Was I in the right?

[MSB]

From what I have seen around the forums, Mithrandir is a very strict mod.

[Mithrandir]

Strict, yes. Unfair ? I don't think so.

If the word can be misunderstood,
pick another which leaves no room for doubt.

When deciding on a post I check the patrons previously received warnings, you already received plenty for language, so you should've learned to be more cautious.

[Papewaio]

Care to tell us which definition you were using here?

Oh, but I am a prick and a thick skinned one at that. So people can call me it until they turn blue in the face.

And if someone is picking on the handicapped I will call them that too. It depends on the patrons, and the reported posts... some of us have a more delicate disposition... or trigger points (mine being those who cannot defend themselves)... so it is better to be safe then sorry.

I dare say this thread will go on long past the time that the warning point expires.

[Mooks]

Prick is not a "bad word". I couldve done much much worse.

[Papewaio]

I'm pretty sure the rest of us could do a lot worse too. That is not a good enough reason to not do better.

[Reenk Roink]

Used "wtf" once in the Frontroom, and Beirut only edited it out and politely informed me of its unfrontroomish character. Very fair.

Calling someone a "prick" is a direct insult. Much different I'm afraid...

Making a thread about it doesn't help either...

I support Mith!

[The Spartan (Returns)]

a) You are implying that someone is a moron for using the urban dictionary. Tsk tsk

b) You are certainly not proving your case when your very own link in your first post http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Prick states the following:

7. Slang (vulgar). a. penis.
b. an obnoxious or contemptible person.

Beaten by your own brilliance methinks.

Oh and in this situation I suggest you check that link at number 25:
Idiom 25. kick against the pricks, to resist incontestable facts or authority; protest uselessly: In appealing the case again, you will just be kicking against the pricks.

And we do have under tens who sign up... mainly for advice on how to beat their dads at totalwar... and they have gone on to do so.

wow... know i know more meanings of prick....
then i side with ol' camel man!

[King Henry V]

I must say though, the rule against substituting stars for bad launguage is a bit silly. We may as well also ban euphimisms, such as fudge, sugar, humbug etc., because WE ALL KNOW WHAT THEY MEAN! However, if that is the case, the offended person was hardly leading a sheltered life before.
It rather reminds me of Eric Idle's song I Bet You They Won't Play This Song on the Radio.

I Bet You They Won't Play This Song On The Radio

I bet they won't play this song on the radio
I bet you they won't play this new -bleep- song
It's not that it's -buzz- or -beep beep- controversial
Just that the -ding-ing words are awfully strong

You can't say -honk- on the radio
Or -shot- or -twang- or -bleh-,
You can't even say I'd like to -creak- you one day
Unless you're a doctor with a very large -boing-

So I bet you they won't play this song on the radio
I bet you they daren't -scratch-ing well programme it
I bet you their -ch-ching-ing old Programme Directors
Will think it's a load of horse -raspberry-

Music and lyrics by: Eric Idle

Of course, using obscenities when speaking directly or indirectly with another member is never acceptable.

[Ser Clegane]

I must say though, the rule against substituting stars for bad launguage is a bit silly

It might indeed seem silly - the problem is that as long as people choose not to follow the spirit of our rules but to follow them by the letter, it unfortunately appears to be necessary to close at least the obvious "loopholes" by specifically mentioning them.

Shouldn't be necessary but experience shows that it is. Personally, I can hardly see a difference between spelling a bas swearword correctly and replacing one letter.
In the end context and tone play a role (as mentioned in the stickied Backroom thread) and leave the staff some room to interpret the rules depending on the situation.

[Dhepee]

As I recall, the rule about using *'s to hide swear words came about came about around at the same time that the Tavern was split into a backroom/frontroom. I was helping out as assistant mod in the backroom at the time and what we saw was enough stars to start a planetarium. Virtually every comment included f, followed by stars, or s followed by stars. They were used to get people ticked off, and it workd. Also, they weren't fooling anybody.

