Forum filter

[Catzsy]

He keeps saying he didn't intend on swearing though, so rather than use what he did why not use the word 'crap'?

He must have intended on the word being used as HE TYPED IT.

We punish inappropriate language. Whether it was filtered or not, he typed it. It makes sense, why doesn't anyone realise this?

Hey, what you say is extremely unreasonable. If the forum filter has failed it has failed and I have proved it has failed - I will forward pm if you want me too.

People are allowed to type in words that are filtered - they have been since day 1 of the forum. In fact you used to do it all the time! Chris has been penalised for something that is the fault of a glitch in the VB Bulletin. Check the word out for yourself. Apart from that , Jamie I do not think it is up to you to re-write the forum rules. That's up to Elkaa, ---Mad--- and Sierk, surely? He did not intentionally avoid the filter and therefore it cannot be considered inappropriate either so he should most definitely if there is any fairness on the forum not have an infraction. Don't you realise that?

[Kardan]

He keeps saying he didn't intend on swearing though, so rather than use what he did why not use the word 'crap'?

He must have intended on the word being used as HE TYPED IT.

We punish inappropriate language. Whether it was filtered or not, he typed it. It makes sense, why doesn't anyone realise this?

That's really stupid.

It's like you go through a traffic light - it's on green even though you know it should be on red...

You go through, get your car smashed up and get told:

"Even though it shouldn't have been on green - you still went through. Your fault."

The infraction should be reversed, why should we be punished when something of yours breaks?

[jesus]

Hey, what you say is extremely unreasonable. If the forum filter has failed it has failed and I have proved it has failed - I will forward pm if you want me too.

People are allowed to type in words that are filtered - they have been since day 1 of the forum. In fact you used to do it all the time! Chris has been penalised for something that is the fault of a glitch in the VB Bulletin. Check the word out for yourself. Apart from that , Jamie I do not think it is up to you to re-write the forum rules. That's up to Elkaa, ---Mad--- and Sierk, surely? He did not intentionally avoid the filter and therefore it cannot be considered inappropriate either so he should most definitely if there is any fairness on the forum not have an infraction. Don't you realise that?

LOL I'm not rewriting rules, I'm saying that inappropriate language doesn't go unpunished. Nothing about the filter. He still typed the word.


Swearing is disallowed on the forum anyway, so the word shouldn't have been typed in the first place regardless of whether the user thought it would be filtered or not.

If you still don't understand what I'm saying after this post then I'm not continuing to attempt to argue my point as you all seem to be ignoring it.

[Catzsy]

LOL I'm not rewriting rules, I'm saying that inappropriate language doesn't go unpunished. Nothing about the filter. He still typed the word.


Swearing is disallowed on the forum anyway, so the word shouldn't have been typed in the first place regardless of whether the user thought it would be filtered or not.

If you still don't understand what I'm saying after this post then I'm not continuing to attempt to argue my point as you all seem to be ignoring it.

Jamie, you are completely wrong about this - where is the common sense applied here? The filter is not working on this word when there is a ? it is when there is a . It was filtered until recently but there appears to be a glitch. I have reported it in the technical section. You could at least refer it to Elkaa or ---MAD--- to look at which would be the fair way. It's not that we are ignoring it it's that you don't seem to grasp what we are saying. Thanks

[jesus]

It's not that we are ignoring it it's that you don't seem to grasp what we are saying. Thanks

I did, you just didn't understand where I was coming from for some reason. It's been sorted now anyway.

[Catzsy]

I did, you just didn't understand where I was coming from for some reason. It's been sorted now anyway.

I understood what you said and in normal circumstances I would agree with you but that is when it is intentionally inappropriate - this was not and was a glitch in the filter. So has Chris's infraction been reversed?

[jesus]

We both know I'm not allowed to disclose things like that.

[Catzsy]

We both know I'm not allowed to disclose things like that.

Well I hope so.

[Elkaa]

From what I understand, this only happened on one day due to a few issues. I assume that nobody has had this problem since yesterday?

[GommeInc]

Has NeverSoft's infraction been removed? If people were meant to type alternative words like crap, then there would be no point in a filter. A simple PM or edit would do. If he put size=2 in areas, then infract him for purposely avoiding the filter. But if it was genuinely typed out, it isn't necessarily his fault because the filter is meant to take control and remove it.