There has been too much foul language here of late.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Personally, I was always grateful for the infractions I received, even the ones I didn't agree with.

Writing isn't speaking - there's no excuse for the sort of profane ejaculation you get in conversation on a forum. I am of the opinion that if you swear you should get one warning, then an infraction, then once the infractions build up you get a temp ban.

If I use my mobile phone on the office floor I get pulled up on a disciplinary - do it a second time and I'd be fired. Resisting the natural urge to pull it out and check my emails during a quiet half-hour is a darn site harder than not swearing here - but I manage.

If this is really a mature forum then there's no need to tolerate swearing.

[Kival]

If I use my mobile phone on the office floor I get pulled up on a disciplinary - do it a second time and I'd be fired. Resisting the natural urge to pull it out and check my emails during a quiet half-hour is a darn site harder than not swearing here - but I manage.

And why are this completly disproportionate reactions a good thing?

[Arjos]

Working place vs videogames/recreational forum, said mimicking a two-pan scale XD

I'm not encouraging swearing, but the way I see it, forbidding it, is just as wrong...
If someone wants to use it as an interjection, that's just fine: you find it cheap/lazy? Point it out, during the discussion :)
Find it offensive towards you? Get over yourself lol

Then of course, if those are specific and malicious attacks on a group/person, mods should get right on it...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

And why are this completly disproportionate reactions a good thing?

For my workplace, it's perfectly proportionate.

The point is - it has become an impulse to check your phone every fives minutes, even when you know it's off, but an adult should be able to curtail such impulses.

If Andre sticks a "no swearing, no nudity" sign on the Org door there's no reason members should not abide by that, none at all.

As far as I'm concerned the only argument against a blanket ban is mod-workload, but from waht I have seen the relaxation of the ban has lead to an uptick in swearing with the result that some, like Strike, have stepped over the now-blurry line and been temp-banned.

Let's just take a moment to consider that - a long-serving and generally well-liked Senior Member is currently serving a temp-ban for language.

When was the last time that happened?

Edit:

I should like to make two further points.

1. I don't have to pay attention to Arjos' points if he is going to be rude and laugh at me, which is connected to the issue at hand.

2. Moving this to the Watchtower has probably reduced the number of members participating in this discussion, particularly the Backroomers to whom it originally pertained. This concerns me in so far as I think it demonstrates people don't usually pay attention to the Watch Tower.

[caravel]

Writing isn't speaking - there's no excuse for the sort of profane ejaculation you get in conversation on a forum.

I agree, there are no excuses for it.

I am of the opinion that if you swear you should get one warning, then an infraction, then once the infractions build up you get a temp ban.

Then you need to define what is and what is not swearing - internationally... you also need a team of moderators vetting every post, to edit out the swearwords and issue the infractions...

If I use my mobile phone on the office floor I get pulled up on a disciplinary - do it a second time and I'd be fired. Resisting the natural urge to pull it out and check my emails during a quiet half-hour is a darn site harder than not swearing here - but I manage.

This is not your workplace.

If this is really a mature forum then there's no need to tolerate swearing.

On a "mature forum", the members are supposedly mature enough not to swear, that's the point being made here.

As far as I'm concerned the only argument against a blanket ban is mod-workload, but from waht I have seen the relaxation of the ban has lead to an uptick in swearing with the result that some, like Strike, have stepped over the now-blurry line and been temp-banned.

Obviously there is going to be a spike in language related incidents and certain people are going to fall foul of that. The staff have always used discretion here, not black and white my way or the highway approach. My opinion is that if someone slips in a mild expletive into a post which otherwise has good content (no personal attacks or slurs), the staff should let it go - but for posts which are simply a string of bad language the post is not even worth the edit - delete it and hand out an infraction.

It's far better if members regulate their own language rather than the nappy/diaper change approach... if you like this board, like to participate here, why would you want to turn it into a cesspool? If you see some new member using foul language, why not politely remind them to moderate it? Why does a mod need to do this on a board with many mature long term members, senior members and especially in the backroom where you have a lot of regular people who have been around for years.

Let's just take a moment to consider that - a long-serving and generally well-liked Senior Member is currently serving a temp-ban for language.

When was the last time that happened?

Who? Just because one person lacks self control, it does not mean that every member needs blanket treatment. Would the previous rules have prevented this, stopped him swearing? It would have meant a nanny running around after said member editing his posts. No one should be expecting this from the staff in 2012.

[Andres]

As far as I'm concerned the only argument against a blanket ban is mod-workload, but from waht I have seen the relaxation of the ban has lead to an uptick in swearing with the result that some, like Strike, have stepped over the now-blurry line and been temp-banned.

Let's just take a moment to consider that - a long-serving and generally well-liked Senior Member is currently serving a temp-ban for language.

Let's assume, for the sake of this discussion, that crossing the language line is the reason why he got temp banned (I'm not saying it is what got hm banned, disciplinary actions are always between staff and member, private).

I'm not going to impose draconic language rules and punish everybody else by forbidding even the most minor bad language (like "ass" or "piss"), because one member made a mistake. I'm also not going to punish that member for his mistake, by imposing those same draconian language rules on him as well and keeping a close eye on him in particular, with my finger on the infraction button, ready to push it at the first hint of something that resembles the f-bomb.

I simply won't do that. Mistake made, short ban triggered, after 3 days, you're welcome back and let's forget about it. Accumulate 10 temp bans in a few months time and you're an exception compared to the other members, ok, we'll talk openly, freely and blunt; in private of course. Did 50 members got temp ban after temp ban after the new rules were introduced, then clearly Andres is an idiot and needs to clean up his act or step down.

As an aside, the fact that the member in question is a "long standing senior member" is irrelevant, certainly when it comes to something silly and minor as 3-day ban for a few bad posts. The senior member title is a honorific you get for your contributions to the .Org community. It's a "thank you for all the good things you did around here". It's nice to hand out and nice to receive, but it's nothing more than that. It doesn't make you special. In fact, if you start walking next to your shoes, feeling special and thinking you are entitled to preferential treatment because you got the SM title, then you should hand it in again for missing the point about what this place is about.

And for your information: plenty of long standing (senior) members have served temp bans here before the language rules were loosened, so it's not like loosening the language rules has led to something that has never happened before In fact, with the stricter rules, there were probably more temp bans of long standing senior members than we see now with the more lenient rules.

[Arjos]

I don't have to pay attention to Arjos' points if he is going to be rude and laugh at me, which is connected to the issue at hand.

Just found funny the comparison between an office and this forum...
As for the rest, imo it isn't healthy, nor has any ground to take offence from a random swearing, aimed at no one in particular...

[caravel]

As for the rest, imo it isn't healthy, nor has any ground to take offence from a random swearing, aimed at no one in particular...

IMO it's not simply a matter of taking offence...

For some members it's a matter of pride in the .org and it's traditions and I respect that. This is your board, everyone's board, not just the staff's, but the staff are members also.

I agree with the end to editing however, because even though it wasn't obvious, swearing was still going on, but staff were having to run about playing censor and editing it. Back when I was a mod, the majority of this would not involve infractions or would come in the form of 0 point warnings - so no incentives to stop and the result = even more editing... (luckily for me, there was virtually none of this in my section (MTW and STW) - why? Maturer members who respected their fellows and their subforum), but fellow moderators were kept quite busy).

A "relaxed" approach to language should make it all too clear. Those abusing this and seeing it as a "licence to swear" should not be surprised at all at the results...

[Arjos]

Guess the staff could set a bar and act accordingly. It will anger some, for how high it is and at the same time vex others, for how low it is :P

[Strike For The South]

et tu Phillip?