1  2  |   Order by index

Jan 1, 2006, 2:02pm

Just been ejected from AWGate, because you Americans seem to consider the
words "hell" and "damn".

Having a telegram conversation with the ejecting Gatekeeper, Frosta as I
type this, which has just blocked my telegrams, after sending me a very nice
one and making sure I cannot reply to it.

My point is simple. Hell and damn are words you will hear on Simpsons and
such, rated G.. AWGate, rated G, and we have to keep it suitable for
children under the age of three?

Any parent in their right mind wouldn't put a child under ten years old, at
the youngest, in a large chat environment such as ActiveWorlds.

We have all these problems in the world, and all these senseless gatekeepers
have to worry about is some kid saying hell instead of replacing it with the
pre-schooler term.

I'm getting sick of this. I just want to keep typing more, due to my
extensive frustration.

And for the record, Australia does have a real tight outline on what is
considered swearing.. The words which I was ejected for, are far from bad
langauge.

-Equin0x.

Jan 1, 2006, 3:02pm

Frosta is usually one of the better GKs, but Id just like to point out that
the only people who *ever* get offended by these words are middle aged
women!!!! =p

--
- Mark Randall
http://www.temporal-solutions.co.uk
http://zetech.swehli.com

"Those people that think they know everything are a great annoyance to those
of us who do"
Isaac Asimov
[View Quote]

Jan 1, 2006, 3:35pm

Funny that you mention this at this time. We were just discussing this in
Bingo the other day.. after hearing the word "hell" being said. We talked
about the cultural differences and I asked people from other countries who
were playing Bingo, if that word was considered swearing, and was told it
was not. I didn't think it was, because it reminded me of a video one of the
music teachers has at the elementary school where I work. It was a harmless
video with children and adults singing. Kinda Raffi style :) Unfortunately,
there was one song on it about a fire truck that said something about "run
like hell" in it! After checking the video cover again we discovered that it
was made in England :) Well, needless to say the teacher was mortified and
the children (2nd grade) giggled! Me too.. coz the words fit the song
perfectly hahaha She wondered if any of the kids would go home and tell
their parents the word hell was in a music video at school!! The problem
here is that cultures ARE indeed different, and there is no simple answer. I
would hope however, that knowing the problems ahead of time could maybe
prevent issues from happening? just a thought :) Anyway.. Happy New Year to
all :)



[View Quote]

Jan 1, 2006, 4:21pm

Having lived in various parts of the US, the only place I've noticed
that "hell" was considered to be a curse word was in rural Alabama. It's
really quite ridiculous.

I think hell is a funny word personally :) I tried in the middle of
saying it once to change to "heck" but it came out as "helk" :)

- Ryan

[View Quote]

Jan 1, 2006, 4:43pm

While I appreciate the desensitization of such words in some other cultures,
I am hazarding a guess that the chief reason those words are blocked at
AWGate is to keep someone from telling someone to "go to...." or "..... you"
in the heat of some disagreement or just to be disruptive, as opposed to the
pure objection of the use of such words in general conversation. Just a
thought.


[View Quote]

Jan 1, 2006, 5:20pm

Exactly. It's all in how you use it.
; )

btw - hell in German means yellow.

[View Quote]

Jan 1, 2006, 5:47pm

funny....I grew up in a city of over 2 million people...all ages. Hearing
swear words was just a fact of life. And as children we KNEW what we could
or couldn't say to the "older generation"

Cultural differences you say?....Culturally when I hear the word Hell or
Damn I think of cities...educated....people of the world in heavy
discussions....

When I hear Heck, Darn (or dagnabbit) all I can think of is Lil
Abner....what you americans call rednecks....farmers....uneducated people.

I know am wrong, as using the 'proper' words is supposed to be a sign of
education, but being intelligent and educated is a state of mind, isn't it?

I am very educated LOL and believe me I use any swear word I can at the
appropriate time if it will give me the 'shock' value I need to slam a deal
into place.

Hell, yes....

sweets

Jan 1, 2006, 8:23pm

Since I live in redneck country, I'll tell you that rednecks only use hell,
damn, and the f-bomb, and it's the educated folks around here that avoid the
terms all together, even the preschooler versions of them. Interesting
contrast, eh? :)

Chris



[View Quote]

Jan 1, 2006, 9:02pm

Guess you never attended a Board Meeting *chuckles....or....Inventory
Day....

