Animation Source Forums

I've seen some poorly run forums before with blatant favoritism and this isn't one of them. Discussions here usually remain very civil, I almost never see bad language. People have jobs / homework and their real lives to worry about so unless the moderators are paid enough to make "forum moderation" their full time job (which is obviously impossible since the site has no ads on it and even if it did it would need an amazing amount of traffic to make any money), asking them to catch everything is unreasonable.

Example... like if they were paid and had no lives, they could have done something about that huge run on sentence that I just posted. lol

My biggest gripe with the way that swearing is handled is not favoritism (I feel that's rather minor), but that words that are not censored can still give you a warning. For me that kinda defeats the purpose of having words censored.
Why?
Because if bad words are censored to hide them from the little ones, and some of the words aren't censored... well, that's a bit of a failure right there.
Plus it's rather inconsistent.

I remember getting an official warning once for swearing (even though I did not consider the word harsh enough to be considered so) and when making the point that because the word wasn't censored in the past, I didn't know, therefore I shouldn't get an official warning and just a gentle reminder, I basically got a 'too bad' response.
(Before you go saying 'you should PM a lead mod', I did, and got no response)

Oh yes, do I ever agree with this. Really. Every single thing you said in this post is exactly on the money, Cobaltie, and that really has bugged me too...especially that very dismissive "too bad" members often get (as I have too) when what some mod might view as a infraction of the rules turns out to be a very minor issue indeed.

I'm sure updating the censor system is on Steet's list, but it is a long one as well, so I can't say it will be fixed soon. But censored or not, a swear will warrant a warning. Censoring it, either yourself or by the system doing it, is considered the same thing, still the swear.

So tell me, Draco...how in the world can someone type the word "censored", and surround it by brackets, and then be pegged for using a curse word? The word "censored" is not a curse word. Nor can ANY staff member in their right minds make presumptions about what was in the poster's state of mind, then GUESS at what word he or she may have meant (or wanted) to type, and THEN "warn" him or her for it.

Or are we engaging in punishing people for crimes they didn't actually commit?

I know "****" is still concidered swearing, [since around the web its used so much for cursing] but I donno about "cencored"
Buuuuuut, look at this sentence=
"I [cencored] hate so-and so!!!!"
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what "cencored" was itended for.

Exactly.

If you cannot, through either quoting (in response, and before your reply is posted) or through some technical legerdemain, discover what the curse word was, and whether or not they actually TYPED a curse word or simply did what I said they could have done, then you have no business warning or banning someone on something they may or may NOT have done.

So, doesn't this mean, then, that you, Question, now deserve a warning for what you just posted? I mean, after all, we have to be fair here, right? As far as I can see, you have just earned a warning! Unless there is a double standard going on here.

She was giving an example. I don't think the censor system work on the forum, but I honestly am not sure on that.

What we simply mean is just because you censor it, or it is censored automatically, doesn't make it okay to still swear. Most of time its obvious that the person actually is trying to swear. If its a simple spelling mistake you can usually tell, or if a word has a swear in it as part of the word (like a certain japanese mushroom). In those cases there wouldn't be a warning. We don't jump down everyone's throats.

It doesn't.

Following the logic you provided earlier, ANYONE who posts something which is either censored by the system, or which they censor themselves (purposefully misspelling the word "censor" or not), is guilty of swearing, and deserves a warning. ANYONE. No matter the reason for it.

Or is the earlier implication, by the original author of this topic, and several others afterward, that certain people get passes on exceptions and others do not, correct? Because I certainly HOPE that is not the case. What is good for one member, MODERATOR OR NOT, is good for another...MODERATOR OR NOT.

I'm not going to argue about it. Question has no reason to swear, you shouldn't be so quick to point fingers at fellow mods. We all know the rules.

Moving on.

I'm just following the line of logic through to its inevitable conclusion. Am I not allowed to do that? Is that how this works?

Ok, I'm going to end this. Since we are all mods (Jersey, me, Draco) one of you two, give me a warning, ok? (This will be my first one, so you'll have to add me to the list)

Whoa, whoa! I think the point that Jersey was trying to make was just that if you censor the word yourself, either with the word censor in brackets or asterisks, that it shouldn't count against the person. And though I partially agree, I feel I must point out that the censor system (the last I remember) does work on the forums, but in a different way. It uses the asterisk system to censor words that have been added to the list that an administrator has to edit. However, if a word is not there, it can't censor it. Simply because of that, it's kind of impossible to know whether the person censored themselves, or whether they swore and the forum did it for them.