Acronym junction, what's your function?

Hi all,

I've been editing and notifying people when they use two common internet/real life acronyms: WTF and MILF. Both of them, at least originally, stood for phrases invoking the f-bomb, which we do not permit at the Org.

Honestly, giving out even 0-point infractions for these acronyms is making me feel like a silly old man, so I would like to take the temperature of the Org. Also, if you have arguments for or against the open use of WTF and MILF, please write them here and let me hear you. At the end of the day the Org belongs to the patrons, and I don't want to make a major decision without hearing your points.

Cheers,

Lemur

-edit-

Just to get the ball rolling, a certain Gallic mod wrote a thoughtful reply via PM:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

It only barely occurred to me that 'milfy' is not a proper word, but an acronym. To me, its meaning has shifted from an acronym 'Mother I'd Like to F', to simply 'Hot woman over the age 35'.

Likewise, last week when I went diving for the wreck of the Titanic together with James Cameron, and strapped on my scuba gear, I did not even realise that I was using a 'Self-Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus'.

The world needed the word 'milf'. So much so, that I think that in a number of years, MILF will have fully gone the way of RADAR and SCUBA. It will be a proper new word, a new word formed out of an acronym, with modern users however mostly unaware of the origin of the word. So no longer capitalised: milfy, radar, scuba.

---

I'm throwing my lot in with my boy.

I have always felt the org has been overly strict on the use of language and it has worsend over the years.

Considering we (theoretically) play a game which is rated T the board should at least have a rating that falls in line with that.

I think it wouldn't do any harm to loosen up either. When it comes to dodgy language probably the intent is most important (are they using it in a malicious way etc) in judging if it's OK.

Let's sum it up as follows: what on earth do you need such crude expressions of your feelings of bewildered amazement for when all you need to say is how sexually attractive you find a certain woman?

I see a few issues:

1) "milf" is not only an acronym for bad language, but also derogatory, sexist and demeaning to the fairer sex.

2) "wtf", also an acronym for bad language, is almost always used in the wrong way, i.e. for trolling, flaming etc. If it's not being used for trolling and flaming, i.e. as an expression of surprise, then there are better alternatives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Considering we (theoretically) play a game which is rated T the board should at least have a rating that falls in line with that.

---

I think citing maturity, gives even more reason as to why we should be mature enough to avoid such words/acronyms.

:2cents:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Considering we (theoretically) play a game which is rated T the board should at least have a rating that falls in line with that.

---

Tosa has stated multiple times in the past that we are run as a PG13, but in reality nothing outside the backroom should be unsuitable for a 9 year old (from memory)

Of course we don't have to be super strict, but really...

Gameroom instituted a clean ban on all swear words, regardless of level. People refrain from using the word 'hell' which is part of everyday language in Australia ('bloody hell' being as common as 'wow'), along with more unsavoury words, but its not hard to not type it, and I can still express my point just fine.

I don't have anything against WTF, but I don't like milf.

Better off without them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

Better off without them.

---

If you've got the time, could you expand on that? I'm hoping to hear people's reasoning, their feelings, etc. And eventually I will have to kick this up to Tosa and such, but first I really want to hear where people are coming from.

Kind of what caravel said. On the org it doesn't make much of a difference because they just pop up once in a while, but on less restricted forums it is very noticeably unpleasant.

I frequent two forums that basically take a polar opposite approach to this issue, the Org and Taleworlds, the original forum for Mount and Blade.

Here, everything's rather stiff. I don't mind it, though sometimes judgment on the part of mods has been more absolute and inflexible that need be, in my opinion. I do get tired of the senseless use of profanity at the other board. But conversely, intelligent and witty use of it makes for some very entertaining exchanges there, which we never approach here. Also, when passionate about a subject, I sometimes use profanity in real life for emphasis or to express that passion poignantly, so I feel like I'm more myself at Taleworlds than here because I'm free to do that. Here, I feel more like I'm in a classroom or at a church meeting, not, say, at a bar having a drink and shooting the daisies with friends.

Recently at Taleworlds, they turned on an optional profanity filter, which ***s out profanity if left on. It was set to be on as default, but could be turned off. I have mine set so I can see the profanity, but those who don't like it can leave it on. I thought this was a pretty good compromise--though many of the hard-core, old-time patrons, who loved Taleworlds for its open expression, left permanently after a heated debate regarding the new filter (one of those who left was a long-time, respected-by-all administrator).

I enjoy frequenting these two sites because they are both gaming forums complete with off-topic areas, but almost polar opposites when it comes to how they are run. It's an interesting contrast, and I enjoy them both.

So I guess my opinion on the matter here is, I don't care. I can go elsewhere if I feel the need to express myself differently, to an audience that doesn't mind.

An interesting fact: active membership and participation at the Talworlds site is much greater than at this site, despite the fact that the Total War games are much better known and more popular than Mount and Blade / Warband. This surprised me when I noticed it. Here we seem to have a lot more lurkers and fewer active participants.

There's a time and place for such language. In front of someone elses youngster or a young lady is neither the time nor the place. Yes, those people can go just about anywhere on teh interweb or elsewhere and find that and much worse, so they don't need to read it here.

Two cents:


I'd prefer no use of 'wtf' and capitalised 'MILF'. They could conceivably be allowed, but with some reluctance.

Small case 'milf' is mostly acceptable - to me it's not an acronym, but a new word. Where 'milf' serves a literary purpose, it could be allowed.



Naturally, I myself would never use such dreadfully common language as 'milf'. I scoff at people who do, and heap scorn on posters whose lack of imagination forces them to resort to the shock value of vulgarities such as 'milfy' to get their point across. :no: :toff:

If the F word is not allowed, concealed versions should not be allowed either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Naturally, I myself would never use such dreadfully common language as 'milf'. I scoff at people who do, and heap scorn on posters whose lack of imagination forces them to resort to the shock value of vulgarities such as 'milfy' to get their point across. :no: :toff:

---

Well not exactly. First there's no particular use that you cannot easily express otherwise (it's not even moderately hard to do). Second it's not polite nor particularly appropriate. And third liberal use of mingled oaths, swearwords, curses, and other expletives quickly gets wearisome. Not unlike some of the animated GIFs or pictures of half naked women people seem fond of using in their forum avatars elsewhere; or for more direct analogy: whatever it is that comes out of the speakers when my brother plays his GTA 4 and failing any semblance of “dialogue”. And then Hooahguy is quite right: if you allow the f there, why not elsewhere and why not other less profane expressions?

Yes when done right a good curse, oath or other expletive can actually improve a bit of informal writing like a forum post. But mostly it tends to do the opposite.

Only 7 year olds use 'WTF' and 'MILF', and they are too young to have access to a 'Teen' rated website. Therefore for their protection, possibly look in temporary banning them for 6 years, till they meet the 'Teen' rating requirement.

Though, in the memorable words of Star Wolf "What the heck?".

I understand why people want the rules on language to be less strict, but I've always been of the opinion that bad language all over the forum generally gives the impression of a less friendly, hostile environment.

Besides, it's not like you can't use other words to express yourself. There's also the general practice to replace swearwords with :daisy:. If someone would post "What the :daisy:", then we all know what that person means anyway.

Then again, context is always very important. A swearword to "color" your post a bit more isn't as bad as using bad language in combination with an insult towards a fellow .Orgah.

I'd say keep the policy as it is. I won't complain if swearing would be allowed, because I don't care that much about it, but I would wholeheartedly support the decision to keep the current policy as it is. There are more than enough fora where you can use as much bad language as you want; the .Org is not one of them and that's just fine by me.

I say that people are free to use whatever word they feel to use...
A word is just a word, and we give weight to it...
If someone has only swears to say, I think that it's bad for him, but he's entitled to have free speech...

I would agree with keeping swear words and these acronyms off limits. Its nice to know that I can come to the .org and not have to read garbage all the time. Think of the .org as a fine dining establishment and other forums as the world's pubs and sports bars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brave Brave Sir Robin

I would agree with keeping swear words and these acronyms off limits. Its nice to know that I can come to the .org and not have to read garbage all the time. Think of the .org as a fine dining establishment and other forums as the world's pubs and sports bars.

---

I agree actually, the refreshing thing about the Org is the lack of swearing, along with the whole uniform style with the avatars. Removing those characteristics just makes the Org 'another forum'. The use of language greatly affects peoples opinions of the poster, and if all the posters experience a 'drop in standard', other users will also drop in their standard. You may get a few more members, especially those from a more immature crowd, you but you begin to lose what it is great with the Org.

Some one types: "wtf louis u milfy french frog eater", you instantly begin to characterise that poster as some one who has failed the educational system.

On the otherhand, when some one types: "I dare say, Louis VI the Fat, it appears you overexerted yourself on the mastication of fresh water amphibians." you would naturally have a higher opinion of the poster.

Rather extreme example, but the assumed quality of posting on the forum elicits similar responses. Imagine going to a upper class restaurant for a fine dining experience, you dress in a fine suit, you remember your manners, and you have an enjoyable cultured experience, this is the Org. Then there are other forums where you come across, which are akin to a ran-down pub with leaky smelling toilet, Bert at the bar is drunk, looks like he hasn't showered for 5 weeks and he scratches his nuts, it is definitely not the same experience.

I have no issue with people using WTF as the only time I have seen it being employed is to express moments of disbelief as to what is occurring in a game. As a user of the EB forum I can honestly say I have never seen MILF being employed and can't imagine a scenario in the EB forum where it could be employed.

Coarse language degenerates conversation in my opinion. The subject matter seems to suffer if curse words are used for adjectives and the like. I like the rigid swearing policy, avatar use, etc. that is employed here. It would be kind of funny if people were turned away from the .org because they couldn't swear in thier posts and get rep for semi naked avatar pictures and the like. But back on the topic of bad language, I vote no. Let us continue the trend of behaving like little gentlemen and little gentlewomen when interacting with one another. I for one won't complain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

a ran-down pub with leaky smelling toilet, Bert at the bar is drunk, looks like he hasn't showered for 5 weeks and he scratches his nuts

---

That's so funny when I went to visit him this was EXACTLY what Andres was like

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brennus

I have no issue with people using WTF as the only time I have seen it being employed is to express moments of disbelief as to what is occurring in a game. As a user of the EB forum I can honestly say I have never seen MILF being employed and can't imagine a scenario in the EB forum where it could be employed.

---

This is exactly what I wanted to say. I've never heard/read MILF on this forum, and I think it's is totally out of place to use.

WTF on the other hand, I don't mind. What's wrong with it? It's a so much used expression that it has become normal. F--- is just a word; in WTF it isn't even related to sexual intercourse. I really don't get what's the hassle about the word f--- in that particular context. If you say c--- (this is an exeption thread, amirite?) for instance I get it, cos it's always pointed toward a person. But WTF is just as Brennus said, an expression of amazement or disbelief.

I don't think the :daisy: will work. Everybody knows what you want to say, so why not just say so? Is it more harmful to have it written than interpret it like that?

The problem of the women and young children who would get exposed to this use of language is out of question. First of all children till the age of 12 (I think) wouldn't come here (then you won't be playing total war as it is probably too difficult). Unless you guys who are older, and have children let them read with you at this forum (highly unlikely). And children older than 9-10 already know the word f---.

Why would women be offended by the term MILF? It's not like they are going to cry when they read it. If a woman would call someone a d---; I won't feel disrespected cos I have a d---. It's not like they're weak and take everything personal.

My opinion is that this forum could loosen up a bit.

I cannot agree more, Beskar. Warman recently posted a thread about elitism. There's no elitism here, but the Org. is most elite of all TW forums or any other forums that deal with the stuff we discuss here.
That's because of discussions that actually make sense, but also because people here use clean and civilised speech instead of WTF or MILF.

We do not want to lose our high standards, do we?

So, NO to all of them. Keep it clean, keep it nice.

I suppose you could see MILF in an AAR. But the mind boggles.

If you don't allow the F word, then you shouldn't allow a hidden version of it. If there is room for bending that rule because of context, then it isn't a proper rule.

You might show leniency in applying the rule, but "no use of swear words except when not directed at any one individual, but rather at the poster's own inability to find an alternative phrase" really muddies the water for when you have to apply that rule.

Oh, and if you use the daisy smiley, then not everyone knows what you meant to say. In particular, small children don't know. So it does work better than simply saying it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maeran

Oh, and if you use the daisy smiley, then not everyone knows what you meant to say. In particular, small children don't know. So it does work better than simply saying it.

---

And how exactly do small children (I assume childrens less than 12 years) come to this forum? Would they read the civilised speech we use here? No an average small child wouldn't read the more sophisticated posts on this forum, it's beyond his limits.

