ChatterBank4 mins ago
Double Standards???
116 Answers
A Question was posed "why was the abuser who used WTF not deemed to fall foul of 'swearing rules'?"
and the Answer by the Spare ED was
“Because "WTF" doesn't have any of the offensive punch of an actual swearword, it is already sterilized and, as it becomes more used, it seems to less be saying the words that make it up and more a direct expression of its meaning.”
Surely the only reason the abbreviation “WTF” is used is there is no way (assuming the automatic censor is working) the full F-word would pass? It is <B>not</B> a case of it being sterilized and <i>if</i> it is a case of the more it is used the less it is saying the words that make it up, why do you not go the whole hog and have no censorship at all in order to reduce the impact of ANY profanity?
You have removed a username because of its sexual connexion when you admitted you originally had no idea of that fact and yet you continue to allow a widely known abbreviated phrase containing the F-word.
How can you justify these actions?
and the Answer by the Spare ED was
“Because "WTF" doesn't have any of the offensive punch of an actual swearword, it is already sterilized and, as it becomes more used, it seems to less be saying the words that make it up and more a direct expression of its meaning.”
Surely the only reason the abbreviation “WTF” is used is there is no way (assuming the automatic censor is working) the full F-word would pass? It is <B>not</B> a case of it being sterilized and <i>if</i> it is a case of the more it is used the less it is saying the words that make it up, why do you not go the whole hog and have no censorship at all in order to reduce the impact of ANY profanity?
You have removed a username because of its sexual connexion when you admitted you originally had no idea of that fact and yet you continue to allow a widely known abbreviated phrase containing the F-word.
How can you justify these actions?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by TCL-MUMPING. 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.
-- answer removed --
My apologies for not having the time to read all the posts here. Here's what I think: I have no problem whatsoever with WORDS - it's how they're USED that matters. In other words, a sentence like "It's another f****** rainy day here today" offends me not one bit, whereas somebody saying "What kind of question is that, you stupid or what?" should have his post removed. No linguistic robot is ever going to be able to make that distinction. Eds eds and eds (moderators) 24/7 is what I vote for.
ah, you'd want this page, swedeheart, a full and rich vocabulary of indecency
http://en.wiktionary....y:Swedish_swear_words
http://en.wiktionary....y:Swedish_swear_words
I Like Boo's suggestion,and to see the knoB post that would be very funny.But folks will always find a way to get around swearing.
F ornication
U nder the
C onsent of the
K ing.:o)
I dont mind swearing on the whole.(not in front of children etc).it can be quite funny used in the right context.And I bet the majority of users on here swear.But it doesent look to good on the internet.
F ornication
U nder the
C onsent of the
K ing.:o)
I dont mind swearing on the whole.(not in front of children etc).it can be quite funny used in the right context.And I bet the majority of users on here swear.But it doesent look to good on the internet.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --