Remove **** from the filter

[e5]

Am I s

Because it's a stupid word to be filtered. And no, I need to use the word ****. I mean, I feel stupid for saying:

Look at this interview with Conan O'Brien and Schlong van Dyke.



- - - Updated - - -



Thought this might happen, clearly you can only see searches on your own account.

You try it yourself, you get 28 results.

I've no idea what you wanted me to search but ok, 28 results, so it doesn't crop up regularly?

- - - Updated - - -

Because it's a stupid word to be filtered. And no, I need to use the word ****. I mean, I feel stupid for saying:

Look at this interview with Conan O'Brien and Schlong van Dyke.



- - - Updated - - -



Thought this might happen, clearly you can only see searches on your own account.

You try it yourself, you get 28 results.

And have you ever, before, said 'Look at this interview....." or anything similar needing that word on the forum before? Or are you still being being difficult for no reason?

[Kardan]

Am I s

I've no idea what you wanted me to search but ok, 28 results, so it doesn't crop up regularly?

- - - Updated - - -



And have you ever, before, said 'Look at this interview....." or anything similiar needing that word on the forum before? Or are you still being being difficult for no reason?

I mentioned Schlong van Dyke yesterday actually

If you search for posts with 'Di.ck' in you get 142 results, now take into account other variations of bypassing the filter, D.ick, D!ck. Now take into account people that bypass the filter like I do by putting in some BBCode into the word (not sure if you can search for that, wouldn't let me search for '****'), and then take into consideration the posts that had '****' in but were filtered.

[Francis]

Don't you have to be older than 13 to join anyways? I'm pretty sure the majority hears ****, penis, ****, *****, ****, **** in real life.. Didn't know teenagers need to be filtered, I understand if you're using it negatively towards a user, but other than that. No. Just no.

[FlyingJesus]

I've no idea what you wanted me to search but ok, 28 results, so it doesn't crop up regularly?

If things don't happen regularly there's no point giving them any credence and they're irrelevant right

[Kyle]

stop being difficult and give an actual reason you think it should b removed, not because of the rare occasions that people are going to want to discuss a certain actor.

[e5]

Surprised I got two actually.

e5 is right on this occasion

3 now?

If things don't happen regularly there's no point giving them any credence and they're irrelevant right

[Kardan]

If things don't happen regularly there's no point giving them any credence and they're irrelevant right

You are such a penis head for pointing that out(!).

[Francis]

And I also would like to point out, ***** is used on TV in America, and we highly censor our TV. Why is it filtered here? I mean if it's allowed on TV during Primetime, then it should be allowed to be said on a forum.

[e5]

Majority of them are people using it as an offensive term, not using it to say someones name? and then people also using it to use it in feedback as an example of a filtered word or in other forums.

I mentioned Schlong van Dyke yesterday actually

If you search for posts with 'Di.ck' in you get 142 results, now take into account other variations of bypassing the filter, D.ick, D!ck. Now take into account people that bypass the filter like I do by putting in some BBCode into the word (not sure if you can search for that, wouldn't let me search for '****'), and then take into consideration the posts that had '****' in but were filtered.

[FlyingJesus]

American TV also allows wank/wanker because most of the population don't use those words which always amuses me