On the matter of children and the org, there's two points:

How many here have younger children? How many of those people want their child to come visit when they're on the computer? Lots, I bet. Children show up frequently and often where you don't want them to; it's a defining feature. Most children begin to read at 5 years old.

Our youngest member was lisabeanie. She was 10 years old when she signed up an account to ask for help beating her Dad at TW. Naturally Dad was a member here too. She was quite active here for a time. There have been others a little older; it's rare but does happen.

Quote:

---

Why would women be offended by the term MILF?

---

Better to ask, why wouldn't we?

It reduces a person into an object intended for another's gratification. The f-word has nothing but negative tones in a sexual context, especially when applied to women as it ties into that whole 'easy/slut/whore' thing and the whole 'I don't need to bother about them so long as I get my rocks off' thing.

Not comparable at all with calling someone a dick; that term is so mild it's practically a joke. There is no direct male comparison; culturally and historically men just do not have the same overtones applied to them in a sexual context. The double standard is alive and well.

I won't cry. I will think that whoever used it is a contemptible, crude idiot. Just as I think anyone who wants a f*** should go find themselves a blow up doll (or vibrator, if female) because that's the best they deserve for aiming so low. Huh, at least aim high enough to want sex. At least that has some ambition and mutuality to it, even if it's still a long away from making love. All the different labels exist for a reason; they all have different connotations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frogbeastegg

I will think that whoever used [milf] is a contemptible, crude idiot.

---

Well said. I couldn't agree more.

I say posters who describe women as 'milfy' are immature sex-starved attention seekers. In fact, I think it is perfectly obvious they aren't getting any and plEASE GOD ANYONE IF YOU'RE READING THIS I NEED A GIRLFRIEND I NEED ONE RIGHT NOW ANY WILL DO I CANT TAKE IT ANYMORE

TBH, I'd never heard of the acronym MIFL or the 'term' milfy until I read this thread. Knowing now what the acronym stands for, I'm surprised that anyone here would advocate/need to inquire about it's open use on this forum. Must be a Backroom thing?

Moderators at their discretion can always overlook expressions when the context is judged (by them) to be acceptable. I don't think a policy change is justified, but that's just me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arjos

If someone has only swears to say, I think that it's bad for him, but he's entitled to have free speech...

---

The org is not America, we are not entitled to free speech.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Togakure

TBH, I'd never heard of the acronym MIFL or the 'term' milfy until I read this thread. Knowing now what the acronym stands for, I'm surprised that anyone here would advocate/need to inquire about its open use on this forum. Must be a Backroom thing?

Moderators at their discretion can always overlook expressions when the context is judged (by them) to be acceptable. I don't think a policy change is justified, but that's just me.

---

I agree with this, basically. Some additional points:

Whatever the aim of certain developers who don't have any conscience, computer or console games are not for children. They'll only mess up children's sensory/motoric development at the expense of more useful activities like reading books or playing outside the house. Not to mention content-related concerns. In this respect, games are almost as bad as TV. I think therefore that gaming fora should generally cater to people above the age of 13. Now teenagers are unfortunately very well acquainted with all sorts of horrible words, regardless of how sheltered they've grown up. While a certain level of unpleasantness should of course not be tolerated (words like "milf", which I didn't know before, but somehow find deplorable), I think that sometimes moderators have been on the verge of overzealousness around here.
I see little problem with "WTF", since it's not a sexually-related expression anyway.

If you're going for all-out strict censorship, please be honest and say that it's in order to create a friendlier atmosphere, and not for the sake of some hypothetical kids who shouldn't be playing games anyway.

Even if this is a forum for older folks, not using such language makes the .Org a nicer place to be, as others have said.
I fail to see why this is even an issue.

I don't particularly care either way; then again I'm not a mod so I don't have to be vigilant about these things. The only reason why I can think that "no." May be an acceptable answer is not because I'm afraid active members would abuse the policy, and push for further easing on the language rules. Rather, that it might take a bit longer in figuring out whether a new member is either uninformed about the policy, or whether they are simply trolling.

I didn't expect such an even divide in opinion, just going by the poll. And to gauge by comments, the majority of Orgahs would rather retain strict language policies.

