Using profanity in the forums

[Charles Anthony]

drawn from the

British Navy Sailors taken by Iranians thread post #289 and post #290

Before discussing the merits of using obscene language, permit me to make something clear: I am not a moderator. It would make no sense for me to be a moderator. My political beliefs are too extreme and I am not always level-headed.

I am a forum facilitator with the job of dealing with spam and helping other members with formatting their post.

I have no authority to decide what members are permitted to post. My job is to hide advertizements so that they may be deleted later by the forum administrator. Greg, the forum administrator is currently and so far has been the only moderator. If you post something objectionable, he will decide whether it should be deleted or edited. If I see something that is objectionable or a contravention of the forum rules, I will report it to him just like every other member reports objectionable posts. I make my report public in the thread to notify other members who might want to report the post too. That way, the moderator does not receive many reports for the same post.

I disagree.

reported

For some reason you overlooked this one....

There could be many reasons:

- Geoffrey is on my ignore list

- I think that word is polite

- I did not read that post

Take your pick.

They are guilty as shit.

IMO, neither is worth reporting... but since you feel so strongly about it, you might want to play moderator for all people who are using profanities. Not just the ones with whom you disagree.

I agreed with FigLeaf in that thread. My first post in that whole thread can not be misinterpreted.

Greg has spoken on this issue quite recently. He indicated that there is nothing in the rules about so-called 'profane' words and that his interest focuses on respectful dialogue. In this instance I think it's obvious my use 'fuck' was exclamatory and in no way directed at any poster.

You are indeed right, he did speak on the issue. Personally, I believe your word choice was unnecessary.

If there is a rule against particular words, I need but be advised of it so that I may comply.

I believe that the use of obcenities demeans the quality of the forums.

Profanity:

Others say that profanity is wrong because it's vulgar, debasing, dirty, or what have you. But that's just a label or a metaphor -- it doesn't explain why profanity is bad.

Here's my tentative answer (with apologies in advance if it's too obvious): Profanities have historically been ways of conveying anger or contempt.

The Volokh Conspiracy

or

Profanity:

Read the rest. The author aknowledges that there are exceptions and that the context of the language may make that obvious.

In an online discussion forum, foul language can be the precursor for uncivilized behavior.

[Figleaf]

I think that word ['shit'] is polite

...Personally, I believe your word choice ['fuck'] was unnecessary.

...I believe that the use of obcenities demeans the quality of the forums.

...Profanities have historically been ways of conveying anger or contempt.

...In an online discussion forum, foul language can be the precursor for uncivilized behavior.

So are you making a pitch for a rule change?

[geoffrey]

Look at Mulroney's word choice, he was 'polite' enough to be one of the most effective world leaders of our time.

My usage of 'shit' in that thread was completely within the normal use of language. "Guilt as..." is a common saying. It's far less offensive then throwing out the f-bomb comment, that was directed at another poster IMO.

Personally, I don't think such things need to be moderated either way. If you sound like an ignorant idiot, then so be it, it only hurts yourself. I don't see the forums descending into a nasty game of extremely profane language at this time.

I'd suggest everyone just cheer up a little.

[Charles Anthony]

My usage of 'shit' in that thread was completely within the normal use of language.

I disagree.

"Guilt as..." is a common saying.

It may be common around your parts but I actually never heard it used that way until BC-Chick insinuated that I deliberately skipped it. The biggest challenge in language arts is identifying your audience. On a national forum including members from all around the world, it would be wise to be more disciplined.

It's far less offensive then throwing out the f-bomb comment, that was directed at another poster IMO.

I agree -- partly.

Personally, I don't think such things need to be moderated either way. If you sound like an ignorant idiot, then so be it, it only hurts yourself. I don't see the forums descending into a nasty game of extremely profane language at this time.

I disagree. The use of foul vocabulary in written language is at best ambiguous and at worst it encourages others -- for whom the meanings are not so docile -- to escalate the language.

Here is what I think is a good test: Would you speak that way to a potential mother-in-law on your first meeting?

I'd suggest everyone just cheer up a little.

I can agree.

So are you making a pitch for a rule change?

No. I am very comfortable with Greg treating foul language in the forum on a case by case basis when it arises. He can not read every single post in every single thread. Thus, it behooves all members to take it upon ourselves to participate in notifying him when possible transgressions arise. I will wait until Greg tells ME to stop calling out what I perceive are transgressions.

FrigLeaf, your attempt to explain your word-choice is what I call a bovine submission to the court of reason. The English language has an objective operator called an exclamation mark! You could have used that at the end of your sentence.

[Figleaf]

My usage of 'shit' in that thread was completely within the normal use of language.

I disagree.

It's far less offensive then throwing out the f-bomb comment, that was directed at another poster IMO.

... Here is what I think is a good test: Would you speak that way to a potential mother-in-law on your first meeting?

So are you making a pitch for a rule change?

No. I am very comfortable with Greg treating foul language in the forum on a case by case basis when it arises. He can not read every single post in every single thread. Thus, it behooves all members to take it upon ourselves to participate in notifying him when possible transgressions arise. I will wait until Greg tells ME to stop calling out what I perceive are transgressions.

...your attempt to explain your word-choice is what I call a bovine submission to the court of reason. The English language has an objective operator called an exclamation mark! You could have used that at the end of your sentence.

Each of the foregoing quotes demonstrates a serious challenge to even the concept of policing language.

Charles thinks both 'shit' and 'fuck' are bad. But Geoffrey thinks 'shit' is good but 'fuck' is bad. On what basis? No objective one, seemingly. (Geoffrey also can't sensibly discern when something is directed at a poster and when it's not.)

Then we are offered the "mother-in-law" test ... which produced for Geoffrey the "shit"/"fuck" distinction, I guess, though how is still unclear. Why would someone's mother-in-law be the appropriate standard for this forum though?

Next, Charles is happy with the case-by-case method. But that apparently involves him reporting people when his sensibilities are offended and putting us to the bother of worrying about it or responding to it. What gives him the right to make specious reports about language that has no rule against it?

And then finally, Charles critiques my failure to use his prefered punctuation in re the word 'fuck'. This is plainly ludicrous.

FrigLeaf,

Reported. Unlike my use of 'fuck', your use of 'Frig' is clearly directed at me through the modification of my user handle. There IS a rule against that, Charlie.

[Greg]

Using profanity during a debate, like using insults, does nothing but lower the overall quality of the speakers argument. I don't have a specific rule about profanity because I think it goes without saying, profanity - in any form - isn't respectful. Whether or not that profanity is directed at a member of the forum, a third party, or in some abstract way, it should not be considered acceptable to litter your responses with fuck, shit, whatever.

This isn't rocket-science, and I don't think it is unreasonable for me to ask that everyone avoid using profanity when participating in these forums.

I understand that we're all humans and that we sometimes let our emotions get the best of us. Much of the profanity that I've seen in these forums falls under that category. However, take a look at the list of banned users, and you'll noticed a trend. Those who use profanity to make their point often don't have much of a point to make. They need to use profanity to express themselves because they couldn't be bothered to construct a reasonable and sound argument.

Saying someone is a fucking idiot, (or "guilty as shit") is far easier than actually defending the position and or explained it further.

[M.Dancer]

Oy....womyn......

[ScottSA]

I would like to point out that the major disruptions here seem to be figleaf whining and crying about every slip of the tongue. It has the effect of poisoning the debate, since he/it invariably reports his betters opponents and gives his buddies in ignorance a pass. Shouldn't there be a penalty of some sort to curb gratuitous snivelling?

[Figleaf]

I would like to point out that the major disruptions here seem to be figleaf whining and crying about every slip of the tongue.

Whining? Crying? Riiiiiight.

Again, I'll point out to you that this forum has rules, and if you abide by them you have nothing to worry about in that regard.,

... Shouldn't there be a penalty of some sort to curb gratuitous snivelling?

If there were such a penalty, you'd likely suffer from it, based on this last post, at least.

[M.Dancer]

Your last 3 post have been gratuitous snivelling. Could you perhaps waddle off and stalk someone else for a change?

[Figleaf]

Your last 3 post have been gratuitous snivelling.

Have I not already advised you that I don't place any value on your opinions? I believe I have, but somehow you haven't grasped that, it seems.

Could you perhaps waddle off and stalk someone else for a change?

Stalk? I've been replying to posts either about me, directed to me, or on subjects I've been participating in closely.

This latest accusation of yours simply demonstrates that you, not me, are the one pursuing an obsession.

But don't let that dissuade you. Keep it up. In fact, please intensify your behaviour. Soon Greg will notice it for what it is -- trolling.

[M.Dancer]

But don't let that dissuade you. Keep it up. In fact, please intensify your behaviour. Soon Greg will notice it for what it is -- trolling.

Oh brother....honestly, when things got tough, did you take your ball and run home crying to mommy?

[Figleaf]

I've already given you an answer to such peurile taunts. I see no reason to add more commentary on that matter.

[ScottSA]

I would like to point out that the major disruptions here seem to be figleaf whining and crying about every slip of the tongue.

Whining? Crying? Riiiiiight.

Again, I'll point out to you that this forum has rules, and if you abide by them you have nothing to worry about in that regard.,

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that your deep concern with abiding by the rules is at its height when you or one of your philosophical soulmates is being intellectually thrashed and backed into a corner by someone. Have you, for example, ever piously trotted off to report CB or anyone else who is philosophical agreement with you? I'll hazard a guess not, but no doubt you're otherwise occupied every single time that happens...probably trying to keep your head above water in another thread. Yet they use pottymouth and toilet words with at least as much abandon as anyone else here. See, that's the problem with little bespeckled class monitors...they tend to use their itsy little bit of power to disrupt, while pretending that they are on the path of shining sweetness and light. Or should I say the Shining Path?

Morris and I have personally watched a forum get torn apart because of this kind of incessant whining about "rules", and the majority of the damage is caused by little martinets just exactly like you.

[Slavik44]

I suppose I am one of the worst offenders when it comes to profanity in my post, so my defense of such use may not mean all that much. But I don't necceassrily know if we should be runing around talking to each other as if we were meeting a potential mother-in-law for the first time, it might lead to a fairly lame duck discussion of politics. I think their is a tendancy to pick certain words label them as profane for whatever reason that might be...this labelling of course seems to change overtime, and within our lifetimes. Honestly, I don't know if they should be excluded from vocabulary. I have heard it said that if person uses a profane word, it is a symbol that they couldn't come up with a better word to use, however, it could be just as likely that it was the best possible word to use.

I mean hell I don't know...is that profane? unnacceptable? or just a little expressive? Certainly I can see Go to hell as a problem. So then could it be said that this is largely dependant on the context within which the post is being interpreted and written? An offensive word might be present, but perhaps it is better to ask about the context of that word. Although again I am certainly no great example when it comes to profanity in my posts.

[Figleaf]

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that your deep concern with abiding by the rules is at its height when you or one of your philosophical soulmates is being intellectually thrashed and backed into a corner by someone.

I almost wish I knew what you were talking about. Almost.

Have you, for example, ever piously trotted off to report CB or anyone else who is philosophical agreement with you?

Even if true (it's not, CB and I have argued vigorously), your complaint would have no merit. I have no duty to monitor the board for all transgressions. I simply report the ones I detect.

Again, I remind you that your remedy is to simply abide by the rules.

Morris and I have personally watched a forum get torn apart because of this kind of incessant whining about "rules", and the majority of the damage is caused by little martinets just exactly like you.

Ah, so you do have a prior relationship.

It sounds to me like you two want a forum where you can run roughshod over others, toss insults around, and generally make yourselves unpleasant. I think you'll find that the rest of us here aren't interested in that sort of behaviour.

[ScottSA]

I think you'll find that the rest of us here aren't interested in that sort of behaviour.

Ah, the old appeal to group strength. Quite in keeping with a tendency to tattle. Now, lest anyone think I'm flaming gratuitously, let me make it quite clear that this personality description may have nothing to do with figleaf (where-tf did that name come from anyway?) and is merely put out there as a general description of a certain type of insipid poster:

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/crybaby.htm

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorsh...iquettenazi.htm

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/weenie.htm

This type of personality is usually found in kindergarten, wearing some particularly ridiculous piece of clothing...maybe earmuffs in summer or some such...that his domineering mother insisted he wear. His father is either thoroughly cowed and adept at the phrase "yes dear", or a heavy drinker usually found at the local pub buying drinks for young women to whom he is forever complaining that his wife doesn't understand him.

