Should Atlas stop censoring "bad words?"

[Drop Billionaires, Not Bombs]

Yes. I self-censor enough _{(you DO NOT want to see some of the things I've written on /pol/)}. But I don't think I'm sh!tting in anybody's cereal bowl by saying f#ck or c#nt. And the latter is barely considered a swear in Australia. If anything, using that word is cultural appropriation.

On a semi-related note: I wish that the word "bloody" was common as a swear in the US, but people look at you funny if you use it that way.

[For Trump, everything. For immigrants, the law]

Why, when it's so much fun to write f(inks)?

[DabbingSanta]

Honestly, I think we should crack down a bit.  There's no need to swear to get your point across.

[Mr. Smith]

S*d off with that nonsense.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

There are only 5 distinct words that are censored, and the other censor entries are just different variations of those words.

If anything, it just shows that there is a troubling lack of diversity in cursing. America needs to put aside their differences and come together to remedy this problem.

We should unite by being more different?  By Odin's lost eye, that's a contradiction you vixen!

[Drop Billionaires, Not Bombs]

Why, when it's so much fun to write f(inks)?

Newfags Newfriends won't get the reference.

[Zohran "The Sword of Islam" Mamdani]

Perhaps we should start using words that sound like they should be curse words but actually aren't. Like spigot.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Perhaps we should start using words that sound like they should be curse words but actually aren't. Like spigot.

Trust a custard like you to come up with something so Dulish.

[DINGO Joe]

Perhaps we should start using words that sound like they should be curse words but actually aren't. Like spigot.

That would just make us look like a bunch of jackanapes

[Kingpoleon]

Perhaps we should start using words that sound like they should be curse words but actually aren't. Like spigot.

This really made me sn.

[Kingpoleon]

That Atlas does have rather rigorous standards against profanity helps keeps the discussions more elevated than what you would expect to find on r/politics and other Internet hell holes. 

I have actually advocated more censorship to prevent posts like this, but the WEAK Atlas moderators are unwilling to do anything about it. We need a strongman in the Modadmin’s seat.

[ملكة كرينجيتوك]

Also, I don't know about you, but I for one was swearing like a sailor by the time I was 10, as were all my friends. Even if a 10 year old were to stumble across this forum:

1. He probably already knows and uses all these "bad words."

2. These words wouldn't be even remotely close to the most disturbing or objectionable things he'd read here!

While you make a very good point, John Dule's point still stands.

You're not prepared for what this forum would look like if people didn't self-censor. And I'm not talking about swear words.

Tally is now 33 Yes 34 No. John Dule’s revelation has brought us back to the light side.

[Arson Plus]

It's more like 34 yes and 33 no because I accidently voted no

[ProgressiveModerate]

As long as people like me continue to indentify as childs, that’s not happening. Trust me, this forum is inappropriate enough without bad words.

[Chips]

There are only 5 distinct words that are censored, and the other censor entries are just different variations of those words.

If anything, it just shows that there is a troubling lack of diversity in cursing. America needs to put aside their differences and come together to remedy this problem.

[Alben Barkley]

Wow, I'm shocked this poll is so evenly split. I think this literally might be the most 50/50 poll I've ever seen here.

[Alben Barkley]

There are only 5 distinct words that are censored, and the other censor entries are just different variations of those words.

If anything, it just shows that there is a troubling lack of diversity in cursing. America needs to put aside their differences and come together to remedy this problem.

The fact that even you seem to acknowledge how arbitrary the censorship is, in my view, only reinforces my point, rather than counters it. You're not objecting on any sort of moral or practical grounds, you are simply pointing out that it's "only" five words and their variants that are censored. But why should it be up to us to invent a whole new class of swear words, rather than simply use those that we all practice frequently in our daily lives without having to worry about it? Hell, this is the language of the common people if anything is. It would defeat the entire point of a "common" language if we were forced to make up new nonsense words for no particular reason, when the ones we have do just fine and get the point across better than any due to their established cultural connotations.

And again, you don't seem to even think this is a problem in terms of "WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN???" or anything like that. And AGAIN, EVERYBODY knows what a poster means when they say "f**k" or whatever the "f--k." Nobody is actually being "protected" from these words, we all know what is being said, so it just seems pointless to hide them.

And as for the idea that having to censor ourselves somehow gives the words more impact or something: I say "bulls--t!" The only difference is I have to replace "h" and "i" there with a couple dashes instead of what I would use on almost any other forum on the internet. It doesn't make the words more meaningful somehow, just slightly more annoying to write them.

It's outrageous. Egregious. Preposterous.

[Alben Barkley]

It's more like 34 yes and 33 no because I accidently voted no

That makes it exactly 50/50 as of this writing then!

[DC Al Fine]

No.

Swearing is a crutch most of the time in political discourse. We already have a problem with poor posting quality, and removing censorship of swears would just exacerbate the problem.