Okay. I feel very silly editing and warning for WTF and MILF and so forth, but if that's the will of the Orgahs, so be it.

if you combined the total votes for WTF Only + Both WTF or MILF you get 20 votes for WTF Only, and 11 votes for MILF. Whereas if you combined GAH + No to Either you get 19 votes... tough call... but it's yours to make.

I dunno, seems to me that changing the policy needs a real, clear mandate from the Orgahs, which we don't have being demonstrated here.

Seriously, if you really have a problem with reading "wtf" or "milf", grow up. In fact, you should get off the internet, because if you are that sensitive, it is impossible for you to use the internet and not be offended, and imposing your ridiculous sensitivities on this forum won't change that.

Of course both of them should be allowed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

The org is not America, we are not entitled to free speech.

---

I believe that it's written somewhere in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights XD
But hey, if people are offended by this let the moderators deal with it, I didn't expect the org to have such issues...
In EB I've never seen such a language, and if it appear I will certanly just ignore it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arjos

I believe that it's written somewhere in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights XD

---

Freedom of speech means the government isn't allowed to silence you. However, you do not have the right to a publisher, or an audience. If you want to use the .Org's bandwidth and servers to express your opinion, you need the .Org's consent. You cannot oblige us to publish your material on the internet, because we too are free to publish what we wish. This has nothing to do with whether the .Org's servers are in the USA or not.

(For the record: I am not a lawyer, but I am pretty sure this is how it works in America and the rest of the Western world.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

I didn't expect such an even divide in opinion, just going by the poll. And to gauge by comments, the majority of Orgahs would rather retain strict language policies.

Okay. I feel very silly editing and warning for WTF and MILF and so forth, but if that's the will of the Orgahs, so be it.

---

Why not use the Word Filter function on the forum? It would be simpler than you constantly having to edit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Celtic Viking

Seriously, if you really have a problem with reading "wtf" or "milf", grow up. In fact, you should get off the internet, because if you are that sensitive, it is impossible for you to use the internet and not be offended, and imposing your ridiculous sensitivities on this forum won't change that.

---

Calm down Internet Tough Guy, because Hobo's don't shower and shave, should the President not present himself professionally to the public?

Because people have some standards and don't eat from a dogs food bowl, it doesn't mean they shouldn't get told to get off the internet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frogbeastegg

It reduces a person into an object intended for another's gratification.

---

Here we wander into the whole "objectification" realm of rhetoric, which I have always found to be a misleading cul-de-sac of thought. People do objectify one another, pretty much on an hourly basis. Or did you look at your garbage collector this morning and think to yourself, "There's a three-dimensional human being with his own needs and thoughts, and I'm not going to move from this spot until I gain a greater understanding of him"? Pshaw. Objectification is neither negative nor positive. It just is. If we tried to grok every human being we saw or heard during the day we'd be unable to get anything done, hence the brain's reflexive protective maneuver; treat some people like objects. They are outside the monkeysphere. Attempting to police our language to prevent objectification strikes me as exactly as productive as calling money "coconuts" to prevent greed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frogbeastegg

The f-word has nothing but negative tones in a sexual context

---

"Subjective" doesn't begin to do this assertion justice. If the f-bomb had nothing but negative connotations, surely we would not have needed to coin the word "rape."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

"Subjective" doesn't begin to do this assertion justice. If the f-bomb had nothing but negative connotations, surely we would not have needed to coin the word "rape."

---

Doesn't really work, since they are different but related things. Even then, if it was the same thing, there are like 10 very negative terms for the female body part in one episode of inbetweeners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

Calm down Internet Tough Guy, because Hobo's don't shower and shave, should the President not present himself professionally to the public?

Because people have some standards and don't eat from a dogs food bowl, it doesn't mean they shouldn't get told to get off the internet.

---

So you should be allowed to insult me, but I should not be allowed to say wtf because it "might offend someone"? How does that logic work?

Look, I'll say it again: if they use the internet, and they are offended by seeing a letter that they understand means a specific word they dislike, they will be offended whether this forum censors these words or not. It's unavoidable. Your analogies are laughable: both of them only answers why some would prefer not to swear themselves, which is fine, though I personally disagree with them. Neither of them even gets anywhere close to addressing the real issue here: that they are trying to impose this rule onto others. They also presuppose that swearing is something bad like not showering or eating from a dogs food bowl, which I flat out disagree with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Celtic Viking;2053215813 Neither of them even gets anywhere close to addressing the real issue here: that they are trying to impose this rule onto [I

others[/I]. They also presuppose that swearing is something bad like not showering or eating from a dogs food bowl, which I flat out disagree with.

