Optional language filter.

[Eoin247]

Would it be possible to make the bad language filter optional on the forum for users? Most of the users on the forum aren't kids, and i find it annoying sometimes when i can't understand what a post is trying to say because a word is starred.

Guests to the forum and users by default would have the filter on of course, but users who want can turn the filter off for themselves.

Thoughts on this?

---------- Post added 18-02-2011 at 01:16 PM ----------

Just to add to my post, habbo (which this site is a fansite of ) has it optional. So unless vbulletin doesn't let you do this, i can't see why it would be a problem.

[Jordan]

If it can be done, I think it should be :) Nothing wrong with it.

[Catzsy]

This has been discussed many, many times and the reason is that on Habbox Forum there would be a permanent record unlike Habbo where it is just transient and disappears. I personally don't see the need to have swearing on the forum. It is already more lenient with some abbreviations being allowed. Also we do have quite a lot of younger members. What possible positives could come from it?

[Aidenn]

I Admit, most people here are teenagers therefore they should have the right to Swear, in GENERAL, but would still break the rules if it was aimed at somebody.

But i dont think theres huge benefit from being able to see what a filtered word said.

[Eoin247]

This has been discussed many, many times and the reason is that on Habbox Forum there would be a permanent record unlike Habbo where it is just transient and disappears. I personally don't see the need to have swearing on the forum. It is already more lenient with some abbreviations being allowed. Also we do have quite a lot of younger members. What possible positives could come from it?

But i'm saying make it filtered by default. Only make it an option to turn it off.

[triston220]

Couldn't a feature could be added where it wouldn't let you change the filter settings if you were under a certain age?

[despect]

Couldn't a feature could be added where it wouldn't let you change the filter settings if you were under a certain age?

how would you know how old someone is? plus someone could easily lie about their age.

To add i actually like the idea. :)

[Conservative,]

I like the idea. I think sometimes teenagers can only express themselves with swears - be it right or wrong, I do personally like the idea.

[Inseriousity.]

I've always been a fan of the idea tbh. Sure, there's a permanent record but as the user makes a choice to see that then that's their choice and up to them. Despite that, I'm not entirely sure if it's possible!

[The Don]

I don't like the idea, it doesn't look very good for Habbox and what would you gain from being able to swear, it would just get abused and then moderators wouldn't be able to tell when someone's swearing is directed at someone or not. It would cause problems, why fix something that isn't broken when there are no/minor benefits.

[Catzsy]

But i'm saying make it filtered by default. Only make it an option to turn it off.

I know what you are saying but what are the positives in allowing it? Also it would require a hack
which could cause security problems.

[FlyingJesus]

As has been said every time this thread gets made (although to be fair it's been a while now) this would basically be the same as completely taking the filter out. Nobody would choose to have it on because they'd miss half of what's being said as obviously swearing is cool so if it was allowed you'd have to do it as much as possible, even though currently most of us manage to get by just fine without swearing constantly

[Eoin247]

Maybe at least make an option to have the filter not be as strict? Like make there be an option for "light" swear words to get through.

[Catzsy]

Maybe at least make an option to have the filter not be as strict? Like make there be an option for "light" swear words to get through.

Well you can already say wtf, lmfao. What else could be unfiltered? :S

[Inseriousity.]

if it was allowed you'd have to do it as much as possible

How? I don't think that'd really be the case. Sure when it's first brought in I imagine it'd be like that for a while but the novelty would wear off and everything would go back to normal but people would still be able to choose whether they wish to see it when it's occasionally used or not.

[Eoin247]

How? I don't think that'd really be the case. Sure when it's first brought in I imagine it'd be like that for a while but the novelty would wear off and everything would go back to normal but people would still be able to choose whether they wish to see it when it's occasionally used or not.

Like Rs on the first day of the filter option :), it dies down very quickly.

[Mark]

I like this idea, it wouldn't cause too much bother if the swearing was aimed at someone else because isn't that what moderators are for?

[Chippiewill]

Over the years I have changed my stance on this and simply, by allowing swearing it makes the forum very negative and mildly depressing.

[triston220]

how would you know how old someone is? plus someone could easily lie about their age.

To add i actually like the idea. :)

Don't you have to enter you age when you sign up?

[xxMATTGxx]

Don't you have to enter you age when you sign up?

