Swear filters are awful pieces of software. Loads of easy ways around it.

Don't like the sound of auto-banning due to "shot" being a commonly used word and the problem with the 'i' and 'o' because right next to each other.

Edited at 15:40 Sun 18/03/07 (GMT)

dude no one cares and everyone knows.

Zanussi, hes only sharing his idea....Give respect.

Yeah, that is one find I think of as worse than swearing - rudeness.

Had it a wee bit during games also.

Well said ruddan & colins.

It takes a very 'special' type of person to take the time and effort to make a post like zanussi's.

Totally rude, totally pointless, and bringing him one giant step closer to a posting revoke.

If you have nothing to say, then say nothing.

Haha, i agree......He must have thought really hard to post the negative post he did...But then again this post is pretty pointless so ill leave it here

Why isnt there a way to turn off the chat during a game?

i like banter as much as everyone else but sometimes it gets out of hand, i know its never anything to be taken personally but its just annoying and when the screen keeps flashing up text it gets on my wick!!! also some people just talk utter rubbish and its rather anoying!

listen up 'mods'! change this!!! lol

Edited at 23:05 Wed 21/03/07 (GMT)

The 3 strikes thing is definately a good idea, but I think funkypool need to have a look at which words they consider to be swear words. 'G@y' for example. I am far more offended by the fact that fp think it's a dirty word than by anything some idiot can do with the word in chat. I guarantee nearly all g@y people feel the same way. It's every bit as bad as racism.

If any homophobic mods feel the need to edit this post because I used 'g@y', feel free. It will only prove you're just as much of a bigot as those you boot for discrimination.

adam_89 - have a look here
http://www.funkypool.com/viewTopic.do?topicid=9699

aspera - this has been brought up before and those who did so agreed after discussion the fact that the slang word which is often used to describe thier sexuality can be, and often is, used as an insult. Which is degrading to all homosexuals in the manner you describe.Meaning it's censorship is reasonble.

I'm sure you wouldn't want children to think that word is a common derogatory term would you?

The filter is not there purely for swear words as some seem to think, and is a generic system applied to help keep the site a safe friendly environment. Sometimes it can appear petty or plain wrong, but the benifits far outweigh the problems.

For family reasons i know a lot of same-sex couples, some indeed now married, and not a single one describes themselves using that word as they find it degrading. The proper words are not censored.

Funkypool is very open to people from all walks of life. Most people understand that the filters are there for the good of all, and to help protect the more vunerable members of society. I am sure you will agree this is a good thing.

Edited at 08:33 Thu 22/03/07 (GMT)

That's just it though. It's NOT considered a slang word in today's society. It's actually the preferred term of most homosexual males (certainly in the younger generation at least), as it places more emphasis on the cultural aspect rather than just the sexual. True, it's often used in a degrading manner, but so are any number of other everyday words.


That's exactly my point. Censoring the word gives children the impression that homosexuals are beneath heterosexuals. After all, it is the preferred and most friendly of all the non-scientific terms. Allowing it's use and booting for using it in an offensive context (as with most other words) would set a much better example.

thefreedictionary.com:
"Usage Note: The word g@y is now standard in its use to refer to homosexuals, in large part because it is the term that most g@y people prefer in referring to themselves."

Here's what the Oxford English Dictionary has to say on the matter. Note the absence of the word 'informal', which would be present to indicate slang.

http://www.askoxford.com/results/?view=dev_dict&field-12668446=g ay&branch=13842570&textsearchtype=exact&sortorder=score%2Cname

(you need to delete the space in 'g ay' to get the correct address)

It's very simple.

The word has positive and negative attributes, predominantly attached by context and user.

In funkypool chat rooms the word is very rarely a part of 'conversation' and I should know, I've moderated the chat rooms long enough.

The word is used as a derrogatory term in FP chat which is wrong and therefore needs to be filtered. We don't need a discussion about why or how it's wrong, theres plenty of political forums out there for that.

As for when it is used in a conversational context? Would you like your 9 year old kid conversing about sexual preference? Regardless of what that may be it's inappropriate.

