Decorum VS Full Disclosure in BOI?

[rosebud945]

An interesting problem surfaced regarding forum rules in a Bad guy thread on Chris Sulwer that some of us think might bear further discussion. To get background on this issue, please visit the last 10 pages of this thread:
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=119923

According to BOI rules, profanity is not allowed, even if it appears in quoted emails meant as evidence. The person posting the offending words, whether as part of a discussion or as part of a direct quote, can censor the whole offending word(s), or receive infractions if all or even part of the word is not asterisked.

Toward the end of the thread mentioned above, a member received an angry email from Mr. Sulwer that contained profanity. She commented on the email, and was then asked to post it. She asterisked everything but the beginning of each offending word, and posted. She received an infraction for profanity.

Her post prompted me to post my dealings with Mr. Sulwer because I had received similar emails from him, and I wanted to help remove all doubt about his character. But the emails that he sent me were particularly vulgar, and I knew about the other member's infraction, so I hesitated to post. In the end, I posted the emails with the offending words censored.

The problem is that some profanity crosses the line into assault. Profane references to female dogs, excrement, fornication, etc, are fairly easily recognized based on context. However, some of the language that Mr. Sulwer used against me is not so easily recognized when bleeped out, is much more offensive, and is, therefore, a more direct reflection on his character.

So here is the question: how can we maintain the full force of language and still maintain the level of decorum that is set forth by the BOI? Should certain kinds of profanity be exempt from the censorship rules at least to the point of leaving the first letter of offending words, or should readers be asked to pm the poster for the uncensored emails?

 

[Roy Munson]

For decorum's sake, I can understand forbidding profanity in a BOI thread's posts. However, I think that this should not apply when quoting communications from outside of the BOI/Fauna. Many site rules seem to be relaxed in the BOI in order to maintain the "give them enough rope to hang themselves" principle.

 

[Lucille]

I agree that certain kinds of language is insulting and inappropriate especially in the context of a business transaction.
However, the BOI was originated to help protect the community primarily from scammers, to help honest buyers and sellers protect their financial interests from those that are not so honest; from the scammers and thieves that plague the industry.

There is a give and take whenever a rule is implemented. The profanity rule certainly lessens the impact of messages that contain gutter language. But if you travel back in time prior to its implementation, you will see some BOI threads that frequently deteriorated into ugly, name calling melees that went far afield from the original poster's good guy/bad guy message.

This kind of verbal behavior obscured the business aspect of the thread and the threads became playgrounds for those who simply wanted to fling poo.

In this particular referenced thread, the bleeps did lessen some of the impact of the message sent, but if one steps back, the bad guy actions presented on the thread, the several references to very poor customer service, and the posts from those actually wronged combine to show such a poor businessman that the few bleeps would not significantly alter the great weight of the evidence against him.

When placed on a scale, the profanity rule gives more than it takes, IMHO, in a business environment.

 

[Roy Munson]

I also wanted to add that I think there is some inherent danger in editing emails etc. that are presented here as evidence. This may be a stretch, but bear with me. A poster could actually make an email appear worse by editing out portions. The fact that there is never concensus over what constitutes profanity anyway only makes the waters muddier.

Sample unedited email:

Dean,

I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to. I tried to make good with you, but now you've screwed that up. Get off your flippin' high horse.

Sample edited email:

Dean,

I don't give a **** what you think you are entitled to. I tried to make good with you, but now you've ****** that up. Get off your *****in' high horse.

Maybe the example is a little extreme, but I hope I've made my point. I can clarify if necessary...

 

[Lucille]

Roy: Excellent points about the editing problem.

Here is another thought to consider: if off-site comments were exempt from the profanity rule, it would not be long before those given to bad language found that they could merely say what they wanted using the worst gutter language they could think of, and sidestep any consequences by merely sending it as email to a comrade, who would then be free to quote it.

 

[Roy Munson]

Here is another thought to consider: if off-site comments were exempt from the profanity rule, it would not be long before those given to bad language found that they could merely say what they wanted using the worst gutter language they could think of, and sidestep any consequences by merely sending it as email to a comrade, who would then be free to quote it.

Yeah, I thought of that too. Having scenario-specific tolerance for profanity would probably be a mess for the mods. It's certainly easier to forbid it outright, and I wouldn't blame them for supporting that policy. Still, I think that the BOI's function is so important that I support the review of its policies for the sake of improved function.

Good thread.

 

[rosebud945]

I completely understand why the rule is in place, and support it for the most part, but I am always squeamish where censorship is involved. Roy's example is an excellent illustration of censorship being used to obscure the truth. I also think that the particular profanity that Chris used against me at least contributed to removing all doubts about his character, though the threats of gang retaliation and his general behavior in those emails probably contributed more.