The purpose of the no swearing rule, as I saw it then, was not to so much to protect our innocent eyes as to promote civility among members. I suspect that most posters are familiar with the good old f-bomb, rather the rule is a means of protecting the civility within the org. Swear words, or their obvious substitutes, provoke a strong reaction. To that end, it is not enough just to ban the swear words, but also to ban their obvious substitutes, such as *'s.

For instance, if everybody on the org decided that saying "fullback" to another member, it's a position in football, was an insult then calling someone a "fullback" might well become an actionable offense, even though the word itself is not obscene or otherwise objectionable.

I'm a lawyer, I play word games all day, can you tell?

[King Henry V]

It might indeed seem silly - the problem is that as long as people choose not to follow the spirit of our rules but to follow them by the letter, it unfortunately appears to be necessary to close at least the obvious "loopholes" by specifically mentioning them.

Shouldn't be necessary but experience shows that it is. Personally, I can hardly see a difference between spelling a bas swearword correctly and replacing one letter.
In the end context and tone play a role (as mentioned in the stickied Backroom thread) and leave the staff some room to interpret the rules depending on the situation.

I was refering to a complete substitution by stars (such as "What the ****" could be a plethora of different words, not all strong obscenities). I agree that replacing one or two letters with them is indeed a cheap bypass of the rules.

[Ser Clegane]

I was refering to a complete substitution by stars

To my knowledge we do not have a rule against that

In addition I would like to point out that the use of "*" to partly disguise profanities is not considered to be a valid alternative within the forum rules

[Andres]

To my knowledge we do not have a rule against that

Oh, in that case:


**** ******* ****** ******** ******* ****** ****** !

Take that, you ***** ********** ***** ****** ***** !

[The Wizard]

I was also warned once for swearing. This was an instance when I (I swear profusely in average human interaction) used the words "jack s**t" (ho boy, hello next warning ) in a commentary on RTW's tactical gameplay ("that doesn't mean <insert curse>").

Now, considering that the Arena (where this was posted) has a sticky explicitly stating that you should not swear, plus the rule that you cannot go wild at CA on this forum (that that one applies here is debatable, but... meh), I suppose you could justify the warning.

But then... I wasn't cursing at anybody -- directly. In my opinion swearing should only become punishable when it's part of derogatory comment on a person (or entity, in the case of CA [and CA alone]).

Therefore, a swear word not directed at any particular person (an Orgah in most cases) should not be a warnable offense (making the comment "what a s****y movie, God d*mn!" in a random Frontroom thread legit). This forum isn't here to teach subjective morals (is it? ).

But, meh... gosh darned rules!

[Ser Clegane]

**** ******* ****** ******** ******* ****** ****** !

No - I won't do that kind of thing

Take that, you ***** ********** ***** ****** ***** !

Not even for chocolate.

[Vladimir]

Isn't the Backroom a PG-13 type forum? That means you're limited to one f-bomb (in a non sexual reference) and can show boobies.

[Mithrandir]

We don't have any age limit anywhere on the forum.

Except maybe in the babethread .

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

I got a warnning from Mith the Other Week, Last week I presume, and here the 3 PM's me and him exchange


"Wether or not he receieved a warning is
1. None of your bussines. I'm sure you wouldn't like it if other patrons knew about the warnings you've received either.
2.Not relevant to yours.

-Mithrandir."


First, I said a 4 letter word, the bad word for poopy poop in Backroom in a argument with a .org member I will not name. He Also said a Four Letter word, bad word for Heck. So, I wanted to know if he got Warn To, because it be unfair, and it would, if I got warn and he didn't. Not Revliant? what you mean? we both broke rules mith,and?

"You're point being ?

You made a post, you broke the forum rules, you received a warning. Period."

After Arguing with him again, I make my point clear, and he tells me this. Well of course, but I still hope he,the other .org member, got a warning.


and last

"


I don't see the irony.

It's not a game which you can "win".

