Author Topic: What is appropriate content for DonationCoder? (Read 133981 times)

tranglos · « **Reply #50 on:** January 03, 2008, 09:53 PM »

If we're considering implemention of a tagging system, then why is "censorship" relevant any more?
-Ralf Maximus (January 03, 2008, 07:52 PM)

I believe it is relevant due to CodeTRUCKER's sentiment which CWuestefeld quoted, implying that a voluntary tagging system would not be sufficiently effective.

How about this:

Spoiler

Usenet readers used to have the ROT-13 feature, which works much as this here "spoiler" tag. This technique is already available, and perhaps better than NSFW, because the text is physically obscured.

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #51 on:** January 03, 2008, 09:54 PM »

...
I would hope that whatever policy evolves, it is left deliberately vague. Otherwise we shall become obsessed with discussing in detail the very subjects some find objectionable.
-Ralf Maximus (January 03, 2008, 09:22 PM)

I don't think that I've ever seen anything that I've found even remotely offensive here... Then again, I could well be a culprit.

But well said Ralf.

I've found that most topics where porn sites or sex toys come up are quite focused on technology with the given spattering of suggestive comments. But nothing even remotely obscene. Then again, I may well have missed those posts too as I can only manage to read a very few of the posts here, and can only respond to even fewer.

However, there certainly is a point to adding in NSFW tags or using the smilie. Sure... Sometimes it's a real pain in the to insert smilies like that, but it's not too much trouble really.

I don't mind a little bit of cursing, and I certainly do so myself, but there's a limit as well. Used sparingly (or rarely), it has a definite effect. Used without reserve, it's nothing short of, well, not sure what to call it other than "undesirable". Swearing belongs in an office when discussing IT projects with colleagues.

In any event, I have faith in the community here to properly police itself and in mouser's judgement over how things should pan out.

Cheers!

-Renegade (January 03, 2008, 09:37 PM)

Hi Renegade,

I have noted that you have always been one to say what you thought. Allow me the same courtesy.

One of my biggest disappointments was when after learning of your ingenious musical s/w, I was intrigued by your "Complain about bad software here" link and followed it to see what was offered that I might could use. I think what you did was not cute, sly or clever. It was an ambush and it was mean. I was terribly disappointed, as I have said. Do I wish to censor your use of innocuous tag lines yes, but only to prevent others from a foul trick. Like a lie that is the parasite that feeds off the very truth that it has to depend on to be successful, your posting of such an affront only worked because I had come to trust the integrity of the community. In short you prostituted the reputation of DC to effect your game. You are not completely to blame; however, as the leadership was aware of the trap door and, to my knowledge, it has never been addressed.

Lashiec · « **Reply #52 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:03 PM »

tranglos, is that similar to a feature some other SMF-based forums have, in which you get a "Spoiler" function which shows the text as you hover over it, or perhaps like the one used in phpBB, where you have to select or click in a box containing the text?

Because all the ROT-13 I know is the encryption method, and I don't know how it would be used here, if you could explain it with some detail

app103 · « **Reply #53 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:05 PM »

If we're considering implemention of a tagging system, then why is "censorship" relevant any more?
-Ralf Maximus (January 03, 2008, 07:52 PM)

I believe it is relevant due to CodeTRUCKER's sentiment which CWuestefeld quoted, implying that a voluntary tagging system would not be sufficiently effective.

How about this:
Spoiler
Usenet readers used to have the ROT-13 feature, which works much as this here "spoiler" tag. This technique is already available, and perhaps better than NSFW, because the text is physically obscured.

-tranglos (January 03, 2008, 09:53 PM)

A wise man once told me that you can't be offended unless you choose to be...choose wisely.

That being said...

If we are going to start tagging things as NSFW with some sort of forum mod, I don't want to see the tags. I think a page of posts with a bunch of visible NSFW tags is more offensive that a page of swear words and boobie pics.

Is there going to be something to hide what I find offensive...like the NSFW tags?

Here is a solution:

http://pj.doland.org...nsfw-html-attribute/

and the firefox extension for it: http://www.chrisfink...ddons/nsfw-detector/

Invisible tags and it will become the viewer's responsibility to filter out in their own browser what they don't want to see.

