Story language being auto-censored?

[PeculiarChangeling]

I noticed that on my latest story update, some language was automatically filtered with no option to edit it. This wasn't the case with the previous chapter of the same story. 

"f**k" got automatically changed to 'f**k', and an attempt to fix it didn't change the censorship. 

What's going on there? 

[~Brian~]

@PeculiarChangeling @DailyDi

22 hours ago, PeculiarChangeling said:

I noticed that on my latest story update, some language was automatically filtered with no option to edit it. This wasn't the case with the previous chapter of the same story. 

"f**k" got automatically changed to 'f**k', and an attempt to fix it didn't change the censorship. 

What's going on there? 

I've also noticed this. There are several words that automatically get censored when you're trying to write a post, and the current one is usually the F word, sometimes the word but gets Censored if it has two T's, and there's a whole bunch of other ones. These probably are part of the censored word list in the system. Admins can put certain words into the system so that they show up as asterisks, however there are some words that I don't think should be censored, but that is a decision of the admin team and of Mikey himself. When you're trying to write a story sometimes it is difficult when you see those words come up like that, because regardless of how you try to fix them so that you know what's being said, it'll come up that way. One of my stories that I write, I tell someone that I was being naughty in the story and I told someone a bunch of stuff, being angry enough so that in one of the things I said it came out With several words that begin with the letter F. Basically I was saying that I was telling someone that pound sand but I wanted to use the F word so I said that I told some one to pound sand using words that begin with the letter F.

I noticed that the word "froggy" Which is a user name on the system, sometimes will come out as asterisks as well probably because the system believes that I'm using it bad word. I'm not sure what words are in the filters, but I sometimes have to be careful myself, because even words that I don't think are bad words may be in those filters, but we'd have to ask Mikey what he thinks of those particular words and if there is a possible way that maybe some of the words that we're using are being interpreted as bad words and are being asterisked Out.

I know why some of the words are placed in that filter, because you don't want a bunch of bad words in your system, lest there be people that start talking and using bad words and something may take offense, but I do have a question on some of those words being in the filter, however I Do know that there's a reason for each one being in the filter.

Let's hope Mikey can explain which ones are in the filter and if there's any that would cause you to not be able to make your story be authentic maybe he can look into that and see if there's any that maybe can be removed from the filter. Bad words such as the C word, and other words that are like that should probably stay there. Don't want a bunch of bad words to be used in the system, but I also understand why some people may be questioning why the word BUT with one extra T is treated as the word a with 2 s's, and then it is asterisks out.

Brian

[Personalias]

3 minutes ago, babykeiff said:

@~Brian~

I would suspect that the story forum is being heavily moderated rather than certain words being blocked. Presuming that certain words are being blocked in posts, this would follow through on all forums including roleplay, where the f word is common place.

From a software perspective, for this function to be added, it would have be added in the PostMessage function or class, depending on the software. It can also be added as Dependency Injection, but this needs a lot of testing before being implemented, and doing that sort of added testing on a generic PostMessage function is almost silly as it creates two PostMessage functions, both need to be maintained and updated which doubles the work in software development. That type of forked development creates unmaintainable code as itterations of PostMessage differs from PostMessage which allows Injection.

As a result, it seems to me to be either a rough piece of code, and a progress to software crashing OR human intervention involved with moderation.

The second seems reasonable due to the change in opinion and rules being implemented - i.e. the elimination of any references to actual children within ABDL stories etc. This rule, in my opinion, has value but also removes the fantasy story or dream story where an adult is regressed to under the age of consent. This is where it verges on opinion rather than rule implementation. This, I raised before, but the topic was locked by the moderator / author in question.

It's not human moderation.   I'm literally copying and pasting 5-6k posts from my patreon and the words are immediately censored as soon as the post updates.  

[Babypants]

22 minutes ago, Personalias said:

It's not human moderation.   I'm literally copying and pasting 5-6k posts from my patreon and the words are immediately censored as soon as the post updates.  

What you are describing is called Bowdlerizing, and it has been going on for centuries.  I have encountered a quite different problem here.  I write in Open Office, which the site will not accept, so I have to convert scenes to PDF.  These post, but with all italics erased, all paragraphs merged into one big blob, and all indented passages turned into outright gobbledygook.  The worst is the capricious elimination of quotation marks.  Editing to correct all of this is time consuming.  

