For Discussion / Review: Forum Language Rules

[wmhawth]

I personally believe that if you cannot communicate your point without swearing then you don't have much of a point to begin with.

That being said there are some revelant links that contain swearing, and that they should be allowed with a warning. I just fear that we will get a lot of links that are unrelated to our forum or that serve no useful purpose.Just because the girl wearing the string bikini is holding a M4 doesn't mean it is related to defensive carry

I wouldn't think that the rule change as described in the OP would make the girl in the string bikini immune to removal or deletion by moderators if she serves no purpose related to the forum. Doesn't look like a problem to me.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[JD]

Doesn't automatically mean it's not though either... just saying.

And I'm just saying that this whole idea can get closed, burried and forgotten with the click of a mouse, so please keep providing reason for us to table this discussion.

Sent via Tapatalk, and still using real words.

[Thunder71]

...exactly why it won't work, you bring things up for discussion to the open forum then choose what portions are allowed to be discussed. and what thoughts would abolish the whole idea.

Allow it or don't, I'll play by the rules - But I don't need the threats.

[Bark'n]

I have posted a couple videos which I felt had so much value and knowledge it would be a shame not to share it because of one or two bad words spoken at the end of the video, during the outtakes.

I posted a very conspicuous WARNING and went so far as to point out at what point in the video where delicate ears shouldn't listen. I feel that is fair enough.

As I've said before, we freely talk about pretty gruesome topics here on this forum. We talk about death and killing and discuss gruesome crimes. The Dr. Petite case in Connecticut comes to mind as one case in particular. I have posted in somewhat graphic detail what it's like to deal with death and murder victims found at crime scenes from personal experience. I'm sorry, but that is the nature of what's involved and people need to be aware of reality and real life if they are going to strap on a gun and think they are prepared to take a life in defense of a life.

It's my belief that while this is somewhat of a social forum, that's not necessarily it's purpose. I do think language guidelines and rules have their place here, and I'm not for allowing foul language in regular posts from forum members. A person should be able to speak and write effectively without resorting to bad language. That rule is part of what keeps this forum civil and the best on the internet. I support Rule #4.

However, out in the real world, it's not so sanitary. And when posting a video where it is intended to be used as a teaching tool, you have zero control over what other people say on the video. Whether it's a firearms instructor who may say a few bad words during the course of instruction, or whether you're posting a video surveillance tape of a violent crime being committed and there happens to audio which has people using foul language. I feel we shouldn't lose that valuable information because of the bad language rule. I feel a conspicuous warning posted along with the video should be sufficient to satisfy those who have delicate ears.

Just my humble opinion.

[gasmitty]

Bark'n covers my thoughts quite well.

[JD]

I have posted a couple videos which I felt had so much value and knowledge it would be a shame not to share it because of one or two bad words spoken at the end of the video, during the outtakes.

I posted a very conspicuous WARNING and went so far as to point out at what point in the video where delicate ears shouldn't listen. I feel that is fair enough.

As I've said before, we freely talk about pretty gruesome topics here on this forum. We talk about death and killing and discuss gruesome crimes. The Dr. Petite case in Connecticut comes to mind as one case in particular. I have posted in somewhat graphic detail what it's like to deal with death and murder victims found at crime scenes from personal experience. I'm sorry, but that is the nature of what's involved and people need to be aware of reality and real life if they are going to strap on a gun and think they are prepared to take a life in defense of a life.

It's my belief that while this is somewhat of a social forum, that's not necessarily it's purpose. I do think language guidelines and rules have their place here, and I'm not for using foul language in regular posts from forum members. A person should be able to speak and write effectively without resorting to bad language. That rule is part of what keeps this forum civil and the best on the internet. I support Rule #4.

However, out in the real world, it's not so sanitary. And when posting a video where it is intended to be used as a teaching tool, you have zero control over what other people say on the video. Whether it's a firearms instructor who may say a few bad words during the course of instruction, or whether you're posting a video surveillance tape of a violent crime being committed and there happens to audio which has people using foul language. I feel we shouldn't lose that valuable information because of the bad language rule. I feel a conspicuous warning posted along with the video should be sufficient to satisfy those who have delicate ears.