I could live with this.

Ralf Maximus · « **Reply #54 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:10 PM »

It was an ambush and it was mean. I was terribly disappointed, as I have said.

Having clicked on the link, you learned something. So don't do it again. Renegade's humor is not for you, that much is clear. Were you expecting happyjoyjoy funtime? That's not R's style.

And blaming ANY of this on mouser or the mods here doesn't impress. I find the assumption that I am an adult and capable of filtering what I perceive a blessing, not a burden.

tranglos · « **Reply #55 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:17 PM »

tranglos, is that similar to a feature some other SMF-based forums have, in which you get a "Spoiler" function which shows the text as you hover over it, or perhaps like the one used in phpBB, where you have to select or click in a box containing the text?

Because all the ROT-13 I know is the encryption method, and I don't know how it would be used here, if you could explain it with some detail
-Lashiec (January 03, 2008, 10:03 PM)

Okay, now I'm confused

I was referring to the feature I used in my post, which lets you hide content. It's much easier to use than Rot-13, of course, but serves the same purpose: you won't be able to see the contect until you decide to physically reveal it.

It may even be "better" (forgive the inverted quotes) than the proposed tagging system, in that a tagged post remains fully readable, while the spoiler feature mechanically hides what might offend.

That said, I don't think server-side technology will solve ideological disputes, which is what we are engaging in here...

ed: typos

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #56 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:18 PM »

Um... Wow!

Frankly, the "examples" of "vulgarity" provided are no where near as racy as a ton of the dialog contained in the old Bugs Bunny cartoon made back in the 40ies to boost the war effort. ...But then again I ran a biker bar for several years, so offending me is (basically) impossible.

CodeTRUCKER while the Morality Police dialog was a truly artful dodge ... it still leaves you firmly planted on the moral high-ground. Now... the argument that one's on-line identity can, will, and does overlap into their real-world identity ... would drive the point with a bit more practical "spin". In our new Techno-Savvy world people have quite literally lost out on job opportunities because of (off color)comments made by them, that showed up in background checks during the application process. Kinda makes you think ... don't it. I know I swear less because of it.

Being reasonable for the majority means everybody has to lighten-up a little.

Trying to auto-tag content based on the fast and loose nature of the English language is a nightmare. Feel free to Google "Spam Filters" for details. I administer a corporate exchange server at work and the Ham -vs- Spam game is an ongoing fiasco.

The folks here seem to be a generally pleasant lot, so I don't thing making a hard policy of "Self Policing" ones own posts would be a problem. You only need one simple question: "Would you type that if your mother was watching?" ...If the answer is No, then label it NSFW. I know with the tons of research I do on a daily basis (vulgar as I are...) that I truly appreciate the NSFW tags when I have to find something when a client is present, or the boss is watching. It's quickly become a universal label and works splendidly on 90% of the boards I frequent. Others feature links to a video of two girls eating poop (I'm not making that up...) <- Now that IS vulgar.

Lashiec · « **Reply #57 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:18 PM »

Okay, now I'm confused I was referring to the feature I used in my post, which lets you hide content. It's much easier to use than Rot-13, of course, but serves the same purpose: you won't be able to see the contect until you decide to physically reveal it.

It may even be "better" (forgive the inverted quotes) than the proposed tagging system, in that a tagged post remains fully readable, while the spoiler feature mechanically hides what might offend.
-tranglos (January 03, 2008, 10:17 PM)

Oh, OK, now I understand, I got it backwards

Veign · « **Reply #58 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:23 PM »

I am trying to be a non-smoker in a auditorium of smokers.
-CodeTRUCKER (January 03, 2008, 09:35 PM)

I think its unfair to assign everyone else to one single group.

Please reference my tag line. I ask you, "What's wrong with doing right?"
-CodeTRUCKER (January 03, 2008, 09:35 PM)

Why? Are you saying everyone else is wrong?

I had written a lot more but deleted it since it was a reaction to your post and really served no purpose except venting.

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #59 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:28 PM »

It was an ambush and it was mean. I was terribly disappointed, as I have said.

Having clicked on the link, you learned something. So don't do it again. Renegade's humor is not for you, that much is clear. Were you expecting happyjoyjoy funtime? That's not R's style.

And blaming ANY of this on mouser or the mods here doesn't impress. I find the assumption that I am an adult and capable of filtering what I perceive a blessing, not a burden.
-Ralf Maximus (January 03, 2008, 10:10 PM)

I find it interesting that you have chosen to defend a mean trick as a harmless joke. Herein lies the problem, what I feel as pain you find humorous. This will never be resolved. What can be resolved is if people become more important than rights, but it appears my attempts at planting are not finding fertile soil. I tried. In regard to Mouser, you don't need to get your feathers ruffled because I have had an open dialog with Jessie since last year, albeit with a massive gap in the middle, but even that was an effort to find harmony with this wonderful community. He knows my feelings completely and could produce multitudes of posts that expressed my heartfelt admiration for his leadership.

tranglos · « **Reply #60 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:34 PM »

A wise man once told me that you can't be offended unless you choose to be...choose wisely.
-app103 (January 03, 2008, 10:05 PM)

I must say I have very, very strong feelings about the issue CodeTRUCKER raised, so I was trying to avoid making a value statement one way or another, since my command of English at 5 am does not measure up to the courtesy of previous posters here

Let me just say I have never been offended by any DC post.

Personally, I find the post CodeTRUCKER refers to as offensive a perfectly DC-suitable entry, at least inasmuch as it could have led to an interesting thread on niche (or not-so-niche) technologies. If it didn't, perhaps it was because many posters felt the topic itself was somewhat risqué and best avoided. There are very few forums on the net where one could expect such restraint.

Interesting idea about the HTML tag!

Lashiec · « **Reply #61 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:36 PM »

What can be resolved is if people become more important than rights, but it appears my attempts at planting are not finding fertile soil.
-CodeTRUCKER (January 03, 2008, 10:28 PM)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a solution has been proposed, and some people has provided variations to make things easier for everyone. Judging from your reaction, you feel like is a good option, and mouser seems receptive to implement such solution in the forum. Most people agree with the arrangement, and philosophical, political, religious, whatever discussions aside, the problem looks fixed to me. Unless you want something else which escapes to my perception.

nosh · « **Reply #62 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:42 PM »

Codetrucker,
just to reiterate, I do appreciate people having different sensibilities but I honestly don't get how a grown man can be so sensitive. It's three days past the new year and here's what I've seen in the news:
A man being assaulted (and subsequently beaten to death)
A school kid who hung himself coz he wanted to "prove his teacher wrong"
Two women nearly raped in public coz they ventured to the wrong place at the wrong time

There's so much craziness going around and here you are, a grown man appealing for kindness coz somebody made a post linking to a porn site and getting deeply offended coz another guy misdirected you with a hyperlink! How does someone like you survive in the real world? DC is one of the cleanest places I know... I've seen more nastiness in this thread than I've seen on the entire board in the past few months. I think the message is loud and clear and the minority has to learn to respect the majority. You can put up a poll if you have any doubts about which is which but I suspect you already know the answer.

As for the term "moral policing", it's a bit of a catch phrase in the city where I live, the media uses it all the time with reference to a narrow-minded right-wing party, a bunch of ass-clowns who try and do innovative things to get some attention, like vandalize movie theatres if they're playing something that "offends their sentiments" & try and ban Valentine's Day coz it brings about "unhealthy feelings" (laugh it up!) among youngsters.

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #63 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:44 PM »

I think its unfair to assign everyone else to one single group.

I stand corrected and I apologize for not being more precise. My original post has been corrected. Thank you.

Please reference my tag line. I ask you, "What's wrong with doing right?"
-CodeTRUCKER (January 03, 2008, 09:35 PM)

Why? Are you saying everyone else is wrong?

I had written a lot more but deleted it since it was a reaction to your post and really served no purpose except venting.

Now c'mon... isn't this doing the same thing you just criticized me for above? As far as venting I appreciate your restraint, but I am becoming disenchanted with this whole effort.

tranglos · « **Reply #64 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:48 PM »

Please reference my tag line. I ask you, "What's wrong with doing right?"
-CodeTRUCKER (January 03, 2008, 09:35 PM)

Why? Are you saying everyone else is wrong?
-Veign (January 03, 2008, 10:23 PM)

Maybe not, but it does mean there is only one "right". We are really tiptoeing around awfully emotionally sensitive ideas here. The issue may not be censorship (strictly defined), but what's called chilling effect: when you refrain from posting reasonable, relevant material for fear someone, somewhere may be offended - or that posting will get you banned.