Even if that was the case, people could enter a fake age to bypass any restrictions like many people do on various websites on the internet.

[Nicola]

Removing the filter would just make the forum look awful, let's be honest most people are going to turn it off. Having the words starred out it so much cleaner and normally it isn't hard to tell what the word is because you can pretty much tell by the context it is used in.

You already have the opportunity to use words such as "wtf" "fml" etc. which you never used to be able to do so it's not as if we are being unreasonable. The swear words just look ugly and as others have said it wouldn't be hard for a younger member to have a quick peek at what's going on.

Having the filter the way it is now has worked fine for the forum for ages and it doesn't need to be changed.

[Nemo]

Removing the filter would just make the forum look awful, let's be honest most people are going to turn it off. Having the words starred out it so much cleaner and normally it isn't hard to tell what the word is because you can pretty much tell by the context it is used in.

You already have the opportunity to use words such as "wtf" "fml" etc. which you never used to be able to do so it's not as if we are being unreasonable. The swear words just look ugly and as others have said it wouldn't be hard for a younger member to have a quick peek at what's going on.

Having the filter the way it is now has worked fine for the forum for ages and it doesn't need to be changed.
If most are going to turn it off, then surely thats what the people want and therefore should get? Since the majority wont care what it looks like?


Not that i care.

[GommeInc]

Aren't all light swear words unfiltered now anyway? The only ones we ever have to worry about are the big swear words. Abbreviations got unfiltered because they're harmless and normal for social websites. I remember when pick with an r between the p and i was unfiltered - it worked until someone moaned about abbreviations - there was never an explanation for it being refiltered, not that the word is needed anyway :P

[Recursion]

Is *** still filtered?

EDIT: :l what.

[N!ck]

Swear words should be, but acronyms shouldn't imo.

[triston220]

Even if that was the case, people could enter a fake age to bypass any restrictions like many people do on various websites on the internet.

But at least some would enter their correct age.

[FlyingJesus]

If most are going to turn it off, then surely thats what the people want and therefore should get? Since the majority wont care what it looks like?


Not that i care.

No, I don't want the filter lifted but if it was made optional I'd turn it off just so that I didn't miss half the conversations, not because it's my preference

[GommeInc]

Is *** still filtered?

EDIT: :l what.
What word is it? You're allowed to avoid the filter if it's acceptable to do so. I assume it's harmless being a 3 letter word :/

[Jin]

These are the reasons for why we won't implement this:



Allowing people to avoid the filter is in another sense allowing swearing, those who have the filter off will be effing and jeffing as they normally would like they do on habbo or msn. This would mean when search engines or users with it filtered read the forum it will appear as something like this.

Warning: Though the censorship is randomly typed asterisks some may still be offended.


So some **** at the ******** cinema today was a right **** **** ***** he was being a total **** just because I ******* asked him to shut his ******* mouth and he took it like a ********

Not only does this bring a large negative vibe to the forum it is not what we want to see.
We use the censorship for security matters as well, censoring known exploitation links and scam sites.
If you are suggesting that you miss half the conversation due to censorship than I suggest taking the conversation somewhere else because if your conversations main content is censored words it isn't appropriate for this forum especially considering that most profanity is used as adjectives. Even in the above quote the meaning of the sentence even with it's censorship is quite clear.


We will not be providing any form of optional censorship any time soon or in the future. We are not the sort of forum that will cater for peoples childish need to use profane or abusive language and are not willing to change our stance upon this.

[Richie]

These are the reasons for why we won't implement this:




Allowing people to avoid the filter is in another sense allowing swearing, those who have the filter off will be effing and jeffing as they normally would like they do on habbo or msn. This would mean when search engines or users with it filtered read the forum it will appear as something like this.

Warning: Though the censorship is randomly typed asterisks some may still be offended.



Not only does this bring a large negative vibe to the forum it is not what we want to see.
We use the censorship for security matters as well, censoring known exploitation links and scam sites.
If you are suggesting that you miss half the conversation due to censorship than I suggest taking the conversation somewhere else because if your conversations main content is censored words it isn't appropriate for this forum especially considering that most profanity is used as adjectives. Even in the above quote the meaning of the sentence even with it's censorship is quite clear.



We will not be providing any form of optional censorship any time soon or in the future. We are not the sort of forum that will cater for peoples childish need to use profane or abusive language and are not willing to change our stance upon this.

I don't mean to be funny but you just called your management childish.

[Catzsy]

If most are going to turn it off, then surely thats what the people want and therefore should get? Since the majority wont care what it looks like?


Not that i care.


I don't actually think that's true. From my experience most members rarely if ever even use words that are filtered. There has never really been any huge demand for this - just a few people now and again.

[Richie]

On topic:
I'd much rather prefer the filter to stay but an optional filter would be nice. I'm not trying to be smart, I'm just pointing the above out because it makes you guys look very contraindicative.

[Jin]

I don't mean to be funny but you just called your management childish.


On topic:
I'd much rather prefer the filter to stay but an optional filter would be nice. I'm not trying to be smart, I'm just pointing the above out because it makes you guys look very contraindicative.

Management have the right to their own views you need to understand this. Each individual is a separate entity so they will have different views especially ones which may contradict habbox or even each other. We act to benefit the majority not ourselves, I for one participate in file sharing despite it is against the rules however it benefits the community more to disallow it.

If I were to rank those 3 reasons in importance I would say:

2) Scam/spam prevention.
1) Public appeal of habboxforum.
3) Social acceptance of profanity.

It is unnecessary and isn't required in everyday language beyond the playground. We simply will not cater for it.

[Richie]

Management have the right to their own views you need to understand this. Each individual is a separate entity so they will have different views especially ones which may contradict habbox or even each other. We act to benefit the majority not ourselves, I for one participate in file sharing despite it is against the rules however it benefits the community more to disallow it.

If I were to rank those 3 reasons in importance I would say:

2) Scam/spam prevention.
1) Public appeal of habboxforum.
3) Social acceptance of profanity.

It is unnecessary and isn't required in everyday language beyond the playground. We simply will not cater for it.


I understand however, in your previous post you said "peoples childish need to use profane or abusive language" your management swear therefore I got the impression you were implying that your staff are childish.

[.x.miss.angel.x]

Yeah, since really everybody should be over 13 anyway... Plus sometimes you do need a swear word to help out your rant (although, I don't swear myself, but many teens do)

[Catzsy]

Yeah, since really everybody should be over 13 anyway... Plus sometimes you do need a swear word to help out your rant (although, I don't swear myself, but many teens do)

Why should everybody be over 13? We have 10 , 11 and 12 year olds here. :S

[.x.miss.angel.x]

Why should everybody be over 13? We have 10 , 11 and 12 year olds here. :S

considering you have to be 13 to join the forum (I think it is anyway) But it was years ago when I signed up.

[Catzsy]

considering you have to be 13 to join the forum (I think it is anyway) But it was years ago when I signed up.

No age barrier here - never has been as far as I know. :)

[Nemo]

I don't actually think that's true. From my experience most members rarely if ever even use words that are filtered. There has never really been any huge demand for this - just a few people now and again.
Hey, im merely making a point based on what she said. I dont really care since it's kinda obvious what a swear word is most of the time anyway, although i do think *s looks more ugly than a swear word.

[GommeInc]

Why should everybody be over 13? We have 10 , 11 and 12 year olds here. :S
I think the US have a law where anyone under the age of 13 shouldn't join forums, but I may have made that up.

Ideally, Habbox should be having 13+ members as Habbo have stated that you should only join Habbo if you are 13+ (it is a teen community afterall). Obviously under 13s can join, but you should cater for the 13+ demographic as is the majority of members on here - I believe 16 has the majority if a poll a few weeks back was correct. You should never attempt to please a minority group when it starts effecting the target audience, but that rant is for another day and the filter is more than adequate.


Hey, im merely making a point based on what she said. I dont really care since it's kinda obvious what a swear word is most of the time anyway, although i do think *s looks more ugly than a swear word.
You could probably look into suggesting a change of the way words are filtered - like <censored>, although *s seem to be alright as they are, especially when asterixes aren't offensive, when a swear can be :P

[Richie]

People always say the filter is there due to "younger members", it shouldn't be about age. Whether you are 10 or 32 it doesn't matter, a younger member may be brought up in an environment were they hear swearing regularly but that's not to say that an older member hears swearing on a daily basis. If it's about hiding up the swearing from younger users I think you're missing the point. The filter is on habboxforum because the words filtered are rude. If anything, older members would be more offended than the younger ones, after all they would know what the words mean.