So it's a lose lose situation for that word being uncensored I'm afraid.

PEOPLE! Use your heads when thinking about these things, PLEASE!

The word in itself is not derogatory, nor will any homosexual be even the slightest bit offended by being called g@y. The only people that find it offensive or degrading are those that are narrow minded enough to try to use it in such a way, and the 'victims' that are prejudiced against homosexuality themselves. A totally non-prejudiced heterosexual will not be any more offended by being called g@y than your average white person by being called black, for the simple reason that it just makes no sense whatsoever.

Regarding the 9 year olds, I have 2 answers to that.
A. That's about the age sexual emotions first start to develop (don't try to argue that, I experienced it first hand not too long ago), so isn't it better not to shelter them too much rather than wrap them in cotton wool, therefore biasing their views later on?
B. Should a 9 year old really be using an internet chatroom anyway, no matter how 'child friendly' it claims to be?

Also, on the kid front, look at it this way. A school places absolute censorship on the word 'g@y' because some of the kids are using it in an apparently offensive manner. The authorities and media would have a field day with them. Morally and ethically (and also legally), the school wouldn't have a leg to stand on. There would be uproar.

I also don't see how it's uncensorship is a lose lose situation. For the exact same reasons 'g@y' is censored, there is justification for banning the use of words like 'idiot', 'thick', 'black'(after all, that's not the scientific term), 'arab', 'towel', 'straight' (believe it or not, bigoted homosexuals, although in the minority, are offended by being called straight), 'dog', 'toss'...etc...etc...etc...

All this can do is degenerate into an argument (and i only do debates!). Clearly there are even differing views about the word within the commnity itself, as evidenced above.

At the end of the day, its been talked about many times and always the same outcome. This is real life, and we all know dictionary definitions very rarely apply.



i agree, over and out for me!

Lets not let this very valid topic get lost.

That's about the age sexual emotions first start to develop (don't try to argue that, I experienced it first hand not too long ago), so isn't it better not to shelter them too much rather than wrap them in cotton wool, therefore biasing their views later on?

Well do you not think the parents should have a say in that? You want to make the decision? hardly..

Like I said just after that, are internet chat rooms really appropriate for 9 year olds anyway? Most would agree they're not.

I'm not looking to start an argument, it's just something I feel strongly about. It's the preferred term in the homosexual community (ever over the word 'homosexual'), and the only people who are ever going to be offended by it are those who are themselves prejudiced against same sex relationships. Censorship just plays right into their hands. Seems the homophobic minority reigns supreme over the homosexual minority.

As said before a swear filter is not clever, it blocks the words regardless of context.

Ideally all chat would be monitored by moderators or all users would be responsible enough to chat to a room of users without resorting to offensive words.

However this is not possible, it's a free game based on a large range of ages and people from all backgrounds. We implement a swear filter aimed to keep chat cleaner - the impact of the word does reduce if the user has bypassed the filter, and a number of users are unable or forget to bypass the filter.

Regarding the words that make up the list: there is a legitimate reason to use most of the words. If the word is used more often than not for offensive reasons then it makes the list. This was the case for g ay (used usually for schoolyard insults, occasionally for spamming, almost never for normal usage). A more debatable word would probably be d ick which is a common name.

Regarding implementing the automated solution: the current solution boots guests once they commit a certain number of offenses be they swearing or spamming. This could easily be increased to work for users, with an increased threshold.

I can't believe where this thread has ended up! Looks like there's no case to argue for the word g@y boys, you're censoring a word which g@ys have spent centuries getting accepted - quite funny if you think about it.

Nick is totally right, the only part I'm not in favour of is the swearing threshold. How will you know how many you've got left? If it leaves 4 stars then what's the problem, I sometimes deliberately type them because I know i'm hiding behind stars

what if there was a way to turn on/off swear filter do to players prefrence..like the player can turn it pff if they dotn mind the swearing or can turn it on if they are bothered..just another bad idea to put in the books lol