Forum Rule Against Swearing

[John Simkin]

The main point is this forum was set up for children in the classroom to gain access to information about controversial issues. This is part of the UK National History Curriculum. (See the thread on Mary Pinchot Meyer):

In the UK we do not allow people to swear the classroom. Most teachers disapprove of swear words used in the classroom. If they read swearing on the forum they will no longer encourage their students to use this website. In fact, they will probably arrange for the forum to be blocked on the school network. As is often the case, one person's freedom leads to restrictions on someone else's freedom.

Secondly, this forum is attempting to teach people about rational and logically debate. The use of abusive language plays no part in this.

I have attempted to keep out of this debate and my moderators have been left with the responsibility of trying to persuade people to behave in an accepted manner. In return, I am duty bound to give them my full support if the request that if members refuse to behave, they are placed on moderation. This does not stop their opinions from appearing. What it means is that moderators will check the language of these members before they can be viewed by the public.

The main point is this forum was set up for children...

We know that John. That's why we're acting like children.

This is a slur against children. Most of my students were far more sensible than this. It would make more sense to say acting like Americans. Once again, all three culprits were from the land of the free.

[Guest David Guyatt]

John,

I would ask how many “children” actually visit the Controversial Issues board?

The impression I have is none. All the posters I have seen are adults – and, all the subjects discussed are growed-up themes. I do not include sixth-formers and above as children btw, although legally they are still in their minority. Heck, some of these “kids” know more about life than I do… and I haven’t led a sheltered life.

If there are genuine concerns about tainting young minds – at least that tiny fraction not already word familiar from the school play-ground, or via the arguments and flare-ups between their parents (where most of the words under discussion take early root), then shouldn’t there be a discussion about having an age restriction imposed?

I think this is more reasonable than imposing a blanket rule aimed at inhibiting the occasional use of profane words when their usage is appropriate, by an adult for other adults – where all the posters are adult.

Now let’s get back to the important issues:

spanking and bondage.

David

[Charles Black]

Having not been born in the "Land of the Free",

John cannot possibly understand the horror which we Americans face when we are unknowingly thrust in the midst of the "cultured". It is a terrible burden that we Americans bear/bare, as John so frquently acknowledges.

I feel however that most of us are generally nice people.....We are merely incapable of engaging the more cultured in the statospheric arena in which they have had the advantage of always having competed.

I feel that it would be more Christian, or more universally spiritual, for those so fortunate as not to have suffered the depravity of our outcast society, to be somewhat more forgiving of we unfortunates.

But I personally greatly appreciate the tolerance of this forum, the sacrifice which has been made by the members in their toleration of our crude and often vulgar behavior, and the empathy which has been demonstrated.

I consider myself particularly fortunate and now feel that I might, with continued guidance, be lifted from the dregs into which I was cast at birth. I feel that "all Americans" owe John Simkins a tremendous expression of gratitude.

We have been truly blessed and should eagerly express such. It is this type of tolerance and understanding toward which I shall set my goals.

Again....Thank You John !

Charles Black

[Bill Miller]

Secondly, this forum is attempting to teach people about rational and logically debate. The use of abusive language plays no part in this.

Really, John? I could create an entire thread on responses that were not designed to debate at all, but rather to disrupt by implying that someone like myself is a communist, a CIA agent, someone bidding for work at the 6th Floor Museum, and the list goes on and on .... while each time never addressing the JFK related points that I made about the photographic record. Was that kind of nonsense was allowed to go on in the name of "rational and logical debate"?

The 'not swearing rule' is a good thing if actually enforced, but not to the extent of being ridiculous. Even in this thread there are words seen here that are very vulgar and replacing a couple of letters here and there with an "x" or some other symbol doesn't stop the viewer from knowing exactly what was said. Yet when a three letter word in which the definition was also given so not to be misconstrued by anyone was posted - so much out of nothing was made of it. Even the word "hell" can be seen as a curse word when used a certain way. Where does it all end?

Bill

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Having been very nicely and politely scolded over my ocassional use of the world's utmost leading Anglo Saxon word, I thought I might just add my bit.

That bit is about context. If swearing is used in anger and to abuse others then okay, banish it. It is all too easy to get into a flame war over the internet.

