Notices


Reply
Thread Tools
Posts: 1,780 | Thanked: 4,148 times | Joined on Feb 2011 @ Germany
#11
Originally Posted by minimos View Post
Half joking proposal:
would it possible to train the swearword engine to detect words combinations that often generate controversies and OT (like "Silica" and "opensource" ) and put up a gentle warning like "Please reconsider to submit your comment if it's going to lead the thread to OT" ?
Nah. This would go more in the direction of nannying.
I'd tend to go full-freedom-of-speech (because *we* can!).

(For everything else, and when/as needed, we have our moderators..)
 

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to reinob For This Useful Post:
pichlo's Avatar
Posts: 5,567 | Thanked: 17,347 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK
#12
I say, ditch the moderators too!

(I have to say, there has been much less moderation in the past 6 months than in the 6 months before and I have to say, it was for the best.)
__________________
In particle accelerators atoms are indeed not only touching each others. But banging together in a massive explosive orgasm.
-- nieldk in a TMO post

Last edited by pichlo; 2015-11-22 at 13:54. Reason: Added a smiley in case it wasn't clear that it was not a serious suggestion
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post:
HtheB's Avatar
Moderator | Posts: 3,488 | Thanked: 6,105 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Bize Her Yer Trabzon
#13
Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
I say, ditch the moderators too!

(I have to say, there has been much less moderation in the past 6 months than in the 6 months before and I have to say, it was for the best.)
Ditch yourself !

(I'm doing my job well, be sure that mods do not have rights in all categories)
__________________
www.HtheB.com
Please donate if you think I'm doing a good job.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to HtheB For This Useful Post:
pichlo's Avatar
Posts: 5,567 | Thanked: 17,347 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK
#14
Originally Posted by HtheB View Post
Ditch yourself !
Believe me, I would if I could.

(ALL moderators have been doing their job well recently, by staying well out of the way.)
__________________
In particle accelerators atoms are indeed not only touching each others. But banging together in a massive explosive orgasm.
-- nieldk in a TMO post
 

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post:
HtheB's Avatar
Moderator | Posts: 3,488 | Thanked: 6,105 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Bize Her Yer Trabzon
#15
Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
Believe me, I would if I could.

(ALL moderators have been doing their job well recently, by staying well out of the way.)
Oh I could lend you a hand if you want
__________________
www.HtheB.com
Please donate if you think I'm doing a good job.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to HtheB For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,149 | Thanked: 2,784 times | Joined on Dec 2010
#16
One thing I noted was the lack off toolchain updates as part of the old items. Is this something still being looked at?
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Android_808 For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,899 | Thanked: 2,978 times | Joined on Jun 2010 @ N900: Battery low. N950: torx 4 re-used once and fine; SIM port torn apart
#17
Originally Posted by juiceme View Post
Originally Posted by reinob View Post
We might also want to consider an opt-in/opt-out filter. People who haven't opted-out (and possible not logged in users, e.g. search engines) will get swearwods filtered out *on-the-fly*, i.e. while serving the page.

Users who have opted-out of the filter will get the "raw" content.
Interesting idea, however I fear that the forum SW does not fold to that easily...
It sure is possible to do something like that but might require rewriting a lot of code!

Originally Posted by reinob View Post
I think we'll soon be ready to organize an election, if only for the fück of it. Oops.

Based on the strong reaction of community to this topic I know we now need an election.
Agree. I would vote for optional filter. However, I would prefer to have the swear words filtered on server-side, not on client side, to avoid browser-compatibility issues. Besides, in case of server-side filtering, we do not need to re-write the swear-word-filter-code: was on server, stays on server. We just need to make sure that the opt-in-or-opt-out works.

The "optimal" way to do it, would when message is taken from database and converted into webpage by server: depending on the request (opted in or opted out), a different swearwords list would be applied. Switching between different lists (empty list and full-list) would be easier than switching off filter altogether. And would allow for more flexibility, should some time in the future users request to have personal swearwords lists.

Of course, I don't know how current server-side code works. If it applies filter before saving message to database (en route from writer to database), old swears may never be recovered (alas, sarcastic), and (more importantly) it would be difficult to change server-side code to apply filter to message en route from database to reader.

Thank you. Best wishes.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Per aspera ad astra...
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Wikiwide For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
maemo council

Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:31.