When you signed up, you agreed to the rules. If you do not agree anymore ,I shall ask Tosa to suspend your account. If you do still agree to them, don't break them.

-Mithrandir."

Of Course, you can argue with the Mods all year, but you will never Win, they got mod power, so they will jsut ban you anyhow if you keep trying to fight them.Of course, I was fighting to get the other org member to get a Warning to, if he didn't already, because it be Highly Unfair if he got away with it, and I didn't. Get my Point??

Just wanted to psot it here :-) :-)

[Papewaio]

Therefore, a swear word not directed at any particular person (an Orgah in most cases) should not be a warnable offense (making the comment "what a s****y movie, God d*mn!" in a random Frontroom thread legit). This forum isn't here to teach subjective morals (is it? ).

I don't think swearing is
a) all that subjective.
b) impossible to replace with some thought with a non-offensive expression.

Rudeness breeds a bad atmosphere of contempt for one another which in turn creates friction and leads to flame wars. Post as if your niece, aunt, grandma or minister was the one reviewing your wording. Being polite may take more ingenuity and effort but it does rub off on people.

Normally I give a zero point and edited warning for swearing not aimed at a person or a zero point warning with upto 24 hours to clean it up themselves or face a 2 point warning per offense.

For swearing at a person or multiple abuses then it is 2 points per offense and/or post.

Some of our longest term posters have had over 10 points in a flare up. They chill, go away for a bit and come back to contribute. Sometimes you have to know when to hold or when to fold.

[Mithrandir]

Just wanted to psot it here :-) :-)

Funny that you leave out bits. Next time it's good nettiquette to ask permission to post private messages.

[King Henry V]

We don't have any age limit anywhere on the forum.

Except maybe in the babethread .

However, as the lowest rated game, RTW, says 12+ on my box, so this forum, like the games on which it is founded, is only legally suitable for those aged 12 and above, isn't it?

[MSB]

Except maybe in the babethread .

Sadly computer whizz kids can easily access the babe thread even if they don't register. In my opinion the Babe Thread should be moved to the backroom where un-registered people cannot see it. Even better I think that the Babe Thread should be deleted for good.

[King Henry V]

Oh come on. There are loads of forums on the net which are completely devoted to babe pics and the like. Even someone was that desperate for some bare flesh they wouldn't come to a gaming site, they could just type "porn" into any search engine and voila.

[drone]

Even better I think that the Babe Thread should be deleted for good.

Uh, no.

[Andres]

Even someone was that desperate for some bare flesh they wouldn't come to a gaming site, they could just type "porn" into any search engine and voila.

Thnx for the tip mate!

*** types "porn" into several search engines ***

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

Even better I think that the Babe Thread should be deleted for good.

Pffft, whatever dude. We ain't bowin' to no prudes in the frontroom.

Seriously, though-strict religious upbringing or something?

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Warman, "hell" is allowed on the forums. Seen the stickied thread in backroom: "who the hell are you, anyways?"

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Funny that you leave out bits. Next time it's good nettiquette to ask permission to post private messages.

Want me to post the rest?


Yea, Funny thing is Sas, he blurred out Hell, and I blurred out crap, and I still got warn, even though I didn't say it outright, which would have broke the rules

[AntiochusIII]

Even better I think that the Babe Thread should be deleted for good.

What the Helios do you mean!?

Mind you, it was quite funny when I received a flood of insults for a seemingly harmless comment of mine from another poster. The word was not used that often in real life when I think of a person insulting another; so it ends up strangely amusing instead of offensive. I really can't believe anyone could be that touchy, though, and I wasn't even baiting or anything like that...

I'd rather, you know, have the law in place but not always enforced. Since I'm a firm believer that there is a great amount of relativism, and that the content of the post counts -- "bad" words can, despite the remarks often made against this point, enhance a point one wants to make. Self-deragatory sarcasm is one example of that.

[The Spartan (Returns)]

Even better I think that the Babe Thread should be deleted for good.

i think you mean the Hunk Thread.