[lizardlady]

Is there a way that the filters for cursing could be contextual? I'm not arguing against the software blocking cursing. I understand the reason for the rule and have no arguement with it. I'm talking about glitches in the software that block the use of the diminutive for Richard, but allow someone to call someone else a "*****".

I realizr in the greater scheme of things this isn't all that important, but it is annoying.

[venusss]

At least it allows us to say what we had for lunch (chicken or turkey breasts ). Not sure if you can discuss Kafka's metamorphosis where hero changes to cockroach.

Or Japanese nuclear plants (which don't even spell a swear word) or defining political theorists (Fukuyama).

But I think we discussed this before, it'd be hard to change.

[optimize990h]

The big thing I noticed about the "anti-swear ware" is that typing out cockatiel in posts is now possible for me, at least. I should try the chat room and see if that word is still censored there.

[DocJohn]

The software isn't smart enough to understand context of swear words -- that would require a fair amount of language processing and computing power for every word written. Neither of which we have here, sorry to say.

I really think this topic has run its course as well, and we've already closed the first thread on this issue. I don't want to keep rehashing it over and over again. We're a community that supports people of all ages with mental health concerns and we decided to limit swearing using common swear words. While it may be a little frustrating from time to time, it's a decision that I continue to stand behind.

DocJohn

[NoCake]

I've always been a leg man anyway.

[Travelinglady]

Sorry I can't resist this comment: "Leg" was considered a no-no word back in Freud's day! I guess folks would have to ask, "May I have a lower chicken limb, please?"

[lizardlady]

Originally Posted by DocJohn

The software isn't smart enough to understand context of swear words -- that would require a fair amount of language processing and computing power for every word written. Neither of which we have here, sorry to say.

I really think this topic has run its course as well, and we've already closed the first thread on this issue. I don't want to keep rehashing it over and over again. We're a community that supports people of all ages with mental health concerns and we decided to limit swearing using common swear words. While it may be a little frustrating from time to time, it's a decision that I continue to stand behind.

DocJohn

Thanks Doc John. What you said about the software makes sense.

[Permanent Pajamas]

I'm still laughing about Philip K. D*ck's last name being censored in the Sci-Fi Social Group.

[lizardlady]

Originally Posted by Permanent Pajamas

I'm still laughing about Philip K. D*ck's last name being censored in the Sci-Fi Social Group.

That sort of thing was why I asked the question. I wasn't questioning or protesting the rules against swearing. I'm in favor of the rule. I was trying to find out if there was a way around that sort of thing. Doc John's answer makes sense. Like I said initially, in the greater scheme of things this is not that important.

[unaluna]

Originally Posted by PAYNE1

Sorry I can't resist this comment: "Leg" was considered a no-no word back in Freud's day! I guess folks would have to ask, "May I have a lower chicken limb, please?"

That would explain the turkey leg eating scene in the movIe Tom Jones - I never did understand why it was considered so lascivious!!