---

Two thoughts:

(1) The Org is its own entity, and is free to impose whatever rules it likes, just as you are free to visit or not. As someone noted earlier, "Free speech" applies to the government's relationship to individuals, not to private associations.

(2) The issue at hand is not whether "swearing is something bad like not showering or eating from a dogs food bowl," but rather what sort of environment we, as a community, want to have. I would phrase the question more like this: Do we want to relax the language standards a bit, and if so, what will we gain and/or lose?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Or did you look at your garbage collector this morning and think to yourself, "There's a three-dimensional human being with his own needs and thoughts, and I'm not going to move from this spot until I gain a greater understanding of him"?

---

No. I saw a human. Nothing more, nothing less. Same as I see when I look at anyone. And yes, I try to gain understanding of people, good and bad.

I'm not going to respond to the objectification thing. Suffice it to say I disagree completely, entirely, and fully. Also, the important part is the last part: intended for another's gratification.

Quote:

---

"Subjective" doesn't begin to do this assertion justice. If the f-bomb had nothing but negative connotations, surely we would not have needed to coin the word "rape."

---

Two entirely different words for two entirely different things, both of them bad but one many times worse than the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by athanaric

I agree with this, basically. Some additional points:

Whatever the aim of certain developers who don't have any conscience, computer or console games are not for children. They'll only mess up children's sensory/motoric development at the expense of more useful activities like reading books or playing outside the house. Not to mention content-related concerns. In this respect, games are almost as bad as TV. I think therefore that gaming fora should generally cater to people above the age of 13.

---

Totally agree with you, children are out of the question. Eventhough that little girl called Isabell was here, this forum is in every way not for children.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by athanaric

I see little problem with "WTF", since it's not a sexually-related expression anyway.

---

Agree again, how can WTF be negative? Not every word with F in it is negative (frogbeastegg), how could you even think that? How is WTF sexual? Please explain how this has anything to do with sexual activities?

Quote:

---

If you're going for all-out strict censorship, please be honest and say that it's in order to create a friendlier atmosphere, and not for the sake of some hypothetical kids who shouldn't be playing games anyway.

---

THANK YOU, exactly what I wanted to say.

Quote:

---

I won't cry. I will think that whoever used it is a contemptible, crude idiot. Just as I think anyone who wants a f*** should go find themselves a blow up doll (or vibrator, if female) because that's the best they deserve for aiming so low. Huh, at least aim high enough to want sex. At least that has some ambition and mutuality to it, even if it's still a long away from making love. All the different labels exist for a reason; they all have different connotations.

---

"the best they deserve for aiming so low?"

Okey I find this so disturbing. All what you wrote says so much more about you than why MILF is a wrong word. I mean I don't use it and don't find it necesary but this... this is just awful you have so much hatred.. about ...nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frogbeastegg

Two entirely different words for two entirely different things, both of them bad but one many times worse than the other.

---

I would question the basis of the assertion that the f-word is uniformly negative. (Crude, yes, but that's not the same thing as bad.) Your earlier breakdown of f-word v. sex v. love-making seems subjective, aesthetic and personal in nature. Such definitions have real power to an individual, but they aren't a basis for etymological understanding or usage in general. Really, that's my main point of disagreement.

Quote:

---

Okey I find this so disturbing. All what you wrote says so much more about you than why MILF is a wrong word. I mean I don't use it and don't find it necesary but this... this is just awful you have so much hatred.. about ...nothing.

---

I don't know what you read, I doubt it is what frogbeastegg actually wrote. Anyway would you contend that to use the f-bomb for having sex is equivalent in its full semantic implications to referring to having sex or that to have sex is equivalent to making love? Having sex entails that it is simply for the entertainment of both, making love conveys a deeper emotional bonding in the act, and to use the f-bomb is completely dispassionate and little more than physical exercise with risk of contracting an STD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios

I don't know what you read, I doubt it is what frogbeastegg actually wrote.

