Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

What is appropriate content for DonationCoder?

<< < (11/43) > >>

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

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:
SpoilerUsenet 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:
...
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)
--- End quote ---

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)
--- End quote ---

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

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:
SpoilerUsenet 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)
--- End quote ---

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/2006/12/28/genius-grant-please-or-the-nsfw-html-attribute/

and the firefox extension for it: http://www.chrisfinke.com/addons/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:
It was an ambush and it was mean.  I was terribly disappointed, as I have said.

--- End quote ---

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.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page