[Wilfred Little]

(Original post by Mad Vlad)
We have one. It's called the Back Room.

Not everyone has access to it though. That's an incentive to subscribe, has nothing to do with students getting *******ed at school for viewing some swear words. Besides, a student could subscribe and still see swearing and whatever else is in there, so that argument is flawed.

(Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
I've never really been convinced on that line of reasoning about swear filters automatically being the main reason for forums like these being filtered out by schools and colleges. It doesn't seem like a particularly strong reason given that a lot prominent filters will block on the basis of it being a chat room, arcade or discussion board.

As for the value of swearing in debate and discussions, my view is that it doesn't really make a difference it if is there or not. You can communicate the same point without expletives. I guess a lot of it depends on how it would be used on a forum like TSR - which would probably primarily be to insult people. As a collective entity, I don't think we are as mature as other forums.

Absobloodyexactly.

The swear filter does affect the character of posts btw.

[Ape Gone Insane]

(Original post by Wilfred Little)
Head-Fi
Red Issue
Basenotes
Bluemoon

Check them out if you don't believe me. All definitely have it. It's a staple system on most forums.

SomethingAwful
NeoGAF
Offtopic
Gallifreybase
IGN (?)
DigitalSpy (?)

That's some of the biggest and most prominent forums on the internet. I'm just not sure how you could be so sure it's on most forums. I'd actually be willing to bet most forums don't have the system implemented. It's a bit too tiresome to use when you have users deliberately signing up to spam or troll.

[thunder_chunky]

(Original post by Wilfred Little)
How is having a no-holds barred section a risk for people in school? A no-holds barred section would essentially be NSFW... If they're meant to be using the exam/info sections of the site (which would still have the swear filter) and they trail off into another section, that's their own fault.

Well I could just see the no-holds barred section being abused. People being able to swear might abuse it, the admins would have to draw up a special set of rules in terms of where the line is drawn in that area and frankly it might be somewhat more difficult for mods to make a decision there.

It's pointless discussing it anyway, it's not gonna happen.

Well you brought it up, but yeah you're probably right.

But a swear filter doesn't make sense when you've got regular racist trolling and in some cases, explicit sexual discussion all over the forum. The majority of people would be more offended by the latter.

I don't think swearing is the same as racist trolling or any of the other things you mentioned. And actually I haven't seen a great deal of that which you just mentioned. I see it in bits and bobs but what you do see is hardly what you'd call truly offensive or truly the definition of trolling. If you really want to see that sort of stuff go to the IMDB message boards, mainly the politics board, the Soapbox and Sandbox boards. Full of trolling right wing numpties day in and day out.
Anyway with that said I don't think you can put swear filters in the same boat as dealing with trolling. They are dealt with seperately, to some extent...I think.

(Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
I've never really been convinced on that line of reasoning about swear filters automatically being the main reason for forums like these being filtered out by schools and colleges. It doesn't seem like a particularly strong reason given that a lot prominent filters will block on the basis of it being a chat room, arcade or discussion board.

Maybe. I honestly don't know what school and college filters are like these days. When I was at school some ten years ago they weren't restrictive of swearing.

As for the value of swearing in debate and discussions, my view is that it doesn't really make a difference it if is there or not. You can communicate the same point without expletives. I guess a lot of it depends on how it would be used on a forum like TSR - which would probably primarily be to insult people. As a collective entity, I don't think we are as mature as other forums.

If there wasn't a sweer filter I think the quality of debate would take a nosedive and the place would be harder to Moderate I reckon so I'm not against it's existence.

[Wilfred Little]

(Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
SomethingAwful
NeoGAF
Offtopic
Gallifreybase
IGN (?)
DigitalSpy (?)
BB.com (?)

I'm just not sure how you could be so sure it's on most forums. I'd actually be willing to bet most forums don't have the system implemented. It's a bit too tiresome to use when you have users deliberately signing up to spam or troll.

It is 100% on nearly every forum I've used. How do you know BB doesn't use points? TSR is the only forum I know where the points are visible on your profile under your post count for everybody to see -- even non-mods, is it not possible that BB also use infractions but you cannot see them as you're not a mod on there? (I assume you're not.) Most forums way of operating regarding bans and infractions = When you get infracted and you receive the PM, it tells you there how many points you got for it if it's not a straight ban. Only the infractee (real word?) and the admin + mods can see the points. Normal posters cannot.

