Please Refrain

[Ken Salisbury]

Please refrain from using acronyms in place of profanity. We all know what the acronyms stand for and they are inappropriate to use. I have had to edit quite a few posts lately and replace the acronyms with more appropriate words.

As Keith said sometime earlier on this subject:
"We are very serious about language that is inappropriate for our public forums. Among our Members we have ladies and younger woodworkers and it is important that all of our forums remain accessible to woodworkers of all ages."


Thanks in advance


http://www.oldrebelworkshop.com/misc/moderator.gif

[Chris Padilla]

Ken,

Is the use of punctuation okay? :) #$%&!#$% just really tells it like it is sometimes! ;)

[Alan Tolchinsky]

I agree with that Ken and find the use of various acronyms offensive. I mean just because you abbreviate it doesn't make it any better, right? We all know what most of them mean. This forum is on a higher level than other forums; let's keep it that way. The classy people and learning type atmosphere displayed here is what makes me want to come back again and again. Alan in Md.

[Todd Burch]

Will do..............

[James Carmichael]

There goes a big part of my vocabulary :confused: But I'm on board with it.

I'm glad to see the SMC moderators are committed to keeping the discussion boards on track. Too often good forums get derailed with, er, bad stuff.

Keep up the good work.

[Waymon Campbell]

Appreciate the kind reminder........Bear!

[Dale Thompson]

Ken,
Thanks to SMC for drawing a "firm" line. :) "Gray" lines have a way of dissipating.

It's not that I don't use profanity. I do. But I try to always direct it at myself. :( With all of the mistakes that I make, I'm sure that nobody deserves it more. On the other hand, I always apologize to myself. :cool: I say, "Self, would you say that to your mother, daughter, wife or grandchild? Say you're sorry to yourself for that lazy use of the English language!" :o

I think that I am confused? :confused:

Thanks again,

Dale T.

[Jeremy Bracey]

I think I might be guilty:(


Sorry. Thanks for keeping it in check.

[Don Selke]

I back that up all the way.

Thank You Sir

[Randy Moore]

I do believe That am guilty and I have already washed my mouth with soap

[Tyler Howell]

Dale, I'm a little worried about this Bipolar conversation you're having. Is it the beer or cheese???:p

Mea Culpa, I'll try to be a kinder and gentler Creeker;)


Ken,
Thanks to SMC for drawing a "firm" line. :) "Gray" lines have a way of dissipating.

It's not that I don't use profanity. I do. But I try to always direct it at myself. :( With all of the mistakes that I make, I'm sure that nobody deserves it more. On the other hand, I always apologize to myself. :cool: I say, "Self, would you say that to your mother, daughter, wife or grandchild? Say you're sorry to yourself for that lazy use of the English language!" :o

I think that I am confused? :confused:

Thanks again,

Dale T.

[Ken Salisbury]

Ken,

Is the use of punctuation okay? :) #$%&!#$% just really tells it like it is sometimes! ;)


I guess it would depend in what context #$%&!#$% was used. If you use it and come back to your post later and find it missing, you could assume it was used in an inappropriate manner :) .

Common sense is the watchword

[Betsy Yocum]

Ken - thanks for keeping such a good eye on things. Good to know there is a forum with such watchful moderators.

Thanks again!:D

[Dan Gill]

Thanks, Ken. You're doing a terrific job.

[Dale Thompson]

Dale, I'm a little worried about this Bipolar conversation you're having. Is it the beer or cheese???:p

Mea Culpa, I'll try to be a kinder and gentler Creeker;)

Tyler,
It's both. I'm trying to boost my cholesterol with the cheese and boost my IQ with the beer. The former is working - the latter is NOT!! :(

My Grandfather always told me that it is OK to talk to yourself - as long as you don't give yourself any stupid answers. Unfortunately, I don't have anything BUT those kind.

Be kind, Tyler. We both know that you will not find very many northern Wisconsin Norwegians on the Mensa membership list. ;) :D

Dale T.

[Tom Sontag]

"We are very serious about language that is inappropriate for our public forums. Among our Members we have ladies and younger woodworkers and it is important that all of our forums remain accessible to woodworkers of all ages."

