|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Those ****ing Asterisks | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 315 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
You're too modest. You have a true gift. Start a ranting style blog a la Pharyngula, it'll be very popular. And there I shall write freely of ***e and ***res ***rics and the ***nx and ***me disease and people called ***nn and ***le; of ***chees and the lands of ***dia and ***onesse; of ***mph nodes and ***copods; of ***tch gates and ***canthropy. You know, I've though of a way you can distinguish all those words from the word "***ing". It is the only one in which the letters "***" are followed by the letters "ing". I guess that's such a subtle pattern it took a genius like me to notice it, but now that it's been drawn to your attention perhaps you could modify your list of censored words accordingly.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
I thought people were typing the asterisks in manually.
That you've designed the software to replace certain words from certain members is a great idea. And hilarious. I like it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18354 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
jar writes: I see your point, but may point out that when a Biblical Creationist debates a secular critical thinker, one may well employ knowledge, evidence, and rationality while the other has been taught to use faith, belief, and dogmatic assertion. In addition, a creationist may quote Ken Ham, for example, and may not be aware of any definite proof that Ken is ignorant or wrong, either willfully or unknowingly. Notice that you post shows that you do not know the difference between an individual, the corporate and content. What is the lack of knowledge called? I can see where you feel the need to confront societal misconceptions and dogmas, but perhaps in a forum such as this one, allowing the other side time to lay out their assertions and feel comfortable trying to defend them makes for a more interesting conversation than simply nipping them off at the bud and challenging their intelligence or lack thereof. Edited by Phat, : spelling
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I do not address anyone's intelligence or lack there of.
If someone is not aware of the actual definitions of words, what is that called?Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 315 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
That you've designed the software to replace certain words from certain members is a great idea. And hilarious. I like it. Well I, for one, am not going to take this *** down. And anyone who says I am is bullshitting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Did you type those asterisks in manually?
ABE: I ask because they're showing up as asterisks in the "Peek" mode. I don't think the software should change what you have typed into the text box, but I don't have a problem with it dressing it up a bit as it goes live. Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
Please understand that I like and support the current censorship at EvC, people such as myself do need to be limited and restricted while Creationists and Intelligent Design supporters must be allowed to continue to make personal attacks on other members, to post falsehoods and misrepresentations.
That is all they have. Edited by jar, : appalin spallinAnyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped! |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3674 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined:
|
Where we can suggest which words should be censored for which members...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 315 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Where we can suggest which words should be censored for which members... Ooh yes. Buzsaw: "prophecy".Dawn Bertot: "logic". Mazzy: any word containing a vowel.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes:
Considering her spelling ability: that would not limit her word count much. Mazzy: any word containing a vowel. Can we add 'curiously' to RADZ's list?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13046 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.7 |
Catholic Scientist writes: I ask because they're showing up as asterisks in the "Peek" mode. I don't think the software should change what you have typed into the text box, but I don't have a problem with it dressing it up a bit as it goes live. This is a good point. Currently it changes the original text, but it should be an easy change to perform the filtering only in the rendered version, so I'll do that next time I'm in the code. Come to think of it, a might only be a little more work to make the original words visible in Peek mode. As long as I'm going to be mucking with that code I should ask if anyone cares whether the number of asterisks matches the number of letters in the original word. If I remember correctly, it's three asterisks no matter what the word length.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Admin writes:
I have noticed that using asterisks makes it look like swearing. As long as I'm going to be mucking with that code I should ask if anyone cares whether the number of asterisks matches the number of letters in the original word.Maybe use a different character? e.g. ~~~???
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4046 Joined: Member Rating: 8.3
|
Would this be the appropriate thread to indicate that I believe censorship along these lines is ill-advised?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
This is a good point. Currently it changes the original text, but it should be an easy change to perform the filtering only in the rendered version, so I'll do that next time I'm in the code. Great!
Come to think of it, a might only be a little more work to make the original words visible in Peek mode. Of course, when you copy&paste from the peek mode, then the words won't be filtered anymore so it might circumvent the whole idea. But still, the stuff I type into the box should not be being changed into something else.
As long as I'm going to be mucking with that code I should ask if anyone cares whether the number of asterisks matches the number of letters in the original word. If I remember correctly, it's three asterisks no matter what the word length. The number of asterisks should match the number of characters. Defaulting to three asterisks makes it really confusing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dogmafood Member (Idle past 379 days) Posts: 1815 From: Ontario Canada Joined:
|
I say let people decide for themselves what they wish to be offended by and then let them be offended by it. For example, I find censorship to be among the most offensive of things. Far more offensive than being personally insulted.
Censor only what you absolutely must and err on the side of inclusion.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024