If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Censoring words on the boards
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
in General Chat
Okay, bit of an update for you
In part as a result of some email discussions about a couple of old threads, in part due to chats with other moderators and in part due to discussions with the internal managers on the editorial team, I've come to a decision about the way we censor words on TheSite.org. Given the change I thought it was important to let you know.
Now obviously to discuss the issue I'm going to have to make it clear what we're talking about, much as I dislike the words in question.
Until about a week ago we censored three words (so they appeared in stars) - one of which was faggot. Given problems on the food & drink board this word was removed.
Therefore, until yesterday, TheSite.org censored only two words - nigger and paki. Btw, that's the last time I'll be using them in this thread.
However discussions about the censorship of words continually left me in a difficult position. As a matter of principal TheSite.org tries to promote the questioning of others views, especially around the use of racial and insulting terms. And as a matter of principal we never consider the use of swear words by adults to be offensive, except in certain contexts.
We believe that debates around race, gender, sexuality need to take place, and should be encouraged, and we don't allow racist postings. The users, and the mods will question those people who post in a racist manner, and we ban people who are clearly racist.
So despite promoting the idea that words and offensive terms should be challenged, rather than banned, I was in a position of having to defend why two words were banned and others weren't. Although I tried, it was a position I couldn't support.
As a result we've changed the way we censor words - we won't. From now on, no words will be censored on the boards.
This doesn't mean that the words mentioned above are in anyway acceptable on these boards - their use, especially in debates on race as a racial insult, or as personally insulting terms will pretty much result in bannings for racism. But it makes no sense to ban only those two words and not also many 100s that are equally offensive to other groups.
So thought we'd let you know, any questions?
In part as a result of some email discussions about a couple of old threads, in part due to chats with other moderators and in part due to discussions with the internal managers on the editorial team, I've come to a decision about the way we censor words on TheSite.org. Given the change I thought it was important to let you know.
Now obviously to discuss the issue I'm going to have to make it clear what we're talking about, much as I dislike the words in question.
Until about a week ago we censored three words (so they appeared in stars) - one of which was faggot. Given problems on the food & drink board this word was removed.
Therefore, until yesterday, TheSite.org censored only two words - nigger and paki. Btw, that's the last time I'll be using them in this thread.
However discussions about the censorship of words continually left me in a difficult position. As a matter of principal TheSite.org tries to promote the questioning of others views, especially around the use of racial and insulting terms. And as a matter of principal we never consider the use of swear words by adults to be offensive, except in certain contexts.
We believe that debates around race, gender, sexuality need to take place, and should be encouraged, and we don't allow racist postings. The users, and the mods will question those people who post in a racist manner, and we ban people who are clearly racist.
So despite promoting the idea that words and offensive terms should be challenged, rather than banned, I was in a position of having to defend why two words were banned and others weren't. Although I tried, it was a position I couldn't support.
As a result we've changed the way we censor words - we won't. From now on, no words will be censored on the boards.
This doesn't mean that the words mentioned above are in anyway acceptable on these boards - their use, especially in debates on race as a racial insult, or as personally insulting terms will pretty much result in bannings for racism. But it makes no sense to ban only those two words and not also many 100s that are equally offensive to other groups.
So thought we'd let you know, any questions?
0
Comments
Jim fixes it.
xxx.
I am at work so there's like nothing for me to do apart from celebrate the word cunt, innit. :razz:
Has it not?! I always had to put the [*I][/I*] in between it and that!
One question, you say they are not to be used in a debate, and as such would lead to a banning, but what in a none arguemenative "offensive" context e.g. if i said something like "In the 60 it was common for people to insult people by calling them (one of the words in question)" or "Why is it acceptable for the (one of the words) to be used in rap songs, yet by somebody of another race said even in the same tone can be viewed as deeply offensive?" etc...
I think there is no offense meant by either sentence, yet could this lead to a ban?
Or sometimes you want to report what someone else has said, it's all about context.
Whaaaaaaaaat! Where the FUCK have I been, mate?!
I know obviously both the terms mentioned above have really loaded meanings, but thats only because we let them. In 25 years time I'm sure niether of those words will be considered as taboo as they are now.
No, not at all, I guess I was just getting across that the casual use of the word would be seen as hugely offensive, my mistake in implying that it wouldn't ever be appropriate - as it katchika's example. I'll edit it to make it clear
Spot on :thumb:
Good decision IMO
But what I think is: It's a choice, about what people do and don't like. Reasons for being racist vary from person to person. Also, are people no longer allowed to have their own opinions on life, unless of course it conforms to a "standard"?
But I'm glad there are no restricted words here anymore. It's up to people to put their opinions across in a decent way - which if they were serious about their debate, they would think about and understand the power of the words used.
I must have missed that! How funny! Do you reckon you could get away with doing that again? Sorry Kermit
Or am I thinking of another forum?
You don't publish anything here - we do. We are the publishers of everyone on this website. As a funded charity that believes in involving as many different people as possible, we don't want to be the people who publish hate. We belive that on one hand it actively discourages people to post who are being threatened, attacked, defamed and demeaned by those posters, and on the other hand, we'd be actively promoting racism by choosing to publish those viewpoints.
This is, and has always been, a moderated discussion board of a charity, not a free for all with no rules. People can have what ever rules they want, but I don't believe I should be made into a racist publisher in order to defend someones right to stereotype and restrict the freedom of other people.
People are entirely entitled to their own views, we have a number of posters whose views could be considered racist, certainly based on stereotypes - they are entirely free to post. What they can't do is use this charity to post hate, and to post racism, and to attack the lives of others because of their skin, their sexuality, their gender, they language. That isn't why this website publishes your posts.
It wouldn't make you a racist publisher, and you wouldn't be promoting racism, but opening avenues for debate about the issues, allowing both sides, not just those who are anti-racism.
I of course understand the stance of thesite.org's boards - and respect them - I merely like to question, sometimes
And it's worth noting that posters like that aren't banned immediately but after a long discussion trying to provide examples how they can post within the rules.
... and all is good in the world
It was worse when I wanted to talk about Scunthorpe :grump:
WHY would you want to talk about Scunthorpe?