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
Well I could just see the no-holds barred section being abused. People being able to swear might abuse it, the admins would have to draw up a special set of rules in terms of where the line is drawn in that area and frankly it might be somewhat more difficult for mods to make a decision there.

Only rules: Nothing illegal. There are still procedures in place to combat bullying or abusive behaviour such as the ignore feature and reporting posts if it got too out of hand.

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
Well you brought it up, but yeah you're probably right.

I did but only to make a point re: the swear filter.

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
I don't think swearing is the same as racist trolling or any of the other things you mentioned. And actually I haven't seen a great deal of that which you just mentioned. I see it in bits and bobs but what you do see is hardly what you'd call truly offensive or truly the definition of trolling. If you really want to see that sort of stuff go to the IMDB message boards, mainly the politics board, the Soapbox and Sandbox boards. Full of trolling right wing numpties day in and day out.
Anyway with that said I don't think you can put swear filters in the same boat as dealing with trolling. They are dealt with seperately, to some extent...I think.

Yeah mate, but my point was, out of the two I'd rather the mods stamp out racism/real offensiveness than swear words.

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
If there wasn't a sweer filter I think the quality of debate would take a nosedive and the place would be harder to Moderate I reckon so I'm not against it's existence.

I don't think it would but this is all hypothesis. The only way to know is to give it a trial run somewhere for a week or two, which won't happen, so yeah, that's that I guess.

[Mad Vlad]

(Original post by Wilfred Little)
Not everyone has access to it though. That's an incentive to subscribe, has nothing to do with students getting *******ed at school for viewing some swear words. Besides, a student could subscribe and still see swearing and whatever else is in there, so that argument is flawed.




Absobloodyexactly.

The swear filter does affect the character of posts btw.

I didn't use that argument. In fact, I actually suggested that this reason should not be used by the mod team as justification, because it's not valid.

[Ape Gone Insane]

(Original post by Wilfred Little)
It is 100% on nearly every forum I've used. How do you know BB doesn't use points? TSR is the only forum I know where the points are visible on your profile under your post count for everybody to see -- even non-mods, is it not possible that BB also use infractions but you cannot see them as you're not a mod on there? (I assume you're not.) Most forums way of operating regarding bans and infractions = When you get infracted and you receive the email, it tells you there how many points you got for it if it's not a straight ban. Only the infractee (real word?) and the admin + mods can see the points. Normal posters cannot.

I edited out BB.com almost as soon as I posted so that doesn't count amongst the forums I posted. The other forums don't have the system, namely the ones I'm sure of: OT, GAF, SA. You don't get infraction emails or points. If it's an offence, they ban you (discretion) - be it for a week or forever. There's no build up of points, visible or invisible.

The forums that do operate the infraction system seem more lenient - which was how this debate started really. Your warning points can expire and you can get away with multiple offences before you get banned. Other forums operate a less tolerant policy.

I'm not arguing that generally forums don't operate this system outside of TSR (even though that's true in my personal experience), I just don't think it's as widespread as you believe.

[Illusionary]

(Original post by Mad Vlad)
I didn't use that argument. In fact, I actually suggested that this reason should not be used by the mod team as justification, because it's not valid.

The justification for the swear filter in the FAQs is here: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/faq....q_swear_filter There's a brief mention of school filters, but it's not the main reason for the filter being in place.

On TSR we have what's known as a swear filter.

This filter is applied so that certain pre-determined words are starred out. So for example, a four letter word in the swear filter would become: ****

There are a number of reasons as to why we have the swear filter on the site. Firstly, we have a responsibility to all users to make the site as accommodating as possible, whether this be to our younger or older audience. We believe such a filter both accommodates and encourages profanity-free debate and discussion on the site.
The filter's tenure has also been as a result of feedback from site members, who have expressed various reasons for wanting profanity-free discussion on the site. Namely to aid higher quality postings from site members.

Having the swear filter has also been known to avoid firewalls and filters in schools, allowing access to the site which would otherwise not have been possible. Since this is an incredibly important demographic to TSR, anything that aids students using the site in school is a positive.

Finally...please don't avoid the swear filter!

[user1-4]

(Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
I'm not convinced when you make a general statement like 'most forums have those'. I've personally never seen them in operation in any of the forums I use outside of TSR. Must be all the forums I don't visit then.

well i used to be a member on jams forum and that had those. Jams forum was made by a school kid too. Not sure what country he was from but he spoke english.