I highly doubt a thread like this would be created again in the future if you just change the reasoning behind it. It's rude, plain and simple. It's nothing to do with age. Without a point a thread fails.

[Nemo]

I think the US have a law where anyone under the age of 13 shouldn't join forums, but I may have made that up.

Ideally, Habbox should be having 13+ members as Habbo have stated that you should only join Habbo if you are 13+ (it is a teen community afterall). Obviously under 13s can join, but you should cater for the 13+ demographic as is the majority of members on here - I believe 16 has the majority if a poll a few weeks back was correct. You should never attempt to please a minority group when it starts effecting the target audience, but that rant is for another day and the filter is more than adequate.


You could probably look into suggesting a change of the way words are filtered - like <censored>, although *s seem to be alright as they are, especially when asterixes aren't offensive, when a swear can be :P
oh god no, i like knowing what the swear word is

[GommeInc]

oh god no, i like knowing what the swear word is
Don't you like guessing games then? :(

[triston220]

Even though I think it would be a nice addition to the forum, I do see why you wouldn't want this implemented. I suppose people will have to increase their vocabulary. :P

[Jsoh]

is possible btw

http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=236736&highlight=censorship

[FlyingJesus]

One of Jin's points was security (ie: certain site names and such are filtered) and no matter if you think you should be allowed to f and blind at everything or believe that even light blasphemy should be banworthy, the security point is one that cannot be argued, so the issue is dead

[Lost_Addict]

I swear (get it swear ;) ) this is the 100th on this topic. There is no need for swearing. Habbox is a fansite for a site which is aimed at 11 year olds. End.

[Snatter]

I personally think this'd be a good idea. It's like Habbo - people can opt in to choose to hear bad language if they want.

Question is though whether it is easy to implement.

[Recursion]

So, if you can turn the filter on and off on Habbo, why not on here? That seems a bit stupid IMO.

[Catzsy]

So, if you can turn the filter on and off on Habbo, why not on here? That seems a bit stupid IMO.

I feel all these points have been covered probably more than once in this thread but most
succinctly by these posts:

http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=688379&p=7003068#post7003068

http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=688379&p=7003243#post7003243

http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=688379&p=7003766#post7003766

Looks like the topic has been discussed thoroughly and a decision has been made not to implement an optional filter. :)

[Recursion]

Ok, so work out a way to force filtering of certain words/phrases (in a blacklist) even if the filter is disabled and then limit the amount of swear words (would be on a greylist) people can make in a post.

There's probably a plugin for it. If there isn't, it's a trivial job to code a custom plugin for it if you know PHP.

Is filter on? > No > How many swear words in post? > 3 or under > Show swearing

Is filter on? > No > How many swear words in post? > over 3 > Filter swearing after the 3rd greylisted word

Is filter on? > Yes > Don't show swearing

[Firehorse]

Ok, so work out a way to force filtering of certain words/phrases (in a blacklist) even if the filter is disabled and then limit the amount of swear words (would be on a greylist) people can make in a post.

There's probably a plugin for it. If there isn't, it's a trivial job to code a custom plugin for it if you know PHP.

Is filter on? > No > How many swear words in post? > 3 or under > Show swearing

Is filter on? > No > How many swear words in post? > over 3 > Filter swearing after the 3rd greylisted word

Is filter on? > Yes > Don't show swearing

I agree with this.

[nvrspk4]

is possible btw

http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=236736&highlight=censorship

This is for 3.x whereas we are on vB4 if I'm not mistaken. Not sure if all of this can be done with vB4. I know it was technical concern before but that was during 3.x so I would assume that eventually one will come out for vB4 (unless it changed the filtering mechanism).


As far as the actual implementation matters, having an optional filter would lead to substantially more swearing. The simple reason is that the asterisks make your post look really ******* stupid and really ******* juvenile. Therefore, any dumb**** with intelligence who wants to appear older than a ******* four year old will not use swear words and will instead find alternative words to use so that his post can appear without asterisks and look moderately more intelligent and mature.

If the word filter was off, this would encourage more swearing and generally make the forum less present. It's my opinion that not only would this lead to a less pleasant atmosphere for the entire forum, but a more annoying viewing for those with the filter on, and a worse impression of the civility here for guests who will have the filter on by default.

[Ajthedragon]

I'm a big boy, I don't mind swear words. Usually we rant when we swear so I think this practise would be quite good.