The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Quote from rules: -
Do not swear
Do not post offensive material
I've noticed a vast increase in sexualy related posts in recent months, i.e. cub!sts descriptions of what he gets up to, and various posts from other people, and also swearing in certain peoples taglines.
Is SR policy becoming more lax? For a board concerned with protecting children reading "offensive" material, it seems to be becoming more so.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no prude, but this is an interesting development. Be as filthy and swear as much as you want. It ain't gonna offend me. If I however had my child asking me about "being done in the a with a double headed (you get the idea)" I'm fairly sure I'd be asking questions about where they read it.
Should the swear filters be removed? Should a "you must be thirteen to enter this site" be implemented, possibly only on the "intelligent discussion" board?
Any views? (away for a while, back later)
Do not swear
Do not post offensive material
I've noticed a vast increase in sexualy related posts in recent months, i.e. cub!sts descriptions of what he gets up to, and various posts from other people, and also swearing in certain peoples taglines.
Is SR policy becoming more lax? For a board concerned with protecting children reading "offensive" material, it seems to be becoming more so.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no prude, but this is an interesting development. Be as filthy and swear as much as you want. It ain't gonna offend me. If I however had my child asking me about "being done in the a with a double headed (you get the idea)" I'm fairly sure I'd be asking questions about where they read it.
Should the swear filters be removed? Should a "you must be thirteen to enter this site" be implemented, possibly only on the "intelligent discussion" board?
Any views? (away for a while, back later)
Page:
Ineedsleep wrote:
> Pandaemonium wrote:
>
> Should the swear filters be removed?
>
> No. Well personally I hope it never is. The odd '*' in a word when
> someone is calling someone else a name, in a funny haha way, can be
> amusing.
Point taken - I remember when I first saw South Park, and in that particular episode one of the kids came out with what was probably a minute long stream of expletives, all censored. If they hadn't have been bleeped out, it wouldn't have been funny. They were, and it was.
> Pandaemonium wrote:
>
> Should the swear filters be removed?
>
> No. Well personally I hope it never is. The odd '*' in a word when
> someone is calling someone else a name, in a funny haha way, can be
> amusing.
Point taken - I remember when I first saw South Park, and in that particular episode one of the kids came out with what was probably a minute long stream of expletives, all censored. If they hadn't have been bleeped out, it wouldn't have been funny. They were, and it was.
SHEEPY wrote:
> there is only a
> limited number of words you can use if say you drop something heavy
> on your foot.
*"*$ *$*("$ *("("( %*("£%
> there is only a
> limited number of words you can use if say you drop something heavy
> on your foot.
*"*$ *$*("$ *("("( %*("£%
I don't think so. In all honesty,I think this is more of a late teen/adult forum, and that it's nothing that we;ve not heard before. People swear on regular day time TV. Children are within earshot almost always, so it's not like they've never heard it or will get offended by it.
It's fun really. If someone gets offended so much so by it, then I'm sure they'll contact some admins.
It's fun really. If someone gets offended so much so by it, then I'm sure they'll contact some admins.
The irony here I feel is that most of the offensive material you refer to is posted by those we are supposed to 'protect' from it.
Sure, I'll use the odd symbol to blank a letter out, leaving it clear what I meant to say, but that's nothing compared to what most of these inbred mewling cabbages spew out on a daily basis.
Threads such as "Tasting your Own Produce" and "Rear Entry Sex" are clear examples I feel.
Sure, I'll use the odd symbol to blank a letter out, leaving it clear what I meant to say, but that's nothing compared to what most of these inbred mewling cabbages spew out on a daily basis.
Threads such as "Tasting your Own Produce" and "Rear Entry Sex" are clear examples I feel.
I think swear words are wonderful and sometimes are needed to be used.
Not all the time but for instance in real life there is only a limited number of words you can use if say you drop something heavy on your foot.
Not all the time but for instance in real life there is only a limited number of words you can use if say you drop something heavy on your foot.
Ineedsleep wrote:
> I cannot do with reading swear words that
> are not necessary and used only because people are too ignorant to
> make better use of the English language.
too f**king right.
> I cannot do with reading swear words that
> are not necessary and used only because people are too ignorant to
> make better use of the English language.
too f**king right.
Pandaemonium wrote:
> Should the swear filters be removed?
No. Well personally I hope it never is. The odd '*' in a word when someone is calling someone else a name, in a funny haha way, can be amusing. However, to allow full scale swearing on the board would drive me away (that idea that just popped into your head - about starting a petition to do away with the swear filter - forget it:)). On the odd occasion that I've checked out other boards I've found that I get really annoyed. I cannot do with reading swear words that are not necessary and used only because people are too ignorant to make better use of the English language.
With regard to offensive material, as Light has already said, define offensive. What I would consider offensive material you would probably not bat an eyelid at but I don't think that there is a lot of offensive threads on here.
There again define 'child'. I have very little idea about children but would have thought that if a child had the patience to read through something like the Cubist thread then possibly they are old enough to have some things loosely explained to them.
> Should the swear filters be removed?
No. Well personally I hope it never is. The odd '*' in a word when someone is calling someone else a name, in a funny haha way, can be amusing. However, to allow full scale swearing on the board would drive me away (that idea that just popped into your head - about starting a petition to do away with the swear filter - forget it:)). On the odd occasion that I've checked out other boards I've found that I get really annoyed. I cannot do with reading swear words that are not necessary and used only because people are too ignorant to make better use of the English language.
With regard to offensive material, as Light has already said, define offensive. What I would consider offensive material you would probably not bat an eyelid at but I don't think that there is a lot of offensive threads on here.
There again define 'child'. I have very little idea about children but would have thought that if a child had the patience to read through something like the Cubist thread then possibly they are old enough to have some things loosely explained to them.
Light wrote:
> The swearing I don't take issue with banning, but as for the offensive
> material...well, what's offensive? Is a description of homosexual sex
> (gay sex sounds like something P.G. Woodehouse did in the 1920's) any
> more offensive than hetero sex? And if it is, doesn't that say more
> about the person offended than anything else?
>
> The problem with 'offensive' is that the definition is different for
> every person. Hence you get Forest complaining endlessly about
> "political correctness" when he's pulled up about one of
> his anti-homosexual posts, or Bell whining about being picked on
> whilst refusing to acknowledge he's anything other than mummy's
> finest little soldier. Maybe SR need to add a disclaimer that they
> and they alone decide what is and is not offensive?
Perhaps "gets up to" was the incorrect phrase to use. Personaly, I've heard the lot and don't take issue with it. In the vast majority of cases the replies posted after cubist came out (on the board :) ) were far more caustic and explicit than what he was posting. I think a disclaimer would be one way to resolve it, but then it's wide open to allegations of abuse. I.e Bell whining.
My main observation is that two years ago, the slightest thing was enough to get a warning. Now the rules seem to be relaxing. In much the way "@rse" and "p!ss" seem to be making frequent appearances on radio one. ;)
> The swearing I don't take issue with banning, but as for the offensive
> material...well, what's offensive? Is a description of homosexual sex
> (gay sex sounds like something P.G. Woodehouse did in the 1920's) any
> more offensive than hetero sex? And if it is, doesn't that say more
> about the person offended than anything else?
>
> The problem with 'offensive' is that the definition is different for
> every person. Hence you get Forest complaining endlessly about
> "political correctness" when he's pulled up about one of
> his anti-homosexual posts, or Bell whining about being picked on
> whilst refusing to acknowledge he's anything other than mummy's
> finest little soldier. Maybe SR need to add a disclaimer that they
> and they alone decide what is and is not offensive?
Perhaps "gets up to" was the incorrect phrase to use. Personaly, I've heard the lot and don't take issue with it. In the vast majority of cases the replies posted after cubist came out (on the board :) ) were far more caustic and explicit than what he was posting. I think a disclaimer would be one way to resolve it, but then it's wide open to allegations of abuse. I.e Bell whining.
My main observation is that two years ago, the slightest thing was enough to get a warning. Now the rules seem to be relaxing. In much the way "@rse" and "p!ss" seem to be making frequent appearances on radio one. ;)
Another quick thought. It the yellow warning card becoming a "lets buck the system" Badge Of Honour?
Put a f*** in the tagline, get a warning, feel all rebelious and grown up?
Put a f*** in the tagline, get a warning, feel all rebelious and grown up?
The swearing I don't take issue with banning, but as for the offensive material...well, what's offensive? Is a description of homosexual sex (gay sex sounds like something P.G. Woodehouse did in the 1920's) any more offensive than hetero sex? And if it is, doesn't that say more about the person offended than anything else?
The problem with 'offensive' is that the definition is different for every person. Hence you get Forest complaining endlessly about "political correctness" when he's pulled up about one of his anti-homosexual posts, or Bell whining about being picked on whilst refusing to acknowledge he's anything other than mummy's finest little soldier. Maybe SR need to add a disclaimer that they and they alone decide what is and is not offensive?
The problem with 'offensive' is that the definition is different for every person. Hence you get Forest complaining endlessly about "political correctness" when he's pulled up about one of his anti-homosexual posts, or Bell whining about being picked on whilst refusing to acknowledge he's anything other than mummy's finest little soldier. Maybe SR need to add a disclaimer that they and they alone decide what is and is not offensive?
Page: