Profanity filter gone wrong?

[slaphappygarry]

Pm i just got from user:

[quote]Hi Garry

I presume I'm the one referred to in your post about the profanity filter -
[quote]
At the end of the day, this came about as a request from a user to me as he is unable to access certain pages due to these words being flagged up on his works computer.

We are helping a user out (i suspect a handful actually) so i dont see why its got such a bad reaction...

G[/quote]


I wasn't referring to just myself, I mentioned that it would effect anyone in that position. Although I'm allowed to use my company workstation to access the internet in my down time, I dare not use it to browse Basschat. I work for a large company, whose content filter will not only scan the page before deciding to display it, but if the page content triggers the filter, then it locks the website out of the system for good. So the carelessly chosen words of an immature or angry poster will indirectly restrict access to the forum by its members. As someone who quite often works a 96 hour week - that's a lot of access to loose! I was locked out of Bassworld at work for over 2 years which is the primary reason I didn't contribute much to that site.

Since I noticed the sudden increase of sexual swear words on Basschat I've bought a laptop and take that into work to connect through a freephone dial-up account - which can be very tedious when viewing the bass porn section!

Like you, I can't understand why some people in particular are being so vociferous and argumentative about a simple filter - which has worked on TalkBass for quite some time with no problems. I don't consider a profanity filter censorship - that's really about the removal and withholding of information from the public by a controlling body. Although people might rant about their right of expression, and being allowed to use sexual swear words "if appropriate" - (whenever that might be?) - they are not having their opinion or information censored - they are having their language moderated.

Moderate on, and apologies if my humble request has created discord! (which I think is a root and flattened fifth?)

Cheers
[/quote]

[finnbass]

[quote name='slaphappygarry' post='16629' date='Jun 13 2007, 12:36 AM']Assisting people to defraud their employers and encourage the possibly illegal misuse of company equipment.... get a bad reaction....?

Thats not really what we are discussing though. Each company has its own internet browsing rules. My work are fine with me browsing this forum for example as long as its in my own time and my work is done.

G[/quote]

I agree totally..but, as every company has different rules...it only makes sense to generate forum-specific rules that suit BC [i]per se[/i]. I am not criticising, just pointing out that you won't please everybody...as you know

EDIT: I can't access any 'live' forum from my local government PC WHATEVER the content. So your 'user' should consider him/herself lucky

Edited June 12, 2007 by finnbass

[Rich]

[quote name='tayste_2000' post='16296' date='Jun 12 2007, 03:19 PM']I don't understand this whole issue Talkbass has had a filter on for years true it didn't change it cockney slang it just **** it out, so the Cockney stuff (which I don't understanda word that is being said) is just Kiwi having a laugh in the word replacement I'm sure it can be made to just be boring and **** but if you shouldn't really need to swear in your day to day conversations (This is from some one who swears profusely) its simply not needed on any forum and I don't know any that really allow it anyways?

If ya need to call some one a harsh name you can do it in a PM can't we Kiwi ya ************************** see now you don't know what I'm talking about shoe's on the other foot now [/quote]
Absolutely agree with all the above. There's no need for swearing all over the place and the rhyming slang is just a bit of a giggle really, and anyone finding it an infringement of civil liberties or whatever really needs to a) chill out and be) get a sense of perspective.

[Alpha-Dave]

The filter currently doesn't act on 9 of the BBC's 20 worst swear words and to be honest the Cockney Rhyming thing is almost as intrusive as the original words, *** would be better IMHO.

[Lfalex v1.1]

[quote name='finnbass' post='16636' date='Jun 13 2007, 12:54 AM']...I can't access any 'live' forum from my local government PC WHATEVER the content. So your 'user' should consider him/herself lucky [/quote]

Ditto. I can't get a thing at work. But I work nights, so it's less of an issue, as no-one would reply to any posts.

I've not yet fallen foul of any such obscenity / blasphemy / profanity filter, but the BC one does seem to be functioning more like a [i]Sanity[/i] filter at the mo'!

[Toasted]

I see the filter also makes appalling judgements about homosexuals. Does Basschat hate [men's crack florist squad]s?

This is one of those "attempts to be funny" that turns out nothing more than basely offensive. I feel nothing but sympathy for the g[i][/i]ay members of basschat.

Edited June 13, 2007 by Toasted

[tayste_2000]

Is this a dictionary we can tweak Kiwi? ie suggestions for words that are being converted that shouldn't like [horse and cart]s or f a r t s as in a cab f a r t s out at loud volumes.

Cheers

[Bassassin]

It's also upset by certain anatomical terms, which are neither offensive nor insulting, such as [Mars and Venus], [Allota Fagine] or [Skoda Fabia], yet we can all say vulva, clitoris, testicles and scrotum without hurting anyone! Isn't that nice?

It also seems to like a profusion of terms for hardcore [men's crack florist squad] sex activities, too. Except for [lucky dipping].

J.

Edited June 13, 2007 by Bassassin

[Waldo]

How does 'men's crack florist squad' tie in with the word g.a.y?

[Bassassin]

It doesn't understand plurals of the same evil word, either:

[member of the ladies tennis circuit]
lesbians

WT[push in the truck]?