Yes it is very interesting all the cultures...what makes AW so damned
addicting *winks

sweets

Jan 1, 2006, 10:35pm

Personally that word doesn't bother me a bit and I am american. But if thats
the rule at the gate then whats the problem just not using that word? I'm
sure there are other words in your vocabulary u can use instead. Just abide
by the rules and don't make waves.. ...Simple as that :) And if its not a
bad word to u, remember there are others that may be offended. It's really
not hard to repect other people. It's just takes some common curtesy.
[View Quote]

Jan 1, 2006, 10:41pm

I should get told that BEFORE I am ejected.

[View Quote]

Jan 1, 2006, 10:42pm

Cultures are different.. Here we have ads promoting Australian Jam (what a
great example), rather than the American brands.. The TV commercial, airing
any time of any day - including prime time for kids, bares the slogan whilst
yelling it at you, "GIVE A DAMN ABOUT YOUR JAM".

Thats the easiest example that came into mind, sorry.

As you all know that there is differences in cultures, that was the problem
at the time -- I telegrammed Frosta asking about that, which a reply came,
"Doesn't matter where I am from goes for all".
Quite inaccurate.

On another note, if I would be a Satanist, freedom of religion, no matter
how much religion should not be bought into the gate, if someone comments on
their religion, they are fine.. If I make a comment on my religion using one
or both of the worlds, I'm gone.

I believe context is good.. but thats why we have Gatekeepers, thats why the
CA bot doesn't have those words in its dictionary.

If we use the words as in "It is as hot as hell", then I see no problems
with that. If I tell someone to "Die and goto hell", then they, by all
means, should be removed.

It's not the word, it's the string of words that matters.
Hence, why we actually have humans patrolling the gate.

-Equin0x.

Jan 2, 2006, 11:28am

I agree. I thought there was 2 warnings befor ejection. Or at least 1 :)
Well u know now, so just chalk it up to a learning experience and don't do
it again. hehe :)
[View Quote]

Jan 2, 2006, 11:34am

It doesn't matter WHO'S right, its WHAT'S right. So u know the gate rules so
just abide by them or stay away and that will be 1 less problem in your life
:) Just roll with the flow and move on.
[View Quote]

Jan 2, 2006, 11:39am

But what if a majority believe that "who" is not right on "what" is right?

[View Quote]

Jan 2, 2006, 11:51am

No. We don't have to warn AT ALL first.
Newbies, yes, cuz they don't know any better.
Regular Cits who do know better, no.


[View Quote]

Jan 2, 2006, 1:30pm

I would imagine that should only go for words such as f -- erm, you know
what I mean.

For someone who wasn't familar with how bad you are with censorship over in
the States, I would appreciate a better warning system.

If America is so bold on what words can be said/typed, whilst other
countries are more laxed, shouldn't AW have it's own system.. I would
believe that the word "Hell" wouldn't be on the blacklist.

And don't give me that whole "American cultures first." thing. AW has
promoted itself over the years of being a multi-cultural community.

Another citizen told me that s/he was ejected for quoting Shakespeare, "If
you prick us, do we not bleed?".

I say, lets stick to teaching users how to use ActiveWorlds in the Gate, not
scaring them off and booting them away because they ask someone "Is there a
Hell themed world?"

[View Quote]

Jan 2, 2006, 2:15pm

[View Quote] hehehehehe The CA boots for "prick"
and it can not tell *context*.

Jan 2, 2006, 2:22pm

Neither can most fascist GKs

--
- Mark Randall
http://www.temporal-solutions.co.uk
http://zetech.swehli.com

"Those people that think they know everything are a great annoyance to those
of us who do"
Isaac Asimov

[View Quote]

Jan 2, 2006, 2:57pm

[View Quote]

Jan 2, 2006, 3:02pm

[View Quote]

Jan 2, 2006, 5:08pm

The Owner of AW decides what's acceptable language for the AWGate, since
it's his business & he decides what type of portal he wants to promote for his
potential new customers. We can see what he wants by the standards the
Gatekeepers uphold in the AWGate and by the bot ejections.

Why should there be fussing about having to use proper language in AWGate?
No one HAS to enter AW using that portal. Set another entrance point! Want to
chat? Go to another world with a different rating! Use AW GZ as a chat area,
that's another option.

Someone that is younger might not comphrehend that some language IS
swearing, since society has eroded the standards of language down to a level,
that using swear words is common place. Where minor swear words are used in
everyday conversations(even the F word). Media has saturated our movies, music,
tv and radio with an onslaught of F words and swearing, to the point that people
use vulgarity as adjectives to highlight their remarks. Because of this, some
younger people might not regard minor swear words as offensive, while an older
adult might retain a higher standard of language, and consider all swear words
rude.

Arguing to be allowed to use swear words in the entrance .... well I can see
young kids(10yr olds) excited to be using "potty mouth" words, but most of us
adults have long gotten over the thrill of using swear words for shock value.
Instead, we are quite capable of adjusting to high standards of language, in
places of polite discussion. Most people prefer to listen to interesting people
using polite manners than see a slew of swear words.

As in all things there is a time and place for everything... AWGate just
isn't that place.

Sincerely,
CoLor








[View Quote] > But what if a majority believe that "who" is not right on "what" is right?
>
[View Quote]

Jan 2, 2006, 6:48pm

I've got news for you, CoLor, but Rick and JP have no say (or apparent
interest) in how the GKs are run. The GKs simply come up with their own
arbitrary standards for what is and isn't acceptable, including
different standards between different individual GKs! It's the same
situation with the PKs. The only thing Rick and JP has control over is
the CA's list of banned words, which as we all know, doesn't have any
sort of context detector.

As for "eroding the standards of language", I think that's a load of
bulldoodie. Language, by nature, is a fluid, dynamic entity, as new
words are created and old words fall out of use to better reflect the
current state of society. Thus, attempting to define "standards" for
such things is an exercise in futility, and merely seeks to separate the
intellectual snobs from those who they deem "crude".

And who gets to decide these standards anyway? Why is "crap" acceptable,
but "shit" is not? Or "screwed", but not "fucked"? What about
euphemisms; should they all be banned as well? It's all a slippery slope
that will result in the abolishment of freedom of speech, and I'd much
rather leave it up to the individual what they do and do not want to
hear. This is why there's a mute function, people! :P

[View Quote] --
Goober King
A euphemism for "awesome"
http://www.gkstudios.net

Jan 3, 2006, 3:28am

[View Quote] ******You can't be serious!! I'll disregard the "have no say" part and
dismiss it as misspeak. No interest? Please tell me how or why anyone with
an IQ over 10 would invest the amount of time and money in this place that
has been invested over the years and not care an iota about what takes place
at the front door of the very asset of which we speak! That seems like a
nobrainer.
>
> As for "eroding the standards of language", I think that's a load of
> bulldoodie. Language, by nature, is a fluid, dynamic entity, as new words
> are created and old words fall out of use to better reflect the current
> state of society. Thus, attempting to define "standards" for such things
> is an exercise in futility, and merely seeks to separate the intellectual
> snobs from those who they deem "crude".
>
> And who gets to decide these standards anyway? Why is "crap" acceptable,
> but "shit" is not? Or "screwed", but not "fucked"? What about euphemisms;
> should they all be banned as well? It's all a slippery slope that will
> result in the abolishment of freedom of speech, and I'd much rather leave
> it up to the individual what they do and do not want to hear. This is why
> there's a mute function, people! :P

******Moral conscience decides the standards, that's who! And I believe that
is exactly what CoLor is saying. The tidal wave of profanity and vulgarity
that has taken over the music and film industries has so desensitized not
just the young ones, but the older generation also to the point we
frequently don't even hear what is said. But a youngster who is looking for
a place to stretch the boundaries and "run with the big dogs", if you will,
would be in a world of delight to pick up on and repeat what he views as
adult talk.

I find it sad....sad that your school of thought from which you speak leaves
it to the innocent to decide what he should censor himself from. We didn't
have to worry about that (back in the old days.....*cough*). Adults
restrained themselves in the presence of children to protect them. Men
restrained themselves in the presence of women to respect them. Sound old
fashioned? It is. But there is a LOT to be said in favor of it! And
btw.......one never heard about first amendment rights being threatened by
it. It was the silent code we lived by. And it produced some of the top
historical figures of all time.

We had Arthur Godfrey.......now we have Howard Stern. We had Make Room for
Daddy......now we have Sex and the City. We had groups who gathered at the
corner store or local pub to discuss the weather, politics and neighborhood
gossip. Now we have a world wide web of cultures who gather online and test
the system to see who can come the closest to being the most profane, vulgar
and disgusting without getting ejected.

What a world!


[View Quote]

Jan 3, 2006, 10:58am

Here, I did some quick research into the subject. Turns out that, prior
to the year 1066, there was no such thing as "dirty words" in the
English language. Then the Normans (read: French) invaded Saxony (read:
England) and deemed anyone who spoke Anglo-Saxon to be crude, vulgar,
and uncouth, and even outlawed some of their words. Ever since then,
speaking the Anglo-Saxon version of certain words has been considered
taboo. You can read more about it here:
http://www.bobparsons.com/DirtywordsWhywehavethemandtheJapanesedontHintThanktheFrench.html

Obviously, morality has nothing to do with it; merely a case of the
winners getting to write the history books. Frankly, morality should be
more concerned with what is said, not how it is said. The fact that
someone is talking about sexual acts against your mother in front of
children should be more troubling than the fact that they used a
compound swear word.

Another point to consider: Maybe the reason kids enjoy saying swear
words so much is precisely because they're banned. They see adults
getting all uptight over these certain words, and think it's funny to
see them wig out every time they utter them, even if they don't know
what they mean. Maybe if they weren't taboo, kids (and adults) would be
less inclined to use them.

So, as I said, trying to ban certain words is just a method of
separating the intellectuals from the "commoners", and futile, as people
will simply come up with other words to describe the same objects and
situations. Instead, let's worry less about how something is said, and
more about what is said.

[View Quote] --
Goober King
Rewriting the history books
http://www.gkstudios.net

Jan 3, 2006, 11:00am

[View Quote] Which planet are you living on again?

--
- Mark Randall
http://www.temporal-solutions.co.uk
http://zetech.swehli.com

"Those people that think they know everything are a great annoyance to those
of us who do"
Isaac Asimov

Jan 3, 2006, 12:55pm

Interesting Mark! I've been wondering the same about you since I came here.
I've asked around, but no one seems to know. Enlighten us, pleeeeeezeee??
LOL !! And btw......I really hate it when people start veering away from the
main subject of the very thread upon which they post. Let's be fair and not
take this or anything out of context. THAT is more what this thread is
about, eh?

[View Quote]

Jan 3, 2006, 12:55pm

No idea, but I put my money on them not having the same Active Worlds as us.

[View Quote]

Jan 3, 2006, 1:01pm

Was actually me who posted the thread..

I see just about all of you have very intelligent points, whilst some points
are making me wonder about what you guys are on about.

While I can not agree with all extremities, and all of which lackthereof, I
fear that there isn't going to be any resolution to the original post.

It just depends on the Gatekeeper, or any other form of authority,, If they
are in a good mood or not (typical, I guess), their view on the offence, the
guidelines set forth detailing the offence, and so on.. Sadly to say, some
may even take in the relationship with the offending person, which may also
result in an abuse of authority powers.
I cannot say that any of those variables are what I suffered from, but
rather just a lack of thought.

-Equin0x.

[View Quote]

Jan 3, 2006, 6:14pm

But he is!! :) At least about the "no say" portion- not a misspeak :)
The Gatekeepers are a "community" group started by a citizen named Moria
years back and all "community" or "citizen-run" groups lead themselves
and it is up to the head of the group to decide how they want to deal
with any type of abuse or misbehavior. The GK's and PK's have more
responsibility considering they have certain rights in AWI owned worlds,
however, it is up to the head of those groups to deal with any
misbehavior or abuse first. AWI only steps in when needed or for
serious matters. This goes the same for other community groups such as
CY's AWEC, AWHS, etc... all started by a citizen in the community. :)

[View Quote]

1  2  |   Order by index