Censors / Word Replacement

[Joshy 4,364 / 44,945]

What do you guys think of censor or word replacements on severely bad words (ie. racial slurs)?  Would something being implemented upset you?

 

I don't make the decisions here and can't say what would happen, but curious about your thoughts.  I personally think a filter would be pretty nice especially if I'm browsing on my phone and someone looks over my shoulder... of course!... just as someone has dropped a racial slur that I had nothing to do with.  Just my luck.  I don't use racial slurs and so I've got nothing to lose from it.

 

I think the other counter argument is where would we draw the line for severe or could this be a pathway for overly censoring words?

 

What would we do with people who count or abuse the censor say for instances a replaced word "You are a damn lamp!" (lamp replaced a word).  Now everything we something like lamp or [censored] we're already going to know what the person was trying to say.  One time slip up. Okay?  Lamp isn't against the rules yet ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°), but what about someone who always uses it and you can pick it up from their context?  Would it be wrong to enforce?

[Dragoon 385 / 10,460]

Thank you for posting this, Joshy. This is a subject that a lot of people have differing opinions on. (Example: The discussion about the "R Word" from a while back) Specifically, the ideas of "Meaning" and "Context" are examples of these "Sides" that a lot of people are divided between. Some people like to argue that no matter what, based off of a word's meaning (Such as how words like the "N Slur" or "F Slur" have been used towards certain groups of people both in the past and in the present), it should never be used. However, other people tend to argue that the context of a word being used matters, and it isn't bad if it is not meant to be bad.

The censorship in itself for the use of these severe words is something that I'm okay with in a controlled community such as GFL, however, there's always that potential worry that more words may be censored.

Many people have different opinions. If you're using a word replacement, some people may not like that, however, as long as the word replacement isn't that of one with negative context, or, the meaning behind the word is not something that people generally feel on edge about, then my opinion is that the specific word should be banned. It depends on the history of the one using said words, what they've previously said, and if there is a worry that they may say it again. If a person has shown reform, and someone tries to interpret something they said as an attack with a so called "Word Replacement", then the people in charge of enforcing rules against certain types of language should be wary and be sure to interpret the situation correctly, rather than assume that someone is trying to be rude. Of course, there are always those types of people that want to show other people some attitude, but you can't really change what people want to do most of the time.

TL;DR: "Word Replacements" and another unnecessary words should not be censored, however, if someone is being ill-mannered, then punishments are fine, so long as "Okay Words" aren't taken away from other people.

Edited December 5, 2020 by Dragoon

[Rhysin_ 540 / 13,177]

I'm in favor of a auto-filtering system for extremely offensive language. Like a system to automatically hide a post that uses racial or homophobic slurs and give the user a warning point or something. 
With the thought of over censoring, I get why many people are worried about taking the censoring to far. In my opinion the only words that should be automatically moderated are the words that are 1. extreme and 2. are extremely uncommon to find in a non-derogatory way, such as the n word, the f slur, and the trans slur (While I do believe the r word is one that could be grouped in here, I understand that each GFL server is it's own community, and many do not ban that word.). Other words that can be deemed extremely offensive should be determined by context.
Looking at replacement words, these are also things that should be determined by context. Is it super obvious that they were replacing extremely offensive language? Punishment. Are they just someone who uses a non-insult word as an insult? No punishment. 

[Joshy 4,364 / 44,945]

I don't know if it can be done on these forums, but I've seen in another community and a game something that seemed to work well:  They ease up on their rules, they allow the filter, and users can turn on or off the filter as they would like.  The filter doesn't have to meant as a way to micromanage and enforce; it could be used in a way that allows people to see and do what they want.

 

The dream for me would be all users could join the forums with a default set of words in their filter; however: They can setup their own filters.  You don't like a certain word?  You don't have to put up with it if you don't want to.  The result of this is that people who want to use some occasional bad words could curse and less likely cause unwanted harm.  The main people who get in trouble are the ones who use the really bad words or break multiple rules (such as spamming it), or the ones who purposely try to get around the filters by not using the common spelling.  Maybe the even better or more fun is if we can use spoilers like discord where the words could be used and if you really want to see it... click it.