However, if that context is humour, or is used as a wonderful and sardonic descriptive, then I see no reason whatsoever to ban it.

All rules are made to be broken and only sensible rules ultimately prevail.

Download: http://files.kavefish.com/audio/usage_of_the_f-word.wav

Personally, I think it is far more important to diminish the same old repetitive arguments by the same old usual suspects. Tedium sets in after the first few times these are read -zzzzzzzzzz - and they considerably detract from the subject under discussion. Often, an important subject is lost sight of altogether because of petty squabling and infantile ego clashes that will not be relinquished.

Maybe the moderators can get together and discuss options to reduce this? If adults can't meaningfully contribute to a thread then perhaps their posts should be accompanied by a graphic that highlights their temperament? I am no moderator and will never make a half reasonable one either. Which is why I can safely say that I would award a thumbnail image of a baby's teething comforter (dummy in the UK) to persistant offenders:

I would even be quite happy to test drive this image to avoid charges of unfairness...

David

David,

If you have any ideas about reducing"the noise" by some posters then by all means, please forward them.

While not agreeing with you with your thumbnail icons because it would offend some(however it is highly creative and I wouldn't mind receiving them personally), it reminded me of an thought I've had for a thread:

I would think it would be great fun to have a thread where ideas had to be expressed in nothing but emoticons.

Kathy

Kathy,

I know what you mean about offending people, but I find it mildly annoying when sensible and intelligent debate is hijacked by persons intent upon petty personal squabbles.

But I do have a suggestion how this can be remedied. Since the culprits wish to express their anima to the detriment of everyone else present, then let them do it. What I propose is a "sin bin". Any posts deemed off-topic are to be cut and pasted to a new one-header only forum set up especially for this purpose. Call it what you will... maybe "Sin Bin" is an ideal moniker? Those who wish to - or enjoy - enaging in disputation, insult or slur, rather than sensible debate, can all go there and fire off their twenty smoking rounds until they run out of ammunition.

To work this would require moderators being iron-willed and no nonsense about cutting and pasting and firm rules about what is off-topic need to be laid out aso everyone is clear about it. if such a decision is made and voted upon by a majority of respondents, then it becomes forum law. I doubtless will see a few of my posts entering these hallowed halls and hereby commit myself to swallow any pride or anger if that happens... and get on with the fudamental purpose of these boards -- adult discussion of controversial topics.

For me, these topics amount to some of the most vital means of making the wider public aware of the real world and exposing the real background to important and domestic and world events. God knows there are few enough individuals committed to this ideal anyway.

David

David, old bean. You will be most delighted to learn that such a thread already exists, I started it back in Feb of this year it is headed BIG SHOUTY THREAD FOR ALL YOUR DISPUTATIONAL NEEDS, or something like that. It has received a total of 12 replies thusfar..Hey-ho. Oh, its in the non academic section of this fine Forum.

[Guest David Guyatt]

Steve,

Nice.

But how about making it a forum of its own and moderators casting all shouty disputational posts into that lower realm as a matter of course.

That would work, init?

David

PS, I will be Fuhrer, I will be Fuhrer, I will be Fuhrer...one day mein Dammen und meain Herren -- one day soooooooonnn.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Steve,

Nice.

But how about making it a forum of its own and moderators casting all shouty disputational posts into that lower realm as a matter of course.

That would work, init?

David

PS, I will be Fuhrer, I will be Fuhrer, I will be Fuhrer...one day mein Dammen und meain Herren -- one day soooooooonnn.

David, when I next speak with our head honcho Sir Simkin of Worthing, i will suggest this very thing. Note to all moderators, Please avail yourselves of the following, A hefty shovel, protective gloves, and a tetinus shot.

[John Simkin]

John,

I would ask how many “children” actually visit the Controversial Issues board?

The impression I have is none. All the posters I have seen are adults – and, all the subjects discussed are growed-up themes. I do not include sixth-formers and above as children btw, although legally they are still in their minority. Heck, some of these “kids” know more about life than I do… and I haven’t led a sheltered life.

They are not allowed to post but I assume that we get a lot of young people who visit the forum. According to a national survey my website is used by more history students in the UK than any other. My website contains hundreds of links to this forum. This is why I take so much effort to make sure that members do not use abusive language. If members refuse to abide by these rules they will be removed from the forum.