---

You can't spot some hatred in her post? Read it again, she even uses more swearwords than me, and that coming from a moderator. So yes, I interpret it as hatred.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios

Anyway would you contend that to use the f-bomb for having sex is equivalent in its full semantic implications to referring to having sex or that to have sex is equivalent to making love? Having sex entails that it is simply for the entertainment of both, making love conveys a deeper emotional bonding in the act, and to use the f-bomb is completely dispassionate and little more than physical exercise with risk of contracting an STD.

---

Are you serious? You think that when everytime a married couple have sex they do it because it conveys a deeper emotional bonding? That they don't do it for pleasure? Go ask your parents.

STD's? You get STD's from having One night stands, not just f---ing. F---ing is just another word for having sex like c---ing is another word for taking a poo or s---.

Im going to pull a Tribesman here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drunk Clown

You can't spot some hatred in her post? Read it again, she even uses more swearwords than me, and that coming from a moderator. So yes, I interpret it as hatred.

---

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Seriously, what? You might want to re-read the thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drunk Clown

Are you serious? You think that when everytime a married couple have sex they do it because it conveys a deeper emotional bonding? That they don't do it for pleasure? Go ask your parents.

---

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Are you seriously saying that married couples, when having sex, dont love each other?
Bollox

This thread seems to be drifting way off topic. Remember to debate the argument, not attack the poster.

Back on topic please gentlemen.

In point of fact, I think the answer to my question is self-apparent, so the thread can be closed. There is no strong movement to change our language rules, so they shall remain intact, even if I feel silly giving out certain infractions.

I wanted to take the temperature of the Orgahs, see what the sentiment was on two acronyms. Were there a more-or-less unified desire to allow them, I would have presented the issue to the other mods and admins; since there is not, there is no point, and my question is answered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

I would question the basis of the assertion that the f-word is uniformly negative. (Crude, yes, but that's not the same thing as bad.) Your earlier breakdown of f-word v. sex v. love-making seems subjective, aesthetic and personal in nature. Such definitions have real power to an individual, but they aren't a basis for etymological understanding or usage in general. Really, that's my main point of disagreement.

---

That's how the words and labels apply where I live. It's not personal. Someone wrote WTF as part of a memo intended only for their viewing at the office I work in. Someone else noticed. There was uproar. Not a single person thought it acceptable, funny or harmless. This in an office of 70+ people who do swear and make crude or lewd remarks.

It's not the crudity that's the problem. Much like a certain word used to describe black people, it's not the crudity that causes the outrage, it's the baggage and connotations which go with it. That particular word is viewed lightly in some areas and very gravely in others. For crudity I can think of several words for sex that are worse, none of which carry the same baggage and so are overall more acceptable.

The org's a global site. What's acceptable in one country isn't always in another. We have to strike the best balance. That's why I chimed in; I don't know how many others live in areas where it has the same meaning as mine. However many there are they deserve to be represented as much as those who live in areas which have it as no more than a crude word.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by athanaric

..

Whatever the aim of certain developers who don't have any conscience, computer or console games are not for children. They'll only mess up children's sensory/motoric development at the expense of more useful activities like reading books or playing outside the house. Not to mention content-related concerns. In this respect, games are almost as bad as TV. I think therefore that gaming fora should generally cater to people above the age of 13. Now teenagers are unfortunately very well acquainted with all sorts of horrible words, regardless of how sheltered they've grown up. While a certain level of unpleasantness should of course not be tolerated (words like "milf", which I didn't know before, but somehow find deplorable), I think that sometimes moderators have been on the verge of overzealousness around here.
I see little problem with "WTF", since it's not a sexually-related expression anyway.

If you're going for all-out strict censorship, please be honest and say that it's in order to create a friendlier atmosphere, and not for the sake of some hypothetical kids who shouldn't be playing games anyway.

---

Hello,

It's both (and maybe more). The 'rule'/'tradition' was already there, but since I'm dutch I normally need more than one excuse to keep or drop stuff.

I'm not sure about games not being for kids: too much of a good thing can (!) be bad. We all need water, but not too much please.

There are risks with too much (clueless whether that's 0.25 or 25 hours a day) games, mental and physical, both for kids and grown-ups. Recently however, a good thing was discovered by accident. People playing computergames develop the skill to make fast decisions. I'ld think that is useful for kids when playing on their bikes outside on the street.

There are probably other benefits too, I agree however that a computer can't cover all and there should be other complementing activities.