I've had some of my posts removed when i reply to people. I think the mods are censoring out things that are anti-anti islamic. Not neccessarily pro-islam but against the racism against it.

[PSxxx]

(Original post by Mad Vlad)
If you have ideas on how the moderation team can effectively deal with threads that have been allowed to go off the rails for hours before someone bothers to report something, please share them. The mods can't read every post - they rely on the community to report rule-breaking content and certainly before I retired, the community were not doing a good job of supporting the mods - I'd noticed a significant fall in the number and quality of post reporting. There were a few quality reporters, but the majority of people wouldn't bother and this has to change.
As for threads being locked for going on too long, mods aren't just there to ban people, they also have responsibility to maintain the quality of posting. A thread that's required a lot of moderation and has turned into a circular argument is a headache for the team. Locking a thread is a last resort, but if a thread is requiring so many interventions then it's a reasonable course of action to lock it. It's not practical to dedicate moderators to individual threads to proactively moderate them - there would need to be vastly more mods on the team to do this, and it's not realistic to task unpaid volunteers whose first role on the site is that of a member, not a moderator, to rota'd, full time proactive monitoring of threads.

So please; any suggestions that you have, please share them, because I personally think the team does a sterling job, considering the scope of their responsibility and how small the team is.



That's a perfect vehicle for bullying. Terrible idea. Besides, TSR isn't a democracy. Don't mistake it for one. The moderation team is perfectly able to ban people with their existing remit.

A perfect vehicle for bullying ? How so ? Wouldn't you guys clamp down on that in less time than it takes to type TSR or something else ?

[Wilfred Little]

(Original post by PSxxx)
A perfect vehicle for bullying ? How so ? Wouldn't you guys clamp down on that in less time than it takes to type TSR or something else ?

It will encourage cliquey behaviour. Not sure if bullying was the right word.

I disagree with it anyway. Bans should be handed to those breaking the rules, not the most unpopular members.

[Mad Vlad]

(Original post by PSxxx)
A perfect vehicle for bullying ? How so ? Wouldn't you guys clamp down on that in less time than it takes to type TSR or something else ?

Firstly, you seem to be mistaking me for a member of staff.

Secondly, it's an unnecessarily bureaucratic way of creating a problem that doesn't need to exist. If a panel of members was devolved power to do that, then it'd be pointless if the moderation team then stepped in all the time. And like I say - this isn't a democracy.

[ak137]

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
I thought you were going to say Nazi Germany, but I guess these days people avoid Godwins law a bit more.

True say. So which war criminal do you want to be, Kim il sung, Kim Jong il or Kim Jong un? Or maybe you'd like to be George Bush, Blair or Cameron?

Personally, I think you should be Kim Jong un, since if you add the an 'm' to the 'un' you'll get 'mun'

[superwolf]

Personally I'm not too happy with TSR's recent decision about banning all talk about suicide and self-harm in the mental health forum. I know that the ban is there at least partially to protect people (both TSR itself and vulnerable users), but by banning all discussion outright you also miss out on a lot of sensible advice and hearing other people's experiences in overcoming things. I think it was better when posts were edited or deleted if they were particularly triggering, rather than their all being deleted indiscriminately (although actually since I've noticed a number of self-harm threads slipping through the net I suspect very few people must be choosing to report them). I know it's all a bit of a grey area and a tough call for mods to make, but I do think just being sensible and taking each case at a time is better than blanket banning.

[Idle]

(Original post by superwolf)
Personally I'm not too happy with TSR's recent decision about banning all talk about suicide and self-harm in the mental health forum. I know that the ban is there at least partially to protect people (both TSR itself and vulnerable users), but by banning all discussion outright you also miss out on a lot of sensible advice and hearing other people's experiences in overcoming things. I think it was better when posts were edited or deleted if they were particularly triggering, rather than their all being deleted indiscriminately (although actually since I've noticed a number of self-harm threads slipping through the net I suspect very few people must be choosing to report them). I know it's all a bit of a grey area and a tough call for mods to make, but I do think just being sensible and taking each case at a time is better than blanket banning.

Just a few points. While some people on TSR do offer good advice when such posts come about, not everyone does and there is potential for one troll or similar member to far out do any positive posts.

As a mod team sometimes we cannot be there 24/7 to monitor threads. When I was a user I often saw such threads which started off with positive talk about it quickly nose dive into something which was much more dangerous.

While we try to deal with all suicide or self harm posts unless people are going to report posts then occasionally posts are going to slip through.