[Myra Bronstein]

Having not been born in the "Land of the Free",

John cannot possibly understand the horror which we Americans face when we are unknowingly thrust in the midst of the "cultured". It is a terrible burden that we Americans bear/bare, as John so frquently acknowledges.

I feel however that most of us are generally nice people.....We are merely incapable of engaging the more cultured in the statospheric arena in which they have had the advantage of always having competed.

I feel that it would be more Christian, or more universally spiritual, for those so fortunate as not to have suffered the depravity of our outcast society, to be somewhat more forgiving of we unfortunates.

But I personally greatly appreciate the tolerance of this forum, the sacrifice which has been made by the members in their toleration of our crude and often vulgar behavior, and the empathy which has been demonstrated.

I consider myself particularly fortunate and now feel that I might, with continued guidance, be lifted from the dregs into which I was cast at birth. I feel that "all Americans" owe John Simkins a tremendous expression of gratitude.

We have been truly blessed and should eagerly express such. It is this type of tolerance and understanding toward which I shall set my goals.

Again....Thank You John !

Charles Black

Oh Charles, this is the best ever post. It should win some kind of "best ever post" award.

My guess though is that the point will not be taken, much as humor is almost invariably lost on the target.

[Myra Bronstein]

John,

I would ask how many “children” actually visit the Controversial Issues board?

The impression I have is none. All the posters I have seen are adults – and, all the subjects discussed are growed-up themes. I do not include sixth-formers and above as children btw, although legally they are still in their minority. Heck, some of these “kids” know more about life than I do… and I haven’t led a sheltered life.

They are not allowed to post but I assume that we get a lot of young people who visit the forum. According to a national survey my website is used by more history students in the UK than any other. My website contains hundreds of links to this forum. This is why I take so much effort to make sure that members do not use abusive language. If members refuse to abide by these rules they will be removed from the forum.

Well it's heartening to know that some young'uns are learning real history to dilute the pervasive propaganda.

[Len Colby]

I’ll be in debt to however finds the exact quote but IIRC in the majority or one of the concurring opinions to the Cohen v. California case one of the Supreme Court justices said that “swearing” is protected free speech because these words express different sentiments than more ‘polite’ words. I might be thinking about Justice Harlan’s comment that "One man's vulgarity is another man's lyric"* but am not sure it's been 20 years since I studied this.

* http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f...ecentspeech.htm

Paul Cohen was arrested in a California courthouse in 1971 for wearing a jacket with “F**k the draft” (with “uc” instead of “**”) written on the back. By the narrowest possible margin (5-4 with the Chief Justice dissenting) the court ruled this was protected by the 1st ammendment. Obviously “To heck with the draft” would not have expressed Cohen’s sentiments.

I actually agree with Mike that though I support freespeech there is a different between recognizing one has the right to do something and that doing it is right. Just because I think the Klan has the right to parade arround in bedseets doesn’t mean I like them doing so. If I ran a forum I probablly wouldn’t have such a rule nor I imagine would forums run by members here think they have a right to use such language here. But this is John and Andy’s forum and if they deem that obcenity is verbotten those of us who choose to post here have two reasonable choices 1) respect that or 2) cease posting here. No one has an inalienable write to post what ever they want on someone else’s forum.

John wrote: “This is a slur against children. Most of my students were far more sensible than this. It would make more sense to say acting like Americans. Once again, all three culprits were from the land of the free.”

I think that depends on your POV. “Obscene” language is not considered as offensive to most Americans as it seems is to most British people*. This is just a cultural difference it doesn’t make American’s bad. Many Americans and Brits would be offended if they saw a topless woman at one of their beaches (not I LOL), that doesn’t mean there is something wrong with French women who only wear half their bikinis in the Riviera. How ever unlike a beach which is one country or another this forum like the rest of the Net is international, live and let live.

* With the exception of David and his declared affinity for "the F word" but Mr. Guyatt is exceptional in numerous ways!

Edited July 20, 2007 by Len Colby

[Guest David Guyatt]

There’s a perfect and elegant solution to this dilemma

When anyone wishes to use the sublime Anglo Saxon words: cuck, cucking, cuck-off etc., they should replace the “c” letter with the letter “f”.

