Apparently not only would he, but he would think it should be appropriate and acceptable. He did say "ANY venue"

Our "house" nice way to put it.

 

And I use that phrase for a reason... imagine being invited to dinner at a friends house. Now, as any homeowner, he probably has rules that he and his family live by. If one of those rules were: no profanity at the dinner table, surely as a guest we would be expected to respect his rules and refrain from dropping the F-bomb while eating. I think it would be in bad taste and very disrespectful to go into someones house and think we were "above" the rules of the homeowner. That's the idea here. We welcome people to come on in and make themselves comfortable, but we also expect them to respect our rules and conduct themselves accordingly while they are visiting.

 

just read the first 3 pages... all I got from this is that there is a lot of crying going on here.

 

I apologize...evidently I am an ineffective communicator. I know that EvoM has rules, church has rules, workplaces have rules, etc...I never said that wasn't the case, nor did I say that they shouldn't have the right to enforce whatever rules they see fit as private entities. I can support EvoM in running the site the way they want and not agree with censorship as a whole at the same time...

I did not clearly define my objective. I was trying to look at the bigger picture of how certain words that are synonomous with common everyday words became unacceptable through history, whereas their more platonic counterparts aren't given a second thought. It's easy enough to choose synonyms to profane words and tap dance around filters all day with the exact same intent behind them.

People keep throwing out examples of "what about this scenario" and "what about that scenario" and that could go on ad nauseum. The examples given are more about fictitious people having an attitude and less about the point I was trying to make regarding words that mean the same as others. Also, hateful slang references specifically generated towards races or peoples also are not what I was referring to, as they have a specific, malicious and injurious purpose...

I guess I'm slightly anarchical in nature. I mean, I do understand the need for constraints in society, but I don't like the fact that I am born into constraints set forth by people who came before me, and that simple fact was their only empowerment. Some anscestor somewhere got offended at some word for some reason, and now the stigma of that interpretation has followed the word all the way to my pen and paper, even though the word doesn't carry the same weight for me.

Amby, UT, we're obviously not going to see eye-to-eye on this issue, but I still like you! Thanks for your opinions and insight.

To the Mods, I support whatever it is you need to do to keep this site afloat, and give me a place to while away the free minutes in my days...

 

Those people who were born before you and _evolved_ those constraints into what they are today were born into similar shackles. What are considered the conventions of social norm (at least in the US) have evolved dramatically over the past five or six decades.

In the not-too-distant past the implication of some of the words that fall within the swear filter would have caused an outrage. I'm old enough to remember when nudity and profanity stronger than a damn would not have been tolerated on TV. That today I can watch OTA television with someone's fully exposed backside, and words I'd certainly not want used around my house is a bit disconcerting.

It really is immaterial that _you_ don't ascribe any stigma to these words. As a member of the community you agree to abide by the social contract set out by the evoM in the announcements thread. They have some very good reasons for constraining the behavior on the site to conform to these conventions.

 

I believe that this conversation has run it's course and everything has been explained. If someone still isn't clear on something, they can PM myself or any other member of the staff. Thanks