. So while looking kinda silly today it was not made like that just for fashion reasons.:know:

fumo30

04-15-16, 01:14 PM

The spike actually had a purpose and wasn't just "decoration". The helmet was designed at a time when cavalry charges where still practiced on the battlefield and the spike made sure that a rider couldn't hit the infantry man's helmet dead center from above with his sabre where it would have been most likely to be breached. The spike deflected the blow on the sloped parts of the helmet which would either deflect the blow further or be able to withstand it. So while looking kinda silly today it was not made like that just for fashion reasons.:know:

I've been thinkin the purpose of the spike and always been satisfied that Germans don't make anything without calcullated purpose. Thanks for the info.:salute:

BTW, the spike also looks very cool.

August

04-15-16, 06:01 PM

I always thought it was some kind of head mounted pike. When all else fails put your head down and CHARGE! :)

slipf18

04-15-16, 07:53 PM

I am fairly new here. Couple months.

I appreciate the "cleanliness" of this forum.

Also appreciate that disagreements don't quickly turn into mud slinging personal attacks.

Sailor Steve

04-15-16, 08:38 PM

You really are new here. Old-timers will tell you that we have had many, many occasions of hostile personal attacks, mud-slinging, name-calling, diatribe and a lot more. We do our best to keep it in check, but you never know when the next one will be.

I'm not trying to scare you, I just don't want you to be surprised when the next outbreak happens. :sunny:

Aktungbby

04-15-16, 08:58 PM

I always thought it was some kind of head mounted pike. When all else fails put your head down and CHARGE! :)
Precisely why the US marines wore it too!https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8b/Pickelhaube_US_Marines_corps%2C_casque_%C3%A0_poin te_des_marines_am%C3%A9ricains.jpg/220px-Pickelhaube_US_Marines_corps%2C_casque_%C3%A0_poin te_des_marines_am%C3%A9ricains.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pickelhaube_US_Marines_corps,_casque_%C3%A0_p ointe_des_marines_am%C3%A9ricains.jpg):D @ Schroeder: I can see where the Prussian police wore it also: those cavalry sabre strikes on the ol' pickelhaube were a real problem while monitoring traffic on the Friedrichstrasse of ol' Berlinhttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/Preussische_Pickelhaube.jpg/220px-Preussische_Pickelhaube.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Preussische_Pickelhaube.jpg)<Prussian Police Pickelhauben https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/Harry_R._Hopps%2C_Destroy_this_mad_brute_Enlist_-_U.S._Army%2C_03216u_edit.jpg/800px-Harry_R._Hopps%2C_Destroy_this_mad_brute_Enlist_-_U.S._Army%2C_03216u_edit.jpg

August

04-15-16, 10:28 PM

:yep: http://www.moviemistakes.com/images/titles/originals/8335.jpg :yep:

Onkel Neal

04-15-16, 11:41 PM

I am fairly new here. Couple months.

I appreciate the "cleanliness" of this forum.

Also appreciate that disagreements don't quickly turn into mud slinging personal attacks.

Welcome aboard. If a mud slinging personal attack breaks out, just hit the Report Bad Post button http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/smartdark/report.gif and watch how fast it is stopped. :yep:

Eichhörnchen

04-16-16, 02:07 AM

Welcome to the forum, slipf18 :)

http://i.imgur.com/JEADgMJ.jpg It is normally a pretty kindly, civilized place...

Schroeder

04-16-16, 05:56 AM

@Schroeder: I can see where the Prussian police wore it also: those cavalry sabre strikes on the ol' pickelhaube were a real problem while monitoring traffic on the Friedrichstrasse of ol' Berlin

Road rage isn't a new invention and back then people rode. Imagine being hit by the sun shade of a feisty lady that was pulled over for riding too fast.:88)

Platapus

04-16-16, 06:50 AM

I always thought it was some kind of head mounted pike. When all else fails put your head down and CHARGE! :)

https://s15-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth% 3Fid%3DOIP.Mdb5aa5194ae3b0f3ddf6bd94d93b7fc4o0%26p id%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=f23f310b316bf2dc12fe7c829ec51d2b

Evidently you are not alone in this. :D

I doubt this was ever seriously considered though.

Armistead

04-18-16, 08:17 AM

Most of the nasty is in the Bilge Rats thread........we don't bath there..

Aktungbby

04-18-16, 09:49 AM

Most of the nasty is in the Bilge Rats thread........we don't bath there..

AS COB of the unbathed ratty bilge: U R only permitted to mutter "]"billingsgate!"[/B] :Kaleun_Mad:a useful term provided to us by no less than the Moderator-in-chief:rock: dulce et decorum est's the word in the Bilge nowadays...bring your own cheese though!:arrgh!:

Eichhörnchen

04-18-16, 10:58 AM

"...and crackers..." http://i.imgur.com/zFFI4fE.jpg

Sailor Steve

04-18-16, 11:51 AM

It seems this is now just another random comments thread. What should we merge it with?

vienna

04-18-16, 12:38 PM

http://assets.amuniversal.com/29c10df0d40001334c42005056a9545d

http://assets.amuniversal.com/2bb309d0d40001334c42005056a9545d

<O>

Aktungbby

04-18-16, 12:40 PM

It seems this is now just another random comments thread. What should we merge it with?
:sign_yeah: :agree: :Kaleun_Thumbs_Up: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=200694 (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=200694) :sunny:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fa/Auditor_of_Reality.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Auditor_of_Reality.jpg)

Eichhörnchen

04-18-16, 01:11 PM

http://i.imgur.com/VWn3J3H.jpg

"No, no, little man... I said what's yer name?"

"And I said Ivor Hugh Janus"

Rockstar

04-18-16, 01:31 PM

has anyone scratched their ass today?

Rockstar

04-18-16, 01:33 PM

are those ****lines tired and worn out or they still tight? To a real sailor ****lines are the lines seen between the three strands that make up a piece of three strand rope.

hmmm I taken aback that a nautical word has been striken and viewed here at a nautically themed website as a naughty word. Guess there's only one real sailor here. :D

is a dogscock also a bad word? apparently not. btw its a back spliced three strand rope

Eichhörnchen

04-18-16, 02:10 PM

http://www.scaffoldersforum.com/scaffolders-forum/6630-splicing-rope.html#post49658

So pulling on a Dogs Cock is OK then?

Sailor Steve

04-18-16, 02:12 PM

is a dogscock also a bad word? apparently not. btw its a back spliced three strand rope
As I've said many times, the easiest way to tell what is allowed and what is not is to send yourself a PM. If the censor bot zaps it, don't use it.

As for the other word, trying to slip it in mixed with other letters is not a good idea. Please don't do it again. And yes, I edited it out of your post.

Aktungbby

04-18-16, 02:43 PM

Guess there's only one real sailor here. :D

Billingsgate!:Kaleun_Mad:
:arrgh!: Well we're back on thread again!:Kaleun_Goofy:

Rockstar

04-18-16, 05:33 PM

As I've said many times, the easiest way to tell what is allowed and what is not is to send yourself a PM. If the censor bot zaps it, don't use it.

As for the other word, trying to slip it in mixed with other letters is not a good idea. Please don't do it again. And yes, I edited it out of your post.

Wont do it again, promise. But also too, I wasnt trying to sneak in a dirty word. In fact if you're into fancy work, knotting splicing, etc etc. It isnt a swear word, it isnt a vulgarity, a cuss word, or a bad word at all. It is simply a term used to identify the space between strands. It isnt something I made up either it can be found in The Book of Knots by Clifford W. Ashely

btw way would it be acceptable in the original Old Norse?

Sent myself a PM, it is but I wont use it.

Jimbuna

04-18-16, 05:33 PM

It seems this is now just another random comments thread. What should we merge it with?

I can think of a few but we'll discuss tomorrow at the secret swearing-in ceremony.

Sailor Steve

04-18-16, 05:43 PM

Wont do it again, promise. But also too, I wasnt trying to sneak in a dirty word. In fact if you're into fancy work, knotting splicing, etc etc. It isnt a swear word, it isnt a vulgarity, a cuss word, or a bad word at all. It is simply a term used to identify the space between strands. It isnt something I made up either it can be found in The Book of Knots by Clifford W. Ashely
I understand, and in that context I'd would say it's alright to post links and to discuss the subject. The fact remains that the word is prohibited here and in most of polite society (what remains of it). I believe you when you say you weren't trying to sneak the word in, but the fact is that there were mixed letters with the word itself in bold so it would stand out. This is no different that putting asterisks in between letters so the bot won't catch them, such as d*o*g, and people have been brigged for that. :sunny:

btw way would it be acceptable in the original Old Norse?
No, no more than it would be acceptable to use Old English, or proscribed words from other modern languages. The bot doesn't catch everything, but we try to.

It's better to avoid it altogether. Trying to be tricky is inviting trouble.

And, as someone I read said recently, "If you have to use profanity to be interesting, then face it - you're not that interesting."

Rockstar

04-18-16, 09:53 PM

Rockstar

04-19-16, 09:36 AM

These words in many cases are like time, there is no absolute but is relative to ones the frame of reference.

