Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

profanity filter

zakarhino

zakarhino

Contributor
Original poster
Sep 13, 2014
2,632
7,036
Kinda interested, which of these violate the profanity filter rule:

What the f*ck!?
What the f***!?
What the ****!?
WTF!?

I guess I'm trying to figure out if we can actively post something like "****" (just asterisks) or would that be considered circumventing the profanity filter. Is there a spectrum of what counts as evading the profanity filter? I say this because I've been dinged for bypassing the filter once and wondered if I should start trying to say stuff* like "what the frick" instead LOL

*yes I typed this as the s word but then corrected it to 'stuff' I'm sorry ??
 
  • Haha
Reactions: millerj123
The first example is one in which the filter was bypassed by the user and would probably be a filter bypass violation. It looks like examples 2 and 3 could be proper use of allowing the built-in filter to do its job.

In my opinion, it is always best to type out the word normally and allow the forum software to filter the word (if needed). If it doesn't filter a word that should be filtered, that is a topic of discussion for the mod staff. I believe it is best to report any possible filter bypass violations instead of adopting the philosophy of trying to filter on your own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: icanhazmac and zakarhino
How about this schoolboy witticism circa 1970

I saw you riding in a boat,
echo: in a boat,
I saw you on the far canal.
echo: far canal.

Geddit, far canal. So, is it kosher to pop into the forums casually tossing in a few 'far canals'?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Fred Zed
I saw this on a T-shirt years ago - best said in a northern British accent:

Whale
Oil
Beef
Hooked
 
MacRumors profanity policy needs to be updated.

Back in 2018 I wanted to say that Siri was ****! When I posted it I included the first two letters and used asterisks for the last two. I did this because I didn't know what the policy of the forum was so censored some letters so it wouldn't be rude. I was then received a curt warning that I had tried to bypass the filter! I actually hadn't I was trying to convey a swear word but make it less rude.

The cold reaction demonstrated something to me, that the moderation team didn't have significant experience moderating because you shouldn't try and be confrontational with members for no good reason just to demonstrate power and this was confrontational and handled badly. I also had a post deleted yesterday because I used the puke emoji and received another curt telling off.

In the UK and even many US newspapers having a semi-censored word is not considered the same as actually using the word. One or two letters only are added to indicate what the full word is for the readership. This isn't the same as a swear world. I get it, MacRumors doesn't want swearing but this reaction is strange and puritanical and is contrary to what is acceptable in Western journalism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zakarhino and SirAnthonyHopkins
inscrewtable said:
How about this schoolboy witticism circa 1970

I saw you riding in a boat,
echo: in a boat,
I saw you on the far canal.
echo: far canal.

Geddit, far canal. So, is it kosher to pop into the forums casually tossing in a few 'far canals'?
Click to expand...

How about describing someone as a real two-hat? If they own two hats, for instance. Or if they've only got one car?
 
Limeybastid said:
How terrible.
Click to expand...
Exactly! Which is why I’m lobbying for this word to also be included in the filter. This oversight obviously is letting some of our jerk members talk smack about our female members, completely uncensored.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fred Zed
aesc80 said:
Exactly! Which is why I’m lobbying for this word to also be included in the filter. This oversight obviously is letting some of our jerk members talk smack about our female members, completely uncensored.
Click to expand...
FWIW, these avatars and names are on-line personas. One doesn't know the real persona of the person that created the account. Having said that, imo, some context is needed. Words that are part of sentences that the intent is to insult should be dealt with appropriately. There are words, such as the b word that have an alternate definition related to dogs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: icanhazmac
aesc80 said:
Hey, how is the b word not included in the filter? It’s nuts THAT word isn’t covered.
Click to expand...
The word in itself is not always profanity so it is not on the filter. If words have non-profane uses they don't get put on the filter. For example one might say, "Tim Cook is always bitching about XYZ." That is neither profane not insulting anybody, so it should not be filtered.

I agree the example you gave is an insult, and is not allowed under the insult rule, but that does not mean it should be on the profanity filter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy, icanhazmac and SirAnthonyHopkins
I7guy said:
FWIW, these avatars and names are on-line personas. One doesn't know the real persona of the person that created the account. Having said that, imo, some context is needed. Words that are part of sentences that the intent is to insult should be dealt with appropriately. There are words, such as the b word that have an alternate definition related to dogs.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t want to be in the business of guessing one’s gender. Regardless of what their avatar is, much like how the profanity filter is being used to keep things family friendly, a term like that used in the way that was clearly sexist is so wrong.
Weaselboy said:
The word in itself is not always profanity so it is not on the filter. If words have non-profane uses they don't get put on the filter. For example one might say, "Tim Cook is always bitching about XYZ." That is neither profane not insulting anybody, so it should not be filtered.

I agree the example you gave is an insult, and is not allowed under the insult rule, but that does not mean it should be on the profanity filter.
Click to expand...
I agree, the word definitely falls in a gray area. The only problem is when it lands on the wrong side, it has a context that is much more damaging to the image of the forum than just the way you used it. I understand I’m in no position to make the choice myself - I myself am a guest here. I just have the feeling that if we have a profanity filter to protect the forum’s image, we may want to consider the b word under the same regards too.
 
aesc80 said:
I wouldn’t want to be in the business of guessing one’s gender.
Click to expand...
Neither do I - hence my comment regarding online personas.
aesc80 said:
Regardless of what their avatar is, much like how the profanity filter is being used to keep things family friendly,
Click to expand...
This site is definitely not rated G. I see it more between PG and R.
aesc80 said:
a term like that used in the way that was clearly sexist is so wrong.[...]
Click to expand...
Yes that remark was clearly an insult, regardless of the persona of the poster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back