Lashiec · « **Reply #65 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:51 PM »

As for the term "moral policing", it's a bit of a catch phrase in the city where I live, the media uses it all the time with reference to a narrow-minded right-wing party, a bunch of ass-clowns who try and do innovative things to get some attention, like vandalize movie theatres if they're playing something that "offends their sentiments" & try and ban Valentine's Day coz it brings about "unhealthy feelings" (laugh it up!) among youngsters.
-nosh (January 03, 2008, 10:42 PM)

OH, MAN, that feels like Spain before democracy

Veign · « **Reply #66 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:52 PM »

Now c'mon... isn't this doing the same thing you just criticized me for above?
-CodeTRUCKER (January 03, 2008, 10:44 PM)

I never said you were wrong in the views you had on profanity and such.

Ralf Maximus · « **Reply #67 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:54 PM »

I find it interesting that you have chosen to defend a mean trick as a harmless joke. Herein lies the problem, what I feel as pain you find humorous.
-CodeTRUCKER (January 03, 2008, 10:28 PM)

Wow. Putting words in my mouth.

I was not defending, simply pointing out that you clicked a link by a known prankster and was surprised at what you found.

How old are you? Are you not aware that the internet contains things you may not like?

mouser · « **Reply #68 on:** January 03, 2008, 10:59 PM »

I'd like to see this thread conversation focus more on the "tagging" ideas -- because i think that's clearly the ideal solution here in some form. if done right it will allow any "adult" oriented posts to be excluded by those who are upset by it, without affecting those who aren't.

nosh · « **Reply #69 on:** January 03, 2008, 11:12 PM »

Something on the lines of Gmail's labels would be really cool!

Letting members create their own tags would be nice for a while but it could become counter-productive in the long run with weird labels, overlap, etc.

I think this has to be part of the larger solution of organizing the forum knowledgebase.

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #70 on:** January 03, 2008, 11:14 PM »

Codetrucker,
just to reiterate, I do appreciate people having different sensibilities but I honestly don't get how a grown man can be so sensitive. It's three days past the new year and here's what I've seen in the news:
A man being assaulted (and subsequently beaten to death)
A school kid who hung himself coz he wanted to "prove his teacher wrong"
Two women nearly raped in public coz they ventured to the wrong place at the wrong time

There's so much craziness going around and here you are, a grown man appealing for kindness coz somebody made a post linking to a porn site and getting deeply offended coz another guy misdirected you with a hyperlink! How does someone like you survive in the real world? DC is one of the cleanest places I know... I've seen more nastiness in this thread than I've seen on the entire board in the past few months. I think the message is loud and clear and the minority has to learn to respect the majority. You can put up a poll if you have any doubts about which is which but I suspect you already know the answer.

As for the term "moral policing", it's a bit of a catch phrase in the city where I live, the media uses it all the time with reference to a narrow-minded right-wing party, a bunch of ass-clowns who try and do innovative things to get some attention, like vandalize movie theatres if they're playing something that "offends their sentiments" & try and ban Valentine's Day coz it brings about "unhealthy feelings" (laugh it up!) among youngsters.

-nosh (January 03, 2008, 10:42 PM)

In regard to the Renegade link, you're the third one ( if I can count) that sees nothing wrong with it. This is outside of my sphere. It is impossible for me to look at it that way. As you have stated, the masses have spoken. I am respectful of this.

In reference to the news items, I am in complete concert with you. They are horrible. The difference is that is not what is here at DC. It is precisely the fact that there is something of an oasis here. The only problem is I get Montezuma's Revenge with ever greater frequency. This is not to say that the water is bad, but my system is not used to it and after a year drinking in (solid lurking) that water my system cannot assimilate it. It is not bad. It is incompatible to my system. (Ah! I wish I would have used this analogy rather than the smoker one.)