This would avoid spreading confusion amongst all those millions and millions of children who already spell and use it that way in the school play ground and elsewhere away from close adult hearing. Educationally speaking this is the most sensible thing to do. Otherwise, we’d be guilty of priming our children with the complex and hypocritical double standards that pox adulthood.

But this solution also presents a problem with the “c” word. This word is not one of my favourites because it is German in origin and I’m easily confused by that language and by German jokes (that’s a joke btw).

What I, therefore, propose, is to replace the letter “c” with the letter “b” so if someone wanted to call me a “stupid bunt” they could do so knowing I wouldn’t understand.

This remedy could equally apply to most other profanities. For example, we could replace “ass” with pass, “bugger” with chugger, “xxxxx” with dick and “clitoris” with a throat infection.

In fact, I have it in mind to write a completely new A-Z sexalphabet based entirely on pheromones. Or is it phonetics? Either way, both are nice and sensible sounding words. Whichever it is, I intend to do it. I really do.

Finally, as a former City type, I felt it only right to share current City boardroom thinking for recommended dress-down-Friday attire.

Children, don’t look:

David

[Guest Gary Loughran]

There’s a perfect and elegant solution to this dilemma

When anyone wishes to use the sublime Anglo Saxon words: cuck, cucking, cuck-off etc., they should replace the “c” letter with the letter “f”.

This would avoid spreading confusion amongst all those millions and millions of children who already spell and use it that way in the school play ground and elsewhere away from close adult hearing. Educationally speaking this is the most sensible thing to do. Otherwise, we’d be guilty of priming our children with the complex and hypocritical double standards that pox adulthood.

But this solution also presents a problem with the “c” word. This word is not one of my favourites because it is German in origin and I’m easily confused by that language and by German jokes (that’s a joke btw).

What I, therefore, propose, is to replace the letter “c” with the letter “b” so if someone wanted to call me a “stupid bunt” they could do so knowing I wouldn’t understand.

This remedy could equally apply to most other profanities. For example, we could replace “ass” with pass, “bugger” with chugger, “xxxxx” with dick and “clitoris” with a throat infection.

In fact, I have it in mind to write a completely new A-Z sexalphabet based entirely on pheromones. Or is it phonetics? Either way, both are nice and sensible sounding words. Whichever it is, I intend to do it. I really do.

Finally, as a former City type, I felt it only right to share current City boardroom thinking for recommended dress-down-Friday attire.

Children, don’t look:

David

I couldn't get Alan Partridge out of mind when reading this. [Maybe it was the pic]

Personally I believe that profanity has a very pertinent place in expressing oneself both orally and in the written word(and I know this is quite the opposite of popular thought i.e. ...lack of vocabulary), however, it's John's well stated wish that this forum should be devoid of 'bad language' and generally abusive terms.

Is this really so hard to understand and action without all the hullaballoo? I am aware that many posts here have been purely to extract urine as it were, but surely this needn't run for another 6 pages.

[Jack White]

Maybe a list of censored "SWEAR" words should be posted. Not everyone

knows. Prudes discern swearing in many commonplace words. Such a list

would allow underage forum members to know what they are missing

without being subjected to them in postings. Most kids know more of them

than I do anyway. Personally I try to avoid all CURSEWORDS, especially

those of the religious sort.

How many minors are forum members anyway?

Maybe we should start a thread where members can propose words

to be on the banned list. I am sure Brits would ban "bloody", which

might handicap discussion of autopsy reports.

I am vehemently against ad hominem personal attacks, whether or not

they use "swear" words. I am not against colorful language which is in

common everyday use unless it is directed at a particular person.

I am for exemplary writing, and all should eschew crude or coarse

language except in SELF-DEFENSE. When unfairly attacked, one must

expose the attacker in no uncertain terms. Daintiness is perceived

as cowardice.

Jack

[Bill Miller]

Maybe a list of censored "SWEAR" words should be posted.

Jack

Let me see if I get you right ... The forum is against students seeing curse words in post, so you think making a list of curse words that should not be said should be posted for all to see ... if this is correct, then sleep on that thought for a night and see if it still sounds like a good idea tomorrow. (sigh~)

Bill