[Personalias]

1 hour ago, Babypants said:

What you are describing is called Bowdlerizing, and it has been going on for centuries.  I have encountered a quite different problem here.  I write in Open Office, which the site will not accept, so I have to convert scenes to PDF.  These post, but with all italics erased, all paragraphs merged into one big blob, and all indented passages turned into outright gobbledygook.  The worst is the capricious elimination of quotation marks.  Editing to correct all of this is time consuming.  

I'm well aware of Bowdlerizing is.  What I am referring to and emphasizing has not been going on for centuries because computers haven't been around that long. I am speaking to the process in which certain words end up censored. The literal process. I'm saying swear words are being reformatted and censored automatically and not by direct human intervention on a post on an individual post basis as suggested by someone else.  No one is going around and editing our submissions for us.

41 minutes ago, babykeiff said:

I think George Orwell was correct with the story Animal Farm. Is the world getting to a stage of someone watching everything said and done lest it offend someone.

Tell me you haven't actually read Orwell without telling me you haven't read Orwell. lol.

[Personalias]

18 minutes ago, babykeiff said:

I love how, a person I blocked and refuse to read what is posted by this person, considers that the removal of freedoms, freedoms that people better that everyone of us alive today, gave up their lives for these freedoms that @Personalias considers a laughing matter

How can you say you know what I'm laughing at and what I consider if you refuse to read what I've posted?  Also. I suggest you actually read Orwell. 

[Gummybear]

 

On 9/30/2023 at 9:43 PM, PeculiarChangeling said:

I noticed that on my latest story update, some language was automatically filtered with no option to edit it. This wasn't the case with the previous chapter of the same story. 

"f**k" got automatically changed to 'f**k', and an attempt to fix it didn't change the censorship. 

What's going on there? 

I just checked my stories, and all the fucks and other naughty words in them are right where they're supposed to be.  Is it possible that you have some kind of filter active on your web browser?  Which story was the one where you were subject to censorship?  I'm curious to see if it's censored for me as well.

[thedman]

Wow, this one went down a rabbit hole.

 

I also noticed the words be censored in your content Personalias and I can say is if it is going to keep happening it is time to "f**k the f***ing fuckers".

[Babypants]

I just looked over the last paragraphs of your Issue 2.  You are using the noun; you might try working with a verb or a participle adjective.  In my Homage to Vincent Vega, there are multiple scenes with expressions in dialogue such as fuckin' swamp.

[Elfy]

I'll speak to the other admin about it. As far as I'm aware there isn't and never has been word censorship like that on this site apart from one notable exception.

[Personalias]

9 hours ago, thedman said:

Wow, this one went down a rabbit hole.

 

I also noticed the words be censored in your content Personalias and I can say is if it is going to keep happening it is time to "f**k the f***ing fuckers".

Yeah, I noticed it too.  It doesn't particularly bother me, but it's kind of weird that words like fuck are being censored on an 18+ site.

Edit: Interesting. But not here and now.

[Personalias]

Also not important to the discussion but:  Rome adopting Christianity in 4AD?  Um...no?  Just no.  Hahaha.   

[WBDaddy]

1 minute ago, Personalias said:

Also not important to the discussion but:  Rome adopting Christianity in 4AD?  Um...no?  Just no.  Hahaha.   

Right?  Here's this kid who's 7 years old (because dating being off) and we're gonna make worshipping him the state religion and then turn around and murder him in a few decades.  Also kill his followers for a few decades after that for some reason. 

[KPAXOR1987]

48 minutes ago, Personalias said:

Yeah, I noticed it too.  It doesn't particularly bother me, but it's kind of weird that words like fuck are being censored on an 18+ site.

Edit: Interesting. But not here and now.

It might be 18+ but the littles aren't 18+ when regressed 😜. 

Na just screwing with ya man it does seem a bit odd though that it would only happen in the stories from what you said, I will take your word for it as it sounds like a bunch of stories filled with conflicts and misunderstandings 😇. Which if that is the case it only shows emotion of the chacter and adds to the story a better sense of the chacter's frame of mind. 

 

Man I just noticed this.. how did I get in the writer's section 🤔😂

[zzyzx]

11 hours ago, Elfy said:

I'll speak to the other admin about it. As far as I'm aware there isn't and never has been word censorship like that on this site apart from one notable exception.

Let me guess.... [That site]  Yup.  I was right.  That's the only one I was aware of.... 

[ValentinesStuff]

21 minutes ago, zzyzx said:

Let me guess.... [That site]  Yup.  I was right.  That's the only one I was aware of.... 

Damnit, I'd forgotten about that site. Now you've reminded me about it. 

[Personalias]

@WBDaddyI suggest some people look up when Rome adopted Christianity as the official state religion.  Also, I suggest some people actually read Orwell before referencing the wrong work in regards to surveillance.

[Gummybear]

I'm just wondering what all this has to do with cencorship.  This feels more like somebody posting long screeds about completely unrelated things in order to keep a thread going so they can post more unrelated posts and thereby pad (no pun intended) their post count. could we maybe get back to the original point: Trying to find out why some fucks have been changed and others haven't?

 

It bears mentioning that your post count doesn't determine how good of a human being you are.  It's just another pointless e-peen.  We all know that the only real measure of your decency is the size of your... shoes.

[DailyDi]

I don't normally swear on here, but in this case it should be known the fucking problem has been fixed,

[foreverdl]

I for one don't like to see the F..k words on a site like this.  This site is for being with our like minded, and of course we can just block a Person that uses the language we don't like. I used those kinds of cursing when I was young, and it is soo hard to stop. If someone cursed while talking to me in Person I will tell them to please not. And I will say ok I am done talking to them even if it's family. Because I am not there anymore and I don't have to listen to it from anyone. I get to the point that I slip too much after I start hearing it. It's to each their own. But I have the right to tell them stop or I'm walking away. Or in this case leave a thread. 

[WBDaddy]

11 hours ago, babykeiff said:

4AD is roughly 4+ years after the mortal life of Our Lord. After the mortal death of Our Lord, a lot of changes were taking place - and the split occured in some people of Jewish faith to create Catholism. The term AD refers to Annos Domini, but is incorrectly read as Anno Domini due to the way the 's' was wrote. The letter 's' resembles todays scroll, seperator or an elongated 'f'. See Vicar of Dibley episode, location 2.00, where Alice is reading from a Bible where every 's', she pronounces as 'f' until Geraldine talks over her at the last word 'sucker'. Although that chapter referred to in the comedy doesn't exist, it shows how easy it is to misread / misunderstand and mistranslate what was orignally in Scrolls and Scriptures all based on limited / restricted knowledge base.

 

AD 1 = the year Jesus was born. 

AD 4 = he was 3 years old.

AD 380 (roughly) = Rome formally makes Christianity its state religion. 

So sorry, but there was no Catholicism in AD 4, nor any split between Judaism and anything but Zoroastrianism, which was still hanging around in Judea when Jesus was born.  There wasn't even any Christianity yet, because Jesus was still a toddler.   

Even if I give you the very WRONG assertion that AD = after his death (that's actually Anno Passionis, another, competing dating system around that same time) 

Rome did not even legalize Christianity in its empire until 313 AD, shortly before the Council of Nicaea in 325. 

[Gummybear]

1 hour ago, WBDaddy said:

AD 1 = the year Jesus was born. 

AD 4 = he was 3 years old.

AD 380 (roughly) = Rome formally makes Christianity its state religion. 

So sorry, but there was no Catholicism in AD 4, nor any split between Judaism and anything but Zoroastrianism, which was still hanging around in Judea when Jesus was born.  There wasn't even any Christianity yet, because Jesus was still a toddler.   

Even if I give you the very WRONG assertion that AD = after his death (that's actually Anno Passionis, another, competing dating system around that same time) 

Rome did not even legalize Christianity in its empire until 313 AD, shortly before the Council of Nicaea in 325. 