Just my humble opinion.

I think we just found the wording for the rules page should we decide to make the change.

[DaveWorkman]

I have posted a couple videos which I felt had so much value and knowledge it would be a shame not to share it because of one or two bad words spoken at the end of the video, during the outtakes.

However, out in the real world, it's not so sanitary. And when posting a video where it is intended to be used as a teaching tool, you have zero control over what other people say on the video. Whether it's a firearms instructor who may say a few bad words during the course of instruction, or whether you're posting a video surveillance tape of a violent crime being committed and there happens to audio which has people using foul language. I feel we shouldn't lose that valuable information because of the bad language rule. I feel a conspicuous warning posted along with the video should be sufficient to satisfy those who have delicate ears.

Just my humble opinion.

I think you've just cracked a code. I've had dealings with homicides and suicides, knife attacks and a lot of fatal car crashes. I've seen some pretty salty language on several forums, too, and on others, on rare occasions, language that came pretty close to making a personal threat.

Bravo.

[retsupt99]

Put in my $.02...
Voted to allow info packed links that add to the forum/thread content with an appropriate warning.

[Mike1956]

The poll results seem conclusive, at any rate.

[JD]

The poll results seem conclusive, at any rate.

Kind of what I expected, but it's always good to get a better metric than "I think the members would like ________"

[357and40]

I guess we could finally post links to the greatest single defensive pistol-craft moments on modern film from "Collateral."
Yes, the briefcase scene...

[shockwave]

This is so silly.

Every day, we can read things here along the lines of: "If anybody threatens me or my family I will kill them." So this whole "family friendly" thing is so absurd as to be laughable.

The raison d'etre of this board is to discuss how we might best blow slugs of hot lead through miscreants, in the gravest extreme. So then, protesting that this is some kind of Disneyland wonderworld of happy times and wholesome, good, family and child-friendly content is so ridiculous and foolish that I'm howling with laughter that you even raised the question.

[BigStick]

I appreciate the fact that you took the time to ask for input. While I have heard most of the words that would be banned, I do not appreciate them, and have no desire to read or hear them. That being said, I agree that this forum includes mature topics and there is a lot of usefull info that can not be sanitized.

In my opinion, a warning would maintain the atmosphere of the forum while allowing usefull content.

[JD]

This is so silly.

Every day, we can read things here along the lines of: "If anybody threatens me or my family I will kill them." So this whole "family friendly" thing is so absurd as to be laughable.

The raison d'etre of this board is to discuss how we might best blow slugs of hot lead through miscreants, in the gravest extreme. So then, protesting that this is some kind of Disneyland wonderworld of happy times and wholesome, good, family and child-friendly content is so ridiculous and foolish that I'm howling with laughter that you even raised the question.

And yet 22% think we should keep it the way it is and even a majority of the majority support our language rules other than allowing some "external sources" to be permitted .


Laugh all you want, but most of the members appreciate our stance on this matter.

[Bark'n]

This is so silly.

Every day, we can read things here along the lines of: "If anybody threatens me or my family I will kill them." So this whole "family friendly" thing is so absurd as to be laughable.

The raison d'etre of this board is to discuss how we might best blow slugs of hot lead through miscreants, in the gravest extreme. So then, protesting that this is some kind of Disneyland wonderworld of happy times and wholesome, good, family and child-friendly content is so ridiculous and foolish that I'm howling with laughter that you even raised the question.

Regarding shockwave's point. There is truth to what you say.

However, what you are obviously missing, is that being able to discuss such a topic with some civility and decorum is accomplished because of the premise that this is a family friendly forum.

It's that premise, and the constraints we put on the discussion, which separates this forum, and puts us above all the other knuckle dragging forums which seem to always degrade into uncivil arguments and insults.