I have no real problem with the overall rule but I feel compelled to add that I find the reason stated above sexist and rather weak.
I realize it is quite traditional to think that one should behave differently around women or children but again, I personally find duplicity shallow. It is much better to adopt a code of conduct which is acceptable to others and best reflects the kind of person you are. Even if you always hang around a bunch of sailors, to flip in a stereotype, I doubt they would think less of you if you spoke like a considerate person. They can sense genuine character as well as anyone - and it is this we are truly judged by.

If this kind of truth in character makes you unacceptable company, well then, go for the fake front.

[Bob Marino]

Tom,

Got to disagree with you here a wee bit in regards to "rough" language (and I guess behavior) in front of women and children. While "proper" language and behavior should not be confined to the prescense of women and children, I see nothing sexist, chauvanistic or shallow in behaving differently when in that company, particularly of children. I guess that's why they have movie ratings and such, because what's acceptable for adults to view may not acceptable for the kids.
If for example, I were speaking with a contractor doing work on my house or a "bunch of the guys" and the language was peppered with obscenities (as is may typically be, by myself as much as the others), I sure would expect that if my wife enjoined us, let alone my six year old daughter, the rough stuff would cease.
Though the times are changing, I would hate to see that the phrase "women and children first" would become an anachronysm.

Bob

[Tom Sontag]

I see the point re: children. No question that they should be exposed to that stuff on the playground where it belongs :rolleyes: I probably watch myself more carefully when playing with nieces and nephews.

But as for women as a broad category, it does not work for me. Several of the most prolific cursers (and one of the most creative) I have ever met were women. I think it comes down to whether we see that person a genuine LADY, some kind of feminine ideal, or not. And if so, why not include true GENTLEMEN? I have met some of both categories and would certainly feel I embarassed myself committing a faux paux if I slipped in front of either of them. Gender is not the issue here, but something more like class.

The REAL reason is contained in Keith's message though: it is the difference between spoken situations and a written bulletin board. In spoken situations it is easier to know your audience and filter accordingly if you must. The board should be acceptable to ALL types and so we should always have our "best company and children" behavior on.

As long as ships still sink, "women and children first" will still have a place.

[Bob Marino]

True Tom. Some of the most prolific cursers are women, but let them show that to me and if I then want to change the flavor of my conversation I will. But until that happens, I may be on better manners, but I don't consider that wrong or innapropriate. What's wrong with a guy talking amongst other guys and saying "hey, cool it, a lady/girl/woman is present"?

Ah, I am interpeting the "women and children first" comment in a wider context.
Don't want to go too far astray on the original post, (if I haven't already done so) but I agree with you on the know your audience comment.

Bob

[Tyler Howell]

Moma use to say "you want to be mad, talk mad"! It is refreshing to find one spot where I'm not assailed by foul language. TV, radio, stores, and grade schools. 5&6 year olds using the big guns:eek: . It's everywhere. I use it:o , helps deliver a point sometimes. But as mom said it mostly just makes me more angry.

Another good debate. Thanks for sharing. Maybe like the FPP this is the start of something really big and really good.;)

[Aaron Koehl]

"We are very serious about language that is inappropriate for our public forums. Among our Members we have ladies and younger woodworkers and it is important that all of our forums remain accessible to woodworkers of all ages."

I have no real problem with the overall rule but I feel compelled to add that I find the reason stated above sexist and rather weak.
I realize it is quite traditional to think that one should behave differently around women or children but again, I personally find duplicity shallow. It is much better to adopt a code of conduct which is acceptable to others and best reflects the kind of person you are. Even if you always hang around a bunch of sailors, to flip in a stereotype, I doubt they would think less of you if you spoke like a considerate person. They can sense genuine character as well as anyone - and it is this we are truly judged by.

If this kind of truth in character makes you unacceptable company, well then, go for the fake front.
Tom,

We are not trying to be politically correct here--the membership of this forum is, in large part, traditional. The argument provided was not intended to be the sole logical substantiation for the rule, and as such, shouldn't be evaluated on its logical merits. The statement should be taken for what it is--that is, as an indicator designed to evoke an idea of proper conduct in the context of a largely traditional base.

Do you take issue with the promotion of social stereotypes?

[Tom Sontag]

The promotion of social stereotypes for a 'traditional' audience is a form of political correctness IMO. I was only pointing out a bias that I saw.

Any form of censoring will lead to a promotion of some kind of 'correctness'. Note that both of my responses above have been edited by the moderator, including one with perfectly socially acceptable medical terminology.

I hope we are open enough here to have the correctness promoted here pointed out for what it is.

[Ken Salisbury]

Any form of censoring will lead to a promotion of some kind of 'correctness'. Note that both of my responses above have been edited by the moderator, including one with perfectly socially acceptable medical terminology.

In lieu of debating the issue I will simply quote the TOS:

In addition, SawMill Creek shall have the right (but not the obligation) in its sole discretion to edit, refuse or delete any Content that it reasonably considers to violate these Terms without notice.



I hope we are open enough here to have the correctness promoted here pointed out for what it is.

Of course we are open enough


http://www.oldrebelworkshop.com/misc/moderator.gif

[Donnie Raines]

Coversation like this always intrigue me. Often I know exactly where I stand on something....particluarly these days. But every once in a while a topic comes up like this...where I kind of ride the fence. I feel both sides(if you would) have very valid points(wrong or right...I dont know). But the over riding rule, here, is what Sawmill Creek has laid out for the guide lines that we must all follow.

And thats where I would concede, and fall into place.

[Chris Padilla]

In addition, SawMill Creek shall have the right (but not the obligation) in its sole discretion to edit, refuse or delete any Content that it reasonably considers to violate these Terms without notice.Yes, this has been practiced on me a few times. I don't care for the "...without notice" part but I'll live.... :)

[Alan Tolchinsky]

"We are very serious about language that is inappropriate for our public forums. Among our Members we have ladies and younger woodworkers and it is important that all of our forums remain accessible to woodworkers of all ages."

I have no real problem with the overall rule but I feel compelled to add that I find the reason stated above sexist and rather weak.
I realize it is quite traditional to think that one should behave differently around women or children but again, I personally find duplicity shallow. It is much better to adopt a code of conduct which is acceptable to others and best reflects the kind of person you are. Even if you always hang around a bunch of sailors, to flip in a stereotype, I doubt they would think less of you if you spoke like a considerate person. They can sense genuine character as well as anyone - and it is this we are truly judged by.

If this kind of truth in character makes you unacceptable company, well then, go for the fake front.


No offense, but is it too hard to just follow a couple simple rules? Why do we have to question EVERYTHING and anything? No I'm not advocating following every rule in the world blindlessly but this is just no big deal. This rule puts SMC on a higher level and keeps everybody more civil and it's worth the slight infringement on your "rights" that YOU may perceive. Since when does any wood working have to be described with foul language?

I'm not saying I don't use "those words" but I don't on any public forum that I frequent.

I can't believe anybody is arguing about needing the right to use foul language on this or any forum. Don't you hear enough of that in daily life?

Let's please keep SMC on that higher plain.

Just my thoughts. Alan Tolchinsky

[Keith Outten]

Yes, this has been practiced on me a few times. I don't care for the "...without notice" part but I'll live.... :)

Chris,

I certainly understand your position however our staff and moderators are not paid, we all volunteer our time. It is unreasonable to ask these people to spend additional time to coordinate editing of messages. Although we aren't perfect we try not to over-moderate any of the messages posted by our members. This might be a surprise but most of the moderation that is done is requested by our members via Private Message to our staff. Since Febuary of 2003 we are still a "Members Moderated Forum" and our members are still in charge of the standards for our community. The SawMill Creek Staff simply listen to what the majority are saying and comply, we almost always agree which makes the job much more enjoyable.


Personally I'm real proud of the fact we are still absolutely free and without advertising of any kind. When the day comes that Hampton Roads Online can no longer provide for SMC we will have to locate other sponsors. We will not be able to attract sponsors if we cannot maintain our current level of integrity.

[Tony Falotico]

No offense, but is it too hard to just follow a couple simple rules?

Amen and well said Alan. Come on folks, lets build a bridge over this one and move on.

Tony

[Chris Padilla]

Keith,

Thanks for responding. The one time it really chaffed me was a post in the Classified section where I posted, of all things, a car item for sale. I knew it was way OT from typical classified posts but I was happy to remove it if requested to do so and I posted as such. I never heard a word and it was gone in less than a few hours with nary a word.

I moderate another fourm (a BMW forum) and am not paid so I appreciate the positions of the moderators here but I rarely do anything without some courtesy notice to members. I, too, almost never act over there without a PM prompting me to so I appreciate that point as well.

I have had a couple PMs to both Ken and Aaron go 100% unanswered...even when repeated. Zero response. This has probably made me a little edgy/sensitive in my reaction to the moderation on this forum. Integrity works both directions: to the people who request things of the mods and to the people who the mods are moderating.

[Dennis McDonaugh]

I guess it would depend in what context #$%&!#$% was used. If you use it and come back to your post later and find it missing, you could assume it was used in an inappropriate manner :) .

Common sense is the watchword

Ken,

I understand your point about acronyms or asterisks and the like, but I'm not sure in what context you would need to edit %&$&^%&* out of a post. Is it the idea that someone would use profanity, or the profanity itself you're concerned with? %&$&^%&* can pretty much be anything you want it to be, can't it? For those inclined to use "blue" language they can insert anything they feel is appropriate. For those who don't like profanity, they can think "gosh darn it!"

[Rich Konopka]

It is much harder to prevent profanities coming off your tongue than it is when they are coming off of your fingers :D It should not be a big deal since we typically type much slower than we speak. Unless you are using speech recognition software:p :D ;) :eek:

[Ken Salisbury]

Keith,

I have had a couple PMs to both Ken and Aaron go 100% unanswered...even when repeated. Zero response. This has probably made me a little edgy/sensitive in my reaction to the moderation on this forum. Integrity works both directions: to the people who request things of the mods and to the people who the mods are moderating.

To my knowledge all e-mail or PMs directed to me which included a question have always been answered. PM's and E-mails which inform me of something or are not inquisitive in nature may or may not get an answer depending on the amount of time I have.

I read every post on both the Freedom Pen Forum and the General Forum and have done so since the inception of SMC. The simple reading of all these posts takes time. The occassional editing of posts takes time. The reading of all the e-mails and PM's take time (I receive somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 e-mails/PM's per day involving strictly SMC/FPP). Just reading them takes time. I can't respond to every PM and e-mail I receive strictly as a matter of courteousy. There's not enough time in the day for it.

The responses required to FPP inquiries from outside sources like suppliers, media, supporters, and the general public takes time.
The purchasing, sorting, packaging and distribution of the free kit/bulk buy programs takes time. The management of donations and FPP funds takes time. The upkeep of multiple web pages to support the availability of FPP information takes time

As a matter of fact the vast majority of "editing" I do on posts have absolutely nothing at all to do with violations of the TOS. Most of them are repairing things like quote coding, optimizing photo sizes, general editing like correcting spelling of supplier names, inserting link references that I think help the readers and generally making the posts more cosmetically pleasant.

I have always been a person who believes in following the rules/guidelines set forth in any activity or work I am involved in. Such is also the case here. As a moderator my job (if you want to call it that) is to insure that the rules/guidelines are followed.

I would absolutely love to not have to edit one single post. Then I could use that time for much more constructive endeavors.

Any of these "tasks" which take up my time are open to anyone who wishes to use their time instead of mine.

I might in fact go back and edit this post since I actually do realize some of it is not consistent to the atmosphere I which to present here at SMC.

Everyone needs to vent from time to time.

I will quote my all time hero:

"If you believe in yourself and have dedication and pride - and never quit, you'll be a winner. The price of victory is high - but so are the rewards"http://www.oldrebelworkshop.com/bearcutout.gif

[Chris Padilla]

Ken,

If you need more time, then why not ask for some help on the forum? I'm not sure I've seen such a request.

I'm shocked how diligent you are in this job (if you want to call it that) but if you want more time, then why not ask for some help?

Perhaps SMC and the forum you moderate is getting too big for 1 person to oversee?

On the forum I moderate, we have 3 mods.

[Keith Outten]

Chris,

I believe that we have made our point clear and our position is supported by the majority of our members who have been very verbal concerning the quality of our forums and the job we are doing. Even those who disagree with certain points of view benefit from the way SMC is run...everyone wins!

Back to woodworking and thanks to everyone for voicing there opinion.

[Chris Padilla]

Just know that I, too, support it, Keith. I'm here often enough aren't I? :) I'm flying to Arkansas to meet a buncha people I met on here for gosh sakes! :) I bought 2 hats, I bought Grrrippers, I've given money to FPP several times...I'm here to stay! You'll find it hard to get rid of me be it good (or be it bad!)

However, why skirt the issue of getting Ken some help? Could you address that, please?

[Ken Salisbury]

However, why skirt the issue of getting Ken some help? Could you address that, please?

The "help" I need is for folks to support what we are trying to do here. Just understanding what is involved is enough help. Taking time to worry about people's "rights" infringments is not something I care to spend time doing. No one pays for what they receive here. It's kind a like giving a homeless person $5 and he spits on your shoes because you didn't give him $10.

[Tom Sontag]

Amen and well said Alan. Come on folks, lets build a bridge over this one and move on. (re: "No offense, but is it too hard to just follow a couple simple rules? ")
Tony

Tony and Alan,

There has not been any discussion or doubt about following rules. I am sorry that discussing the logic behind the rules makes you uncomfortable. I, for one, am done.

[aurelio alarcon]

Please refrain from using acronyms in place of profanity. We all know what the acronyms stand for and they are inappropriate to use. I have had to edit quite a few posts lately and replace the acronyms with more appropriate words.

As Keith said sometime earlier on this subject:
"We are very serious about language that is inappropriate for our public forums. Among our Members we have ladies and younger woodworkers and it is important that all of our forums remain accessible to woodworkers of all ages."


Thanks in advance


http://www.oldrebelworkshop.com/misc/moderator.gif I don't think that the presence of women and children should be used as a deterrent to the use of foul language. The fact that the language is Foul in and of itself should be deterrent enough. I have heard women who are much more foul than any men that I have known, and I was in the service, worked on construction sites, and played organized sports, etc. Speaking of children, I think that foul language is childish itself. Why is it that men who want to impress other men revert to foul language? Can't they see how elementary, unpolished, crude and primal it makes them look. If you want to sound cool, how about using the correct term to illustrate your concept. I've never been able to figure out why stupid is always considered cool. Using foul language is stupid and uncool! Grow up.

[Keith Outten]

Aurelio,

Ditto, I agree with your observation and perspective.

Chris,

When Ken Salisbury asks for help we will provide another moderator to assist him which isn't an easy task. I have picked all of our moderators personally and it is difficult to select people who are willing to donate their time and have the right attitude for the job. Many of the people who I have asked to serve as moderators have refused simply because they don't have the time.

Chris, I am certainly willing to acknowledge your contributions here at SMC ...we are glad you have chosen to join our community.

To All,

I'm not really sure why this dicussion is taking place, it doesn't affect but a very few of our 3000+ members who seem to be very happy. In the past we have discussed every rule in our Terms of Service (TOS) and everyone has had the opportunity to voice their point of view. Our TOS is compiled from a host of sources and all of the experience I obtained as a Bulletin Board System (BBS) System Operator when I started Hampton Roads Online almost ten years ago. Our TOS is very basic and for the most part tried-and-true for the purpose of maintaining responsible content.

The use of profanity or any likeness for want of a better term is counter-productive to the goals of our woodworking community and will not be allowed. The guidelines for operating SawMill Creek will continue to be enforced based on what is good for the majority of our members, individuals rights are secondary and our TOS enforces this philosophy.

[Tom Sontag]

I'm not really sure why this discussion is taking place, it doesn't affect but a very few of our 3000+ members...