In addition to this, it's also worth remembering that the Anno Domini system wasn't introduced before the early sixth century, when a monk whose name escapes me at the moment declared that based on his calculations it was 525 years after the incarnation of our lord, i.e. his birth.  (His maths wasn't great so he set AD 1 about four years late, but that's beside the point.)  If a story is set before the sixth century, it wouldn't make sense for the characters to use the AD reference.  It would be like having a story set in the 1920s and having someone referring to "the first world war".  It wasn't the first world war until there was a second one.

 

As for catholicism, it wasn't a thing for more than a thousand years after the death of Christ.  It could be argued that the Council of Jerusalem (AD 48 or 49) is the point when christianity splits from judaism since they decided it was acceptable for non-jews to become christian.  What was to become catholicism split from what became the orthodox churches in The Great Schism of 1054.  There had been regional differences between the eastern and western church before the actual split, but formally there was only "christianity" before they schizzed (Yes, I know that's not a word, but it should be.)

[Babypants]

1 hour ago, Gummybear said:

If a story is set before the sixth century, it wouldn't make sense for the characters to use the AD reference.  It would be like having a story set in the 1920s and having someone referring to "the first world war".  It wasn't the first world war until there was a second one.

 

A very good analogy.  For the record, there is no year 0.  In the Julio-Claudian dynasty, as throughout the Republic, the government used the consules ordinarii to date official documents.  Thus, what we call 1 BC is the year in which the ordinarii were Cossus Cornelius Cn. f. Lentulus and Lucius Calpurnius Cn. f. Piso (Augur).  AD 1 is Caius Caesar Augusti filius and Lucius Aemilius Paulli f. Paullus.  A second dating system, which began in the first century BC with the pedant M. Terentius Varro, became increasingly popular in the Imperial period.  This is the ab urbe condita (AUC) system ("from the birth of Rome"), which starts in 753 BC.  Thus 1 BC = AUC 753, AD 1 = AUC 754, and so on.  Because there is no fixed point to which we can attach the birth of Jesus, the terminus post quem presently sits at 7 BC, and the terminus ante quem at 2 BC.

Into the second century AD, what we call Christianity was an underground sect to which the Roman government was oblivious.  To see how oblivious, one need only read the exchange of letters (Epistulae 96-97) between Pliny the Younger as Governor of Bithynia and the emperor Trajan (AD 98-117).

The notion that there was a prescription against public displays of nudity in the early Empire is way, way off the mark.  Keeping in mind that Pompeii was buried by the eruption of Vesuvius in AD 79, the paintings that graced not only brothels in the city but also the suburban baths are not only sexually explicit but also highly instructive.  These are readily accessible both in print and on line, and are but a tiny fraction of the evidence for public nudity in the early Empire.   

  

[ValentinesStuff]

1 hour ago, Gummybear said:

In addition to this, it's also worth remembering that the Anno Domini system wasn't introduced before the early sixth century, when a monk whose name escapes me at the moment declared that based on his calculations it was 525 years after the incarnation of our lord, i.e. his birth.  (His maths wasn't great so he set AD 1 about four years late, but that's beside the point.)  If a story is set before the sixth century, it wouldn't make sense for the characters to use the AD reference.  It would be like having a story set in the 1920s and having someone referring to "the first world war".  It wasn't the first world war until there was a second one.

 

As for catholicism, it wasn't a thing for more than a thousand years after the death of Christ.  It could be argued that the Council of Jerusalem (AD 48 or 49) is the point when christianity splits from judaism since they decided it was acceptable for non-jews to become christian.  What was to become catholicism split from what became the orthodox churches in The Great Schism of 1054.  There had been regional differences between the eastern and western church before the actual split, but formally there was only "christianity" before they schizzed (Yes, I know that's not a word, but it should be.)

This dating system was devised in 525 by Dionysius Exiguus but was not widely used until the 9th century.

[WBDaddy]

8 minutes ago, ValentinesStuff said:

This dating system was devised in 525 by Dionysius Exiguus but was not widely used until the 9th century.

Noteworthy that it was a clumsy dating, because he never explained his methodology.  No one really knows where his "calculations" come from, but there are many who suspect that it was him subtracting 27 from the Anno Passionis (which is wrongheaded, because Jesus wasn't 27 when he died), and folks try to forgive him by claiming that he was referencing the Nativity as AD 1, not Jesus' actual birth.