 

Let's just say for example User A wants to say an offensive word "salad", and User B has the filter on; User C doesn't care and it's not in their own list of filtered words or they've removed salad from the default list.

 

User A posts: I think salad is disgusting.

User B sees: I think ***** is disgusting.  (maybe a click is available if they really want to see it or change their mind just like spoilers on discord)

User C sees: I think salad is disgusting.

 

Let's say that "salad" is a common bad word that everyone knows.

 

User A posts: I think slad is disgusting.

 

Now the filter doesn't work and the person clearly skirted around it.  They're at risk of getting in trouble.  Typo?  Their responsibility or they should edit it quickly if they can.

Edited December 6, 2020 by Joshy

[Rena 2,779 / 33,647]

This was a chaotic discussion in Discord the other day because the words "retard/retarded" were banned (and others) without any warning. I personally agree with banning extremely offensive words such as racial slurs as they are inexcusable in use, but some other words are used on the daily, like the two in question that day, that are used without intent to hurt anyone. I can see why some would take offense, but it has never been an issue up until now unlike other known terrible words. I feel at least giving the community a small warning/reminder that these words on the list are a no-no as well as allowing for some to be discussed by the community.

Edited December 6, 2020 by Pachimo

[TheThirdReaper 291 / 0]

Or just don't and give us forum mods some more work 

[Brotherwolf 326 / 7,218]

I personally don't believe in censoring these because admins and mods technically have a job to not allow players to say harmful/malicious things on the server. I don't believe censoring these will do much good for the admins because they won't have as much practice in handling these things.

 

I think the admins/mods need to be able to do their job and tell the players that derogatory slurs on the server will not be tolerated and if those players don't listen, then punish them in some way or another. I like to believe that you should verbally warn anyone before punishing them, but if they're intentionally saying slurs and being malicious towards someone or a group of people, I'm honestly not opposed to an instant mute (say someone just comes in and screams the n word or f word multiple times, I'm not opposed to an instant mute for that), as I think that's more practical than just censoring things, but I do get the point of censoring those.

 

Also, if we censor things, the players can always alter the spelling of a censored word to get around this, which also makes the censorship completely redundant (for example, the n word on HnS is censored to "psquaw", but after a player sees that they'll usually type it out with all spaces or with [white] in front of the n word, which makes the censorship completely redundant).

 

I think the idea of censoring bad shit is there, as nobody wants to see this, but I just don't believe it's beneficial or productive to the people moderating a server, forums, or discord for reasons stated above.

[Sophie~ ♡ 176 / 2,841]

I don't believe there is any wrong with censoring them as the original post states severely bad words. 

I doubt it will remove much situations for admins to get 'practice' as said people using slurs with bad intentions will work around them, thus leading the admin to take action they might've anyway. Censoring these bad words I would argue is at least more effective in not encouraging people not to use said words because they have to go through more effort to use them.

 

I also don't believe there is too much practice to be gained for an admin or not in this regard as an admin deals with many things that can result in confrontation i.e RDM reports, usual player drama, and so on. Admins do not always catch this stuff right away as we are only human, so I would argue it helps keep everything more cohesive. After all, we're only talking about really bad shit like racial slurs.

 

I'm all for making a community more inclusive and I see this a step in the right direction, provided the community has notice and all. 

It also reinforces that certain words are straight up against the rules imo. Otherwise if someone is trying to be smart they may feel they can get away with calling people a certain homophobic slur beginning with f as long as it's 'joking' or towards a friend. 

 

Nothing wrong with making our job a little easier!

 

 

[TheJitFace 699 / 18,162]

11 hours ago, Pachimo said:

This was a chaotic discussion in Discord the other day because the words "retard/retarded" were banned (and others) without any warning. I personally agree with banning extremely offensive words such as racial slurs as they are inexcusable in use, but some other words are used on the daily, like the two in question that day, that are used without intent to hurt anyone. I can see why some would take offense, but it has never been an issue up until now unlike other known terrible words. I feel at least giving the community a small warning/reminder that these words on the list are a no-no as well as allowing for some to be discussed by the community.

 

I agree and I was apart of this discussion. Banning the word retard was kinda strange, but the no warning was just stupid. Saying rarted got me manually warned. It is not a slur, it is offensive towards those who maybe mentally impaired, but we aren't using the word like that.