Sailor Steve

04-19-16, 09:40 AM

The phonetic spelling of the old norse version is used in the name of Kunta Kinte from Roots. If that word is acceptable when used in a name shouldn't it also be acceptable when describing a piece of old rope?
That's not my argument to make.

In either case whether the word starts with a C or a K they are not swear words and shouldnt be blotted out. If I choose to abuse the word then it would be a vulgar swear word. But I didnt and instead what is being enforced by the man isnt abuse of language but rather politcal correctness.
In this case "The Man" is the private owner of a private forum. You can call it whatever you like, but it's his house and his rules. My job is to enforce them. You can color it any way you like, but if you want to complain about them your beef is with him, not me.

Oberon

04-19-16, 11:08 AM

Aaah, Political Correctness, the bogeyman of the 21st century. :har:

Jimbuna

04-19-16, 12:04 PM

:ping:

AVGWarhawk

04-19-16, 12:20 PM

Swearing alienates some people. This forum is not about alienating anyone. Further, ones reputation is his brand. What brand does SS want to present the world? What brand does Neal want to present the world? Can we enjoy one area of our lives were swearing is not required, necessary or welcomed? I certainly hear it enough elsewhere. Sometimes out of my own mouth as my brain catches up. :doh:

Rockstar

04-19-16, 08:36 PM

Aaah, Political Correctness, the bogeyman of the 21st century. :har:

You liked that huh? I got more where that came from. :D

Rockstar

04-19-16, 08:44 PM

That's not my argument to make.

In this case "The Man" is the private owner of a private forum. You can call it whatever you like, but it's his house and his rules. My job is to enforce them. You can color it any way you like, but if you want to complain about them your beef is with him, not me.

Oh I dont have a beef with anyone over anything. Im just trying to stay on topic is all. :)

GT182

04-19-16, 10:27 PM

Aaah, Political Correctness, the bogeyman of the 21st century. :har:

Don't mix up Political Correctness with Respect. :)

There's way too much Political Correctness these days that is not correct. And way to little Respect from all ages towards others.

Oberon

04-19-16, 11:38 PM

Don't mix up Political Correctness with Respect. :)

There's way too much Political Correctness these days that is not correct. And way to little Respect from all ages towards others.

Respect is a two way street, some Political Correctness encourages people to respect each other and each others life choices, for some people that is far too much Political Correctness already.

I wonder what would happen if you got news headlines and removed Political Correctness and replaced it with 'treating people with respect'. :hmmm:

Oh wait...thanks Chrome. :O:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/this-google-chrome-extension-replaces-political-correctness-with-something-more-accurate_us_55c82605e4b0923c12bd4a91

Rockstar

04-20-16, 07:51 AM

Respect is a two way street, some Political Correctness encourages people to respect each other and each others life choices, for some people that is far too much Political Correctness already.

I wonder what would happen if you got news headlines and removed Political Correctness and replaced it with 'treating people with respect'. :hmmm:

Oh wait...thanks Chrome. :O:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/this-google-chrome-extension-replaces-political-correctness-with-something-more-accurate_us_55c82605e4b0923c12bd4a91

Respect is a feeling one has for another normally based on their abilities, qualities or achievements, the choice is mine whether I deeply admire that person or not. On the other hand Political Correctness sole purpose is to attempt to take that choice away and demand that feeling regardless of who I think deserves my respect.

Here's my life choice is: I dont give a rats patoot about political correctness and it does not have my respect. Political correctness demands you admire this life choice.

I swear P.C. crowds are just like those televangelists trying to impose their religion on you.

Sailor Steve

04-20-16, 08:21 AM

Rockstar

04-20-16, 08:31 AM

And that is, as I see it, the big difference between us. To you, respect has to be earned. I freely give my respect to everyone until they prove they don't deserve it. I also assume that anyone I deal with is as good as, if not better than I am, until they show otherwise.

The way I see it respect as defined by a dictionary of the english language is deep admiration for another based on their qualities, abilities or achievements. Not to be confused with just being a good neighbhor, friend, affable, decent human being towards another.

You may make life choices that I do not respect but I may still be your friend and neighbhor.

Sailor Steve

04-20-16, 08:35 AM

That's a very good point. :sunny:

Eichhörnchen

04-20-16, 10:04 AM

Oberon

04-20-16, 12:51 PM

Respect is a feeling one has for another normally based on their abilities, qualities or achievements, the choice is mine whether I show respect or not. On the other hand Political Correctness sole purpose is to attempt to take that choice away and demand that feeling regardless of who I think deserves my respect.

Here's my life choice is: I dont give a rats patoot about political correctness and it does not have my respect. Political correctness demands you admire this life choice.

I swear P.C. crowds are just like those televangelists trying to impose their religion on you.

I don't think that the original goal of PC was to make sure that you admire someone because of their life choice, but to encourage you to not discriminate against someone because of it. The way I look at it, and I've seemingly become the chief constable of the PC Police, is that if you don't like someones life choice, that's fair enough, but don't be an arse about it, like refusing service to them, or insulting them, or committing acts of violence against them, just because of this life choice.
Really, at the end of the day, the best law in this regard is Wheatons Law. :yep:

Rockin Robbins

04-20-16, 01:26 PM

Neal's rules are not political correctness. Perhaps, if you lack understanding of his reasoning, it is best for you to look at his rules of engagement as the arbitrary choices of a man who needs not seek approval and who does not subject his ideas of right or wrong to a vote. There are two choices: comply or take your business elsewhere.

And that is as it should be. I admire Neal for making choices and exercising his right to control his own private property. Ownership has its privileges.

vienna

04-20-16, 01:48 PM

I see common ground between you: there often remain social pressures to extend respect to people for whom we do not feel it.

I once knew a woman who exhorted her children never to show respect to another person unless that person had earned it. I wanted to believe she was just expressing herself poorly, but she had ambitions to become a psychologist. I didn't feel much respect for her after that (though there was much else lacking in her behaviour... I could give a list) but common courtesy meant that I would continue to extend respect to her, but maybe that's more about being British :hmmm:

Of course, I wouldn't show this respect to someone who'd outright insulted me, but then who
would?
...

I have a bit of a dim view of psychologists, particularly analysts, in general, given the ones I have had contact with in the past. Shortly after my first ex and I broke up, I was encouraged to seek out psychological counseling although I didn't really feel the need. The psychologist I went to was highly regarded and, at one time in his career, was the head of a prominent US national psychologists organization. I only went to him for a short time; the bulk of his 'advice' was a marriage breakup wasn't the end of the world and I should just move on; there was also the problem that once he knew I played guitar and had been in a few bands, he would spend a large portion of the rather expensive hours talking about how he could have been a jazz horn player if he had only stayed in New Orleans in college. The great and rather tragic irony is the psychologist's own wife left him: he came home from the office to find his wife had cleared out all the furnishings from their home and just left behind a letter saying she was was leaving and telling him to address any future communications to her lawyer. The psychologist took his own advice and did move on, with the aid of a bottle of booze and an overdose of barbiturates...

There seems to be something perverse in seeking out a career listening constantly to the miseries of others and thinking you are immune to the vicissitudes of life merely because you have a PhD or MD after your name...

And what would I do if I ever met Justin Bieber?

I can't specifically advise you, but I will say if the encounter should result in the 'disappearance' of Beiber, I, and many others, would be very happy to rpovide you with an alibi... :D

<O>

Eichhörnchen

04-20-16, 02:11 PM

:har: I often think that these psychiatrists (and perhaps psychologists too) suspecting all the while a certain vulnerability in themselves, are seeking some kind of 'immunity', or some other way of addressing their own issues.

Rockstar

04-20-16, 02:21 PM

I don't think that the original goal of PC was to make sure that you admire someone because of their life choice, but to encourage you to not discriminate against someone because of it. The way I look at it, and I've seemingly become the chief constable of the PC Police, is that if you don't like someones life choice, that's fair enough, but don't be an arse about it, like refusing service to them, or insulting them, or committing acts of violence against them, just because of this life choice.
Really, at the end of the day, the best law in this regard is Wheatons Law. :yep:

I didnt equate PC with the word respect (admiration), you Byron Clark and the huffington post did. :O:

Now what about Kunta Kinte? Who or what determines what a swear word is? Really how does it come about that a words origin which in the beginning had no vulgar, obscene meaning, is now placed on the verbotten list? According to George Carlin the FCC has a list of seven dirty words that cannot be spoken. Yet the Bible doesn't mention a thing about them, and people say the Bible is oppressive, hah!

Aktungbby

04-20-16, 02:37 PM

The great and rather tragic irony is the psychologist's own wife left him: he came home from the office to find his wife had cleared out all the furnishings from their home and just left behind a letter saying she was was leaving and telling him to address any future communications to her lawyer. The psychologist took his own advice and did move on, with the aid of a bottle of booze and an overdose of barbiturates...

His EGO not withstanding his SUPER EGO; his quID pro quo'd ?:O:Did his estate refund your fee$ ?http://www.simplypsychology.org/id-ego-superego.jpg The id is the primitive and instinctive component of personality. It consists of all the inherited (i.e. biological) components of personality, including the sex (life) instinct – Eros (which contains the libido), and the aggressive (death) instinct - Thanatos. :dead:

Eichhörnchen

04-20-16, 03:14 PM

The id is the primitive and instinctive component of personality.

http://i.imgur.com/KhgLZG1.jpg "So I'm just a crazy mixed-up id?"

vienna

04-20-16, 04:18 PM

Yes you are, and I id you not...

<O>

Aktungbby

04-20-16, 05:27 PM

"So I'm just a crazy mixed-up id?"In your professional field of painting: not a bad thing! A little 'Hare of the Dog that bit U' (excess Sangria in Pablo's case) can lead to :smug:
http://imagecache5d.art.com/Crop/cropwm.jpg?img=-63-6399-AG99100Z&x=0&y=0&w=1000&h=1000&size=2&maxw=1457&maxh=648&q=100or other distortions of ...
http://www.simplypsychology.org/id-ego-superego.jpg
depending on what yer smokin'!:O: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/Sigmund_Freud_LIFE.jpg/200px-Sigmund_Freud_LIFE.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sigmund_Freud_LIFE.jpg)

vienna

04-22-16, 01:09 PM

It is not PC to criticize PC!...

<O>

AVGWarhawk

04-22-16, 01:28 PM

Seven pages. I swear. :shifty:

Sailor Steve

04-22-16, 02:21 PM

Seven pages. I swear. :shifty:
Which brings up an interesting sub-topic - swearing!

According to most modern dictionaries the first or second definition of "swear" is to use rude or "bad" language, i.e. profanity or vulgarity. As I understand it that definition of the word is fairly new. "To Swear" originally (and still does by one definition) meant to take an oath - "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." In the Bible when Jesus gives his injunction against swearing, that is the meaning intended. Don't make oaths, just let it be known that when you say "yes" or "no" you mean it.
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/110381/origin-of-the-double-meaning-of-swear
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:34-37

mapuc

04-22-16, 03:28 PM

Here's my 5-cent on this topic

I like it as it is-no need to change.

Some stories I have read and heard.

Story 1(read)

You can use swearing in you vocabulary to tell a person, to go to a very hot place

Or you can use diplomacy and write it in a such way that the person is looking forward to the journey to this hot place.

Story 2(heard)
My Brother-In-Law said to his children-you can't close your ears to prevent them from hearing bad/ugly words. I will however not hear them here in our house or at other family related.

So this is how I see it.

Markus

Oberon

04-22-16, 06:23 PM

Which brings up an interesting sub-topic - swearing!

According to most modern dictionaries the first or second definition of "swear" is to use rude or "bad" language, i.e. profanity or vulgarity. As I understand it that definition of the word is fairly new. "To Swear" originally (and still does by one definition) meant to take an oath - "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." In the Bible when Jesus gives his injunction against swearing, that is the meaning intended. Don't make oaths, just let it be known that when you say "yes" or "no" you mean it.
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/110381/origin-of-the-double-meaning-of-swear
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:34-37

So it's also against the rules to lie? :O:

Rockstar

04-22-16, 07:17 PM

I think we've been over this before.

And it shall be if they nevertheless learn the way of My people to swear in My name "As YHWH lives," in the way that they taught My people to swear by Ba'al, then they shall be built into My people. ( Jeremiah 12:16)

I was always fascinated by this prophecy because it is speaking to the Gentiles, not the Israelites! It's directed at those Gentiles who taught Israel to swear by Baal. If these Gentiles will learn to swear "As YHWH lives" then they will become a part of the covenant-nation.

Obviously this has not happened yet. At this point most Israelites have forgotten how to swear "As YHWH lives" and I am not aware of too many Gentiles who do this either. But this is a promise that in the end-time the Gentiles will learn to swear in the name of YHWH and through this they will be built into Israel.

Then comes along Jesus in the Greek Matthew (5:33-37) who did away with swearing, even saying that he who swears was of "the evil one." If this is really what Jesus said, then he would not only be annulling Torah but delaying the fulfillment of the end-times prophecy in Jeremiah.

However! Before passing final judgment on Jesus I double checked in the Hebrew language Matthew. "You have further heard what was said by the ancients, "you shall not swear falsely by my name" [Leviticus 19:12] but you must pay your vow to YHWH [Deuteronomy 23:21]. But I say to you, that you must not swear by anything falsely, not by heaven which is the throne of God, nor by the earth which is His footstool, nor by [Jerusalem] which is His city, nor by your head because you cannot make one hair white or black, But let your yes be yes and your no, no. Anything added to this is evil. (Hebrew Matthew 5:33-37)