As this type of personality grows and finds himself either ignored or worse yet; the butt of jokes; he learns that running to higher authority compensates for his personal lack of power. As he grows older, he finds that he can augment this most annoying trait with appeals to group membership: "I'm gonna tattle, and not just because I want to, but because everyone else ("we") wants me to. This appeal also serves as avoidance of responsibility for actions.

Personality types like this tend to make good rank and file fascists, since their already weak self esteem and a general insipidity are suited to taking orders from higher authority.

Once again, let me assure the forum that this description may have nothing to do with figleaf, and any resemblence to him/her or anyone else on the forum is entirely coinmumblemumblental.

[Charles Anthony]

Excellent website!

[Figleaf]

I think you'll find that the rest of us here aren't interested in that sort of behaviour.

Ah, the old appeal to group strength.

Yes, that's my problem ... Won't stand up for myself. A real shrinking violet, that's me.

[geoffrey]

He's right, an appeal to group strength is a logical fallacy... argumentum ad populum. An invalid argument. I'd make a reference to a "one millions ants can't be wrong, so eat..." but I'd offend some if I finished the thought.

But hey, while some might have profanity as their big issue here, some grammar... I'm here trying to keep some logical consistancy to the arguments being made.

Unless they are my arguments of course, which are allowed to be irrational.

[ScottSA]

I think you'll find that the rest of us here aren't interested in that sort of behaviour.

Ah, the old appeal to group strength.

Yes, that's my problem ... Won't stand up for myself. A real shrinking violet, that's me.

If I were referring to you, and under no circumstances might I may not be, I would point out that there is a difference between standing up for oneself and running to mommy. In the context of a BB, standing up for oneself means absorbing a bit of punishment because...well, just because that's the nature of a BB, and indeed of life. Besides, a little well written flaming can be funny, and really, who cares, right? Conversely, running to mommy and pretending to do so because everyone wants you to is lame in the extreme and indicative of utter pathetic weakness of personality. I use the term "you" generically of course, because this observation certainly might not be personally directed at "you" in a more direct sense. That would be mean and I'm sure mommy would be alerted post haste.

[Figleaf]

If I were referring to you, and under no circumstances might I may not be, I would point out that there is a difference between standing up for oneself and running to mommy.

My dear chap, in case you haven't figured it out yet, 'running to mommy' as you call it, or reporting a post, as I call it is:

1) The required substitute for responding in kind on this forum. When you insult another poster, my first inclination is to belittle you and call you names that would so shrivel you that you'd fall in obsessive slave-love with me. But thankfully, the forum rules demand that I not indulge that impulse. Instead, I sublimate it by reporting you.

2) A coup counted Score on you by me !huzzah!, each time your arguments fail you so badly.

Now, as for the rest of your post, should I take that as pleading for mercy?

[ScottSA]

If I were referring to you, and under no circumstances might I may not be, I would point out that there is a difference between standing up for oneself and running to mommy.

My dear chap, in case you haven't figured it out yet, 'running to mommy' as you call it, or reporting a post, as I call it is:

1) The required substitute for responding in kind on this forum. When you insult another poster, my first inclination is to belittle you and call you names that would so shrivel you that you'd fall in obsessive slave-love with me. But thankfully, the forum rules demand that I not indulge that impulse. Instead, I sublimate it by reporting you.

2) A coup counted Score on you by me !huzzah!, each time your arguments fail you so badly.

Now, as for the rest of your post, should I take that as pleading for mercy?

Here's a hint for your future endeavors in the world of adulthood: Try to avoid loudly declaring victory in a debate. This is especially true after having been soundly mocked in a most comprehensive and humiliating manner. It almost never looks good to the others you might want to hide behind in the future.

Don't spend time attempting to keep others from falling in slave love with you. The danger is probably not as clear and present as you think. Worry instead about curbing your tattling to attacks that are actually directed against you, instead of leaping uninvited into conversations between other people with a perky "reported!", followed by the declaration that other people made you do it. Even if it were true, it just makes you look even more spineless.

[Canadian Blue]

Wow, the hypocrisy.

[Figleaf]

Don't spend time attempting to keep others from falling in slave love with you. The danger is probably not as clear and present as you think.

I feel that moment by moment it is getting stronger.

Worry instead about curbing your tattling to attacks that are actually directed against you, ...

I don't think so. You just need to respect the rules we all follow here.