J.

[Kiwi]

This is (at last) a healthy discussion as far as I'm concerned. I've removed some words from the filter that can otherwise be used in every day language in a non offensive manner.

[tayste_2000]

[horse and cart]

Not all of them

Edited June 13, 2007 by tayste_2000

[NJW]

Another problem one - "You want something Loud, S[Thora Hird]y and Reliable above all things."

[Kiwi]

Good good, keep them coming.

[pete.young]

[quote name='slaphappygarry' post='16577' date='Jun 12 2007, 10:42 PM']We are helping a user out (i suspect a handful actually) so i dont see why its got such a bad reaction...[/quote]

Leaving aside the fact that I don't regard it as a 'bad' reaction, I'll give the following reasons:

1) It won't fix the problem. Virtually all web content filtering systems do not work the way that
your anonymous correspondent thinks they work. I'm prepared to be corrected, but all the
systems I'm familiar with do not do any intelligent filtering or decision making. They work on
blacklists of URLs, which are compiled and placed into categories by people surfing the web
in dark rooms. Some companies modify these based on observing the traffic flow from their
systems, and some companies monitor outgoing search strings, but they don't normally have
the resources to read content on individual pages. So the decision whether to tag 'basschat'
as a forum isn't based on dynamic profane content.

2) I would have preferred the moderators to take the approach of discussing the problem
and filtering as a possible solution on the forum, before introducing filtering. This might have
helped avoid some of the problems with false positives.

3) There are still going to be loads of false positives which get in the way of communication
and cause other problems. When the filter mangled my posting in the 'Wanted' forum,
changing 'bass' to 'be*ss' , I shut down my system and changed my keyboard, thinking
mine had somehow developed a fault. Call me selfish, but this is at least as inconvenient
to me as someone else being denied access at work.

[ped]

All valid points, and ones we would no doubt have considered if it was possible to adjust the filter settings offline as mentioned earlier. In order to get it right it will obviously take some tweaking and thanks for the helpful feedback so far.

[slaphappygarry]

[quote]3) There are still going to be loads of false positives which get in the way of communication
and cause other problems. When the filter mangled my posting in the 'Wanted' forum,
changing 'bass' to 'be*ss' , I shut down my system and changed my keyboard, thinking
mine had somehow developed a fault. Call me selfish, but this is at least as inconvenient
to me as someone else being denied access at work.[/quote]

Do you not see the funny side of this?!

Lighten up man.

G

[bassbloke]

I'm not the moderator arse-kissing type,but I fully support them on this issue.

Companies that block sites due to offensive language don't do it out of prudishness, but prudence. We live in a litigious age and many a company has been taken toa n employment tribunal by a disgruntled ex-employee claiming harassmentor constructive dismissal as a result of seeing offensive or inappropriate materialon a collegue's PC.

Whilst it is unlikely that Basschat will be the cause of a multi-million pound tribunal claim, there is the possibility that it will find itself on a URL blacklist were it to gain the attention of a company like SurfControl.

There's more to freedom of speech than being allowed to say f**k

[Dood]

Thats interesting, it hadn't occurred to me that if we have a site full of foul language it can be picked up by 'parental control' type software and web surfing URL blacklisters.

More than a good reason to **** your language. The last thing I think the Basschat forum wants is for people to not be able to get to it for one reason or another, I think anyway.

[Toasted]

The "there should be a filter so I can view basschat at work" holds no water for me. Shouldn't you be working at work - not surfing bass forums?

My posting shouldn't be filled with gibberish just because "you're" lazy.

[Hamster]

[quote name='Toasted' post='17422' date='Jun 14 2007, 10:46 AM']The "there should be a filter so I can view basschat at work" holds no water for me. Shouldn't you be working at work - not surfing bass forums?

My posting shouldn't be filled with gibberish just because "you're" lazy.[/quote]

I think you should read the posts - the posters both state that they are allowed to surf during their breaks. As long as they don't spill their coffee on the keyboard, I really don't see a problem wiith that - do you?

As for your posts filled with gibberish - I've always valued and highly regarded your knowledge

Hamster

[Toasted]

Righteous indignation overpowering my reading ability

Points well made Hamster.

[Waldo]

Asterisk-ing out the words would be far better if this has to be done,rather than mangling the posts with 'funny' cockney slang or whatever it's supposed to be. It's just looks better I think.

And as for the issue of surfing at work, If you're getting stressed about having to wait until you're home so you can use an internet forum, I think you're in need of mental help.

[Machines]

Asterisks are a preference for me also.

[Hamster]

[quote name='Waldo' post='17441' date='Jun 14 2007, 11:02 AM']Asterisk-ing out the words would be far better if this has to be done,rather than mangling the posts with 'funny' cockney slang or whatever it's supposed to be. It's just looks better I think.

And as for the issue of surfing at work, If you're getting stressed about having to wait until you're home so you can use an internet forum, I think you're in need of mental help.[/quote]

So from the previous couple of posts, people who are allowed to surf at work in their breaks are:

1. Lazy
2. Need mental help

Well, at least it's better than reading the Guardian

Hamster