In reference to "how a grown man ..." Yes, I am a grown man, mere months from 50, but to answer your question, I have chosen to not give myself to the hardness that pervades so many others later years. I have chosen to never give up hope. Today I own my own profitable and paid for Volvo tractor and am self-employed. I have been driving off and on for over 20 years. Yet I have never hardened myself to the realities associated with truck driving. I have never declined an invitation to join another trucker for a meal or conversation as I always held hope I was not a singular entity. There were times when I found kindred spirits but the vast majority were incompatible. In order to bring this post to resolution, let me state I have my reasons for why I have chosen my particular road. Since that is deeply personal and a window to my very essence, I will only share it in PM conversation as I do not wish to foist on anyone.

tranglos · « **Reply #71 on:** January 03, 2008, 11:18 PM »

Herein lies the problem, what I feel as pain you find humorous. This will never be resolved. What can be resolved is if people become more important than rights, but it appears my attempts at planting are not finding fertile soil.
-CodeTRUCKER (January 03, 2008, 10:28 PM)

CodeTRUCKER, you voiced a concern and technical solutions have been proposed. True, technology will never be fully effective, or at least not effective and efficient at the same time, as you yourself realized when it became too hard to keep maintaining your Proxomitron filters. But this is what can be done.

What also can be done is request that posters refrain from racy topics, which is happening all the time at DC - not the requesting, mind you, but the refraining! As others have noted, DC is one of the most "clean", most corteous discussion forums of its size and popularity.

What else would you like to happen, please?

I never advocate for the minority to submit to the wishes of the majority (but this itself is a highly political topic for an entirely different forum!) However, and please set me right if I misunderstand your intentions, you seem to be asking everyone to apply the lowest common denominator when deciding about what might possibly be offensive. Because it's not only about swearwords, is it? It's also about content that may well be relevant to the site. The YouPorn post might well have been an article in an IT magazine, after all. It's a "people meet technology" issue - part computing, part sociology. It seems to me you are asking adults to refrain from discussing certain relevant topics. So what would you like to be done?

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #72 on:** January 03, 2008, 11:19 PM »

Man that got quiet fast... LOL

I think that if app103's HTML tag was tied to tranglos's (click to view) button, with a strong public recommendation that anything not qualifying as "Polite Conversation" be labeled as such ... That the folks here could easily Self Police their way to a reasonable resolution.

Mods could also be allowed to insert the tag for any borderline stuff without having to resort to any feather ruffleing draconian post deletion.

CodeTRUCKER · « **Reply #73 on:** January 03, 2008, 11:22 PM »

Um... Wow!
CodeTRUCKER while the Morality Police dialog was a truly artful dodge ... it still leaves you firmly planted on the moral high-ground.
-Stoic Joker (January 03, 2008, 10:18 PM)

I'm not sure what you mean by an "artful dodge?" I am dodging nothing. As far as your estimation that I am on the "high ground," that has always been my purpose. I have no interest in mediocrity and I do all I can to encourage as many as I can up the slope. If you were suggesting I think I am better than anyone else, then you are wrong, but I will concede that my goals are lofty and virtuous.

Darwin · « **Reply #74 on:** January 03, 2008, 11:29 PM »

I like the tagging idea

I'd like to see it implemented on the end-user side - ie if one is happy to keep DC as it has been they need do nothing more than be responsible for tagging their own posts, if necessary, but otherwise will see everything posted on DC. At the other end of the spectrum, those who wish to filter out profanities or vulgarisms may apply the tags as necessary. Seems win-win to me, as long as everyone cooperates. One isse that arises from this is how to tag posts and what to tag (or what content is deserving of a tag). I think we should trial tagging with minimal guidelines (other than "use your common sense" or "would I want my mother to read this?") and see how we get on before getting into maintained word, phrase and topic lists and user-guides.

Thank you CodeTrucker for raising this issue. I can only imagine how difficult it was. My re-reading of this thread is that people are generally receptive to the idea of accommodating differing viewpoints on what is and what is not acceptable and to working toward a resolution. With luck more ideas will be put forward in the coming days and a solution everyone can work with will be worked out. It really would be a shame to lose members and I think that offering people options about what content they will, and will not be able, to see is the best solution.

Once again the thread has moved on as I have typed...