I've been a lurker on these threads and since the Lurkians have been called out, I'll throw in a couple of Lincoln tokens.

First of, I'm not going to touch the NSFW aspect as I am left-leaning enough to even be left-handed.  I can't believe this is even a concern on DC but then I don't really go into Living Room so for all I know it might be full of Roman orgies and Paganesque cavortings.  (If that's the case let me know so I can start frequenting it more.)

As for backing the tagging idea, Mouser's explanation of his concept really has me intriqued.  I find a lot of useful software on DC and also when looking for reviews or comments on something a literal search isn't always the best method.  If tagging can be implemented for this idyllic usage then I'm all for it.  My only concern is the high probability that I'll start on a tag trail only to find myself missing an hour or two and no idea of what I was originally trying to find.

Can we get this discussion back on track?

Is DC safe for work?

I think the answer is clearly yes. 

There are no naked pictures on DC forum or site.  You might find the occasional curse word here and there, and you may find a discussion of some technological issue relating to sexuality, but nothing that you wouldn't read in any newspaper or magazine.  There are probably a handful of posts on the forum in three years that refer to some sexually themed site, and link to them -- in such cases the links should clearly be marked as NSFW.

I think that's where this forum has found it's comfort zone, and it seems to be a reasonable approach, and I don't think we should try to change that.

Is DC safe for work?

I think the answer is clearly yes. 

There are no naked pictures on DC forum or site.  You might find the occasional curse word here and there, and you may find a discussion of some technological issue relating to sexuality, but nothing that you wouldn't read in any newspaper or magazine.  There are probably a handful of posts on the forum in three years that refer to some sexually themed site, and link to them -- in such cases the links should clearly be marked as NSFW.

I think that's where this forum has found it's comfort zone, and it seems to be a reasonable approach, and I don't think we should try to change that.

Well put...

There are lies, damn lies, then statistics. CodeTRUCKER, your graphs are absolutely meaningless presented as they are You HAVE to show an increase in these terms against an increase in other terms. All those graphs show is a general increase in activity here on the forums.

As a second point, we're not children here and not one of those terms is hurtful or offensive. Asking people to show a little restraint is fine but I am beginning to think you want to gag people from expressing themselves naturally.

[edit for a p.s] Besides fuck is a very versatile word

Maybe my second point went off topic back to the previous thread but like jgpaiva it was the graphs which prompted me to post. An analysis such as this is dangerously misleading.

When considering what kind of tagging system would be appropriate for DC, is it already determined whether we're talking about tagging threads or tagging posts?  Or both?  Or is that still up in the air?

suleika: It is still all in discussion. Thus, you can comment if you'd prefer one or the other, or what you'd like about one or the other. (or none )

In general my position has been that if we add a tagging system we get the NSFW filter for free and it won't affect the vast majority of users who won't ever be turning on such a block.

But i am sort of curious about something, it seems to me as if codetrucker and others who want such a filter.. would you want to block ALL posts that EVER mention the terms you've listed about in your chart, including wtf and similar acronyms?
(regardless of other content).

It may make sense to have a FoulLanguage filter that could be automatically computed from posts without requiring any human intervention.  Personally it seems to be like a very unforgiving filter but i don't know, is that the level of blocking you are interested in Codetrucker?

Including "WTF" in a "bad words" search? OK, that has made me go WTF?!?!

This is starting to become ridiculous.

ok, enough is enough already

first of all, if you're a parent and let your kids browse the internet unsupervised, it's YOUR fault, and YOUR responsibility.

statistics
just counting words YOU think unsuitable for kids doesn't make your effort the least bit statistically relevant.
you have to count relative occurrences, of course the absolute count went up, no arguing about that,
but so went the total posts per month, norm your data!

also, putting in a linear fit into a growth pattern is kinda flawed to begin with.
do you want to imply you actually know what you're doing? well, you failed.

besides all that, you can make statistics look exactly what you want them to, just by carefully picking the question for the answer you want.
you did that.

you're hypothesis is: "DC needs regulating because there is significant danger to minors"
doing it properly:
you'd establish the null-hypothesis "there is no danger to minors on DC" and try to find statistically significant reason to refute the null-hypothesis, thus accepting the initial hypothesis.

your graph shows what you WANT it to show, with no significance at all.
same goes for you're initial argument wich has no foundation and is but a bold claim you came up with.

your values != every one's values
one thing people should learn is keeping their 'values' to them selfs, this is a international community of mostly adults.
what makes you think your standards apply to everyone.

there is a significant difference in 'getting involved with a community' and 'pushing your own views and values'.

cost / benefit
how many active minors are on DC anyways? numbers please, and percentages.
there is NO REASON AT ALL to make life complicated and less fun for 99.999% of all DCers just to 'protect' some minors (who's numbers we don't even know) from reading certain 'words'.
let alone that it's not DCs task to protect them from the oh-so-evil internet but their parents.
if you're afraid your kid might read something you deem inappropriate, YOU control it, who cares about your standards?

to put it bluntly: hell, i don't.

o m f g (yes, that's a 'fucking' in there.... oh the children! OMG!)


if you still disagree that it's not the parents task.
you might as well give your toddler a couple of loaded hand guns and blame the manufacturer if they get hurt.

gee.

Damn and WTF are NSFW?  That's a new one to me.  The graphs, although nice looking, are useless and skewed to the NSFW argument.  The more you try and convince us the more your losing credibility in your argument.

DC is a great forum and at this point I say put the tagging system on the back burner until things cool down.

CodeTRUCKER, don't be offended, but considering all those words as inappropriate for children made me giggle. I'll tell you, children hear things like that everyday, mostly on the street, and if we're going to consider the proper names for sexual organs as offensive, I wonder what kind of sexual education are we going to teach to children.

Of course, your mileage may vary, but I think we could end up going too far. Besides, another thing that arises from the context consideration is that if you're willing to turn on a post filter with the possible results of missing conversations just because there's a inappropriate word in there. Considering all the times words like "damn" or "dammit" were used in this forum (half of my posts include the word ), I think you'll end up ignoring much of the conversations around here.