Donate SIGN UP

Ḅȉoody - Can You Remove It From The Swear Filter

Avatar Image
Gromit | 10:29 Wed 08th Oct 2014 | Editor's Blog
75 Answers
there are many legitimate uses of the word ḅȈoody which you filter out.

In the news section, a link with the word ḅȈoody in it will not word because you have bastardised it.

When used as a swear word, it is on the very low end of offensiveness.

Please, just let it through.
Gravatar

Answers

41 to 60 of 75rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Looking at some very old posts I notice that you couldn't say **** but you could say, "I can't be ***d.

Also, there was a post regarding a match between Spurs and ***nal!
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
That is gratuitously insulting, irrespective of the subject, so I am not surprised that the term has been removed.
It has always defeated me why anyone feels the need to type or even disguise foul words.

We have such an abundant language to use.

Bloody is different as it can be used perfectly legitimately.
I don't think there should *be* a "swear filter", I find it shallow and pointless ...then again it's not my site.
The "low command of the English language" notion has been proved to be nonsense many times but the possibility that certain types might just eff and blind willy nilly ruins the fact that there are processes and heated debates going on and people should be allowed to express themselves including swear words.
(IMO)
Why can't we say ***? D a m n
d-a-m-n..... if you spell it *** goes down as well I think
or s o d and s od ding
erm bit of etymology here for bloody

does not mean "covered in blood" a lot of the time
which is the usual sense

but - a contraction for ..... by-Our-Lady

william II's fave swear word was 'by the face of Loki' and no one onjects to that now
I think the by-our-lady derivation is hotly disputed these days. On the other hand, calling something "covered in blood" doesn't make a lot of sense as a swearword.
I think that the problem is that these filters cannot recognise context. So many words have legitimate uses as well as being insulting. A classic example is the term for a female dog, though I could quote many more.
Well I'll be ***
D a m n e d
Who'd a thowt it!
Why the elle does any bhugger need to bloody well swear on AB.

Hans.
Just bamboozle the filter with a bit of dialect -still gets the point across.
Dhamned if I know

41 to 60 of 75rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Ḅȉoody - Can You Remove It From The Swear Filter

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.