[SevenEleven]

There are only 5 distinct words that are censored, and the other censor entries are just different variations of those words.

If anything, it just shows that there is a troubling lack of diversity in cursing. America needs to put aside their differences and come together to remedy this problem.

The fact that even you seem to acknowledge how arbitrary the censorship is, in my view, only reinforces my point, rather than counters it. You're not objecting on any sort of moral or practical grounds, you are simply pointing out that it's "only" five words and their variants that are censored. But why should it be up to us to invent a whole new class of swear words, rather than simply use those that we all practice frequently in our daily lives without having to worry about it? Hell, this is the language of the common people if anything is. It would defeat the entire point of a "common" language if we were forced to make up new nonsense words for no particular reason, when the ones we have do just fine and get the point across better than any due to their established cultural connotations.

And again, you don't seem to even think this is a problem in terms of "WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN???" or anything like that. And AGAIN, EVERYBODY knows what a poster means when they say "f**k" or whatever the "f--k." Nobody is actually being "protected" from these words, we all know what is being said, so it just seems pointless to hide them.

And as for the idea that having to censor ourselves somehow gives the words more impact or something: I say "bulls--t!" The only difference is I have to replace "h" and "i" there with a couple dashes instead of what I would use on almost any other forum on the internet. It doesn't make the words more meaningful somehow, just slightly more annoying to write them.

It's outrageous. Egregious. Preposterous.

Whoa, chill.

[Joe Kakistocracy]

Why is Alben Barkley so apoplectic with white-hot rage over a relatively minor issue, once again?

In any case, to those here who say "if you can't make an argument without swearing, it's not worth reading", I present the following:

Intelligent people are more likely to swear, a study has found.

It’s the news that every foul-mouthed person has been waiting for – the opportunity to excuse your potty mouth as one of the side-effects of being smart.

Researchers at the University of Rochester quizzed 1,000 people about 400 typical behaviours, and discovered a strong like between intelligence and swearing.

What this correlation suggests is that swearing isn’t simply a sign of language poverty, lack of general vocabulary, or low intelligence.

Instead, swearing appears to be a feature of language that an articulate speaker can use in order to communicate with maximum effectiveness. And actually, some uses of swearing go beyond just communication.

Beyond swearing's impacts on the body and mind, research has shown that cursing can influence our social dynamics, too. A 2012 study found that swearing can enhance the effectiveness and persuasiveness of an argument. In addition, cursing can also convey an emotional reaction to something without us resorting to physical violence.

And while many might consider swearing less than savory, a recent study revealed that people who curse often actually lie less and have a higher degree of integrity.

After the scientists surveyed how often participants use profanity, they conducted a series of tests to determine how truthful an individual was. The research team found a positive link between profanity and honesty. Cursing was associated with less deception on an interpersonal level, and higher levels of integrity overall.

These article excerpts are each referring to different scientific studies.

[Torie]

Joe Republic, your litany of citations is inapposite to the case before us, because it entails I presume oral conversation rather than written. Sad!

That said, it is a relief to find out that I may not be the village idiot. Whew!

[SevenEleven]

Why is Alben Barkley so apoplectic with white-hot rage over a relatively minor issue, once again?

In any case, to those here who say "if you can't make an argument without swearing, it's not worth reading", I present the following:

Intelligent people are more likely to swear, a study has found.

It’s the news that every foul-mouthed person has been waiting for – the opportunity to excuse your potty mouth as one of the side-effects of being smart.

Researchers at the University of Rochester quizzed 1,000 people about 400 typical behaviours, and discovered a strong like between intelligence and swearing.

What this correlation suggests is that swearing isn’t simply a sign of language poverty, lack of general vocabulary, or low intelligence.

Instead, swearing appears to be a feature of language that an articulate speaker can use in order to communicate with maximum effectiveness. And actually, some uses of swearing go beyond just communication.

Beyond swearing's impacts on the body and mind, research has shown that cursing can influence our social dynamics, too. A 2012 study found that swearing can enhance the effectiveness and persuasiveness of an argument. In addition, cursing can also convey an emotional reaction to something without us resorting to physical violence.

And while many might consider swearing less than savory, a recent study revealed that people who curse often actually lie less and have a higher degree of integrity.

After the scientists surveyed how often participants use profanity, they conducted a series of tests to determine how truthful an individual was. The research team found a positive link between profanity and honesty. Cursing was associated with less deception on an interpersonal level, and higher levels of integrity overall.

These article excerpts are each referring to different scientific studies.

None of these studies are very large. That said, while I think profanity should be limited, I will tell you to "f off" in situations when I feel it is truly merited. Still, thinking about the last four years and how many generic "fck trump" posts we would've gotten makes my stomach churn. Sure, it's true, but is it really worth spending time on?