Lots of discussions affect small pockets of the readership. And plenty of threads go over familiar turf. We are having a discussion about rules because Ken brought it up.

But I see no fire here, so I wonder why the authorities and others here keep trying to throw water on the discussion.

I see nobody trying to change the rules. One or two questions about enforcement have been answered quite completely. The only real stress and strain I note in the thread came from those trying to quelch the discussion. I think we all understand the time and dedication it takes to run a place this well. If it stops being fun, then some kind of change is required. But a dose of calm demeanor can keep any discussion civil. And if it is civilized conversation, why worry?

Peace.

[Keith Outten]

Tom,

I just re-read Kens original post and I cannot find any reference to his opening up any discussion of SMC Terms of Service. Ken simply reminded everyone to refrain from using innapropriate language. Maintenance and interpretation of our TOS is the responsibility of the Site Administrator Aaron Koehl. To my knowledge Aaron has not been asked to revise the TOS based on any current issue so they are not "on the table" or open for discussion.

Why worry? I can assure you we aren't worried at all, we are simply trying to be civil and respond to questions when they are asked. We prefer to be friendly in our approach to moderating our forums and explain our position clearly so there is no misunderstanding. Our policy concerning "Fires" is to remove the entire thread as soon as the first Member or Moderator feels there is a problem.

Any member who has a question concerning our TOS should contact Aaron Koehl via Private Message here at SawMill Creek. If Aaron feels that a public discussion is appropriate he will establish a new thread and offer everyone the opportunity to respond.

[Dale Thompson]

Hi Folks,
I am REALLY confused. :confused: Why should folks who volunteer their time to provide me with a GREAT woodworking forum be allowed to ask me not to use profanity on THEIR forum? :mad: To me, this is an OUTRAGEOUS violation of my rights to free speech! ;) In fact, I am SOOO outraged at this obvious attempt at censorship that I feel forced to resort to DIRECT statements intended to obviate the entire discussion:

- Profanity is NOTHING more than a lazy or ignorant use of the English language. Since NO SMC member is ignorant, it must be laziness.

- Excluding the TOTALLY ignorant, of which we have NONE, the folks who use profanity generally use it to denigrate the actions, beliefs, positions, policies and intelligence of others. :(

- If anyone is interested in putting others down, I would suggest that you review the works of two of my favorite historical figures, namely: Winston Churchill and, in a distant second, Will Rogers. :) Both of these gentlemen, with absolutely NO profanity, could puree their verbal adversaries far more thoroughly than could the most comatose sailor ever shanghaid out of San Francisco.

I stand corrected - but only by those who are students of Churchill and Rogers. ;)

Get with it, folks, the rules are simple. GEE WHIZ - what's the problem? :confused:

Dale T.

[Frank Pellow]

"We are very serious about language that is inappropriate for our public forums. Among our Members we have ladies and younger woodworkers and it is important that all of our forums remain accessible to woodworkers of all ages."

I have no real problem with the overall rule but I feel compelled to add that I find the reason stated above sexist and rather weak.
I realize it is quite traditional to think that one should behave differently around women or children but again, I personally find duplicity shallow. It is much better to adopt a code of conduct which is acceptable to others and best reflects the kind of person you are. Even if you always hang around a bunch of sailors, to flip in a stereotype, I doubt they would think less of you if you spoke like a considerate person. They can sense genuine character as well as anyone - and it is this we are truly judged by.

If this kind of truth in character makes you unacceptable company, well then, go for the fake front.

Right on, Tom! I felt the same thing when I read the quote, but did not take the time to complain. Thanks for doing so and for doing so so well.

[Frank Pellow]

...

I can't believe anybody is arguing about needing the right to use foul language on this or any forum. Don't you hear enough of that in daily life?

...

Alan Tolchinsky

I have not seen anyone arguing for this right in this thread.

[Ken Salisbury]

Lots of discussions affect small pockets of the readership. And plenty of threads go over familiar turf. We are having a discussion about rules because Ken brought it up.



I have closed this thread to further posting. A simple request for refraining from using profanity evolved to an overall discussion of the TOS which was not my intent.

http://www.oldrebelworkshop.com/misc/moderator.gif