 

[WebSlave]

Just to clarify what I meant by having a rule on profanity, there are a few issues present that need to be dealt with when you run a website that is open to the public for both posting text and a broad viewing audience being reached to read them.

Firstly, there is just common courtesy to people who would find such language offensive enough that they would just avoid coming to this site, regardless of the additional benefits derived from their attendance. Profanity being allowed uncensored just gives a very bad impression of ANY site, and many people will take such unfiltered text as being a sign of deeper underlying problems with the management of the site.

Secondly, parents may get highly offended that their children might be reading such garbage and in response put in parental blocks for this entire site as a result. While this site does not cater to underage or juvenile viewers, it is just not prudent to incur the potential of having a large segment of viewers blocking access to this site under such circumstances.

Lastly, many corporate firewalls will incorporate smart filters for incoming webpages, that when substantial instances of profanity (among other evidence deemed of an offensive nature that business management may want to keep from coming into their internal network via the firewall) are detected, the firewall can block the IP address or the domain name and NO ONE within that internal network will then be able to access this site. Again, to have a policy that will allow this potential filtering out of this site from a large segment of corporate firewalls is just not a very prudent position for me to take.

So taken as a whole, regardless of what actual force of proof that the poster of such quoted messages intended to portray, there are far more negatives attached to allowing uncensored quotes then there are to any actual benefits derived from having them uncensored. Yes, some profanity is definitely worse then others, but all in all, when all things are considered when using such quotes to portray that aspect of the person in question, is that difference really going to amount to all that much to really matter?

As far as the one example where a rather tame quote was made to look as something far worse, well certainly that can happen, but the originator of the quote certainly has the capability to dispute that claim by merely posting the ORIGINAL text for their side of the argument.

So, with that being said, the whole time I'm writing this I'm thinking "So is it really smart to have the HELL forum here?" Anyone who subscribes to that forum and reads it while at work or at home where they have small children puts this site in jeopardy for the same above mentioned reasons.

I will have to think about this. Perhaps the HELL forum is just not worth the negatives incurred for the few people who actually take part in that subset of this site.

 

[Roy Munson]

Good points and conclusions, Rich. Thanks for posting them.

 

[rosebud945]

Do firewalls pick up on partially censored words? That was the issue with one poster. She left the first letter of each word in the post.

In the case of the emails that I posted, members did not know that the c word had been used until Dennis said so in a post.

 

[KelliH]

I am 100% for the profanity rule. That kind of stuff was allowed on this site for far too long, and it's encouraging to see some cracking down on it here.

 

[gillian25]

well i quick read through this post and my opinion is young adults relay do not have much business on this sight , if they can't afford to perchance from fauna they should not be on it , animals are not cheap! shipping is not cheap. and i have a ten year old . she knows more and heard more then i would ever think she has . i think editing as much as bio does takes the impact out of what was said to this woman . if i print something about a mans being B*****S. a man would be livid why shouldn't a woman be as offended buy what was said . and i relay don't think that what i wrote you can tell , or get the full impact on being what is said . could you understand what i just called a man . well ?.........i do not think that from reading bio anyone could get the full impact from dealing with this person . he is down on the same level as rapists and murderers he has the same respect for someone else as those . but from bio the only thing one gets is he takes your money and has a foul mouth . i have seen a woman with her arms legs and head removed . who did it a man . he has the same mentality , absolute no respect . saying about sending the hells angels after someone . come on.i just think that when it is quoting someone else you should be able to post at least most of the quote so those that read it can get the full impact of the person in question.(Nicole Simpson was murdered . but after the whole storie was brought out her breasts were removed and placed next to her . her head was cut thorough the spine , the law changed and it was passed that if a woman calls she was hit the man gos to jail . not just told to take a walk)with the whole storie out and not just part because you are afraid of getting reprimanded i think the bio will have a lot more impact .

 

[LauraB]

Huh??

well i quick read through this post and my opinion is young adults relay do not have much business on this sight , if they can't afford to perchance from fauna they should not be on it , animals are not cheap! shipping is not cheap

It took a moment for me to translate the above, but what I believe Gillian/Toni is attempting to say is that it is her opinion that if a person - a young adult particularly - cannot purchase from Fauna, then they really don't have much business on this site. Is that correct?

Toni, this is the BOI (not the "bio" as you continually call it, by the way). It is the Board of Inquiry. It is here for young and old, buyers and sellers alike ... and NOT just for purchasers from Fauna. It is a great service to all interested in the herp industry. Young adults have every right to be here; how else can a young adult learn if not by research and examples set forth herein? And if you have a 10-year old child, then I would think you would understand the importance of censoring certain words on this, a public message board open to all.

As for this: (quote in bold by me)

i think editing as much as bio does takes the impact out of what was said to this woman . if i print something about a mans being B*****S. a man would be livid why shouldn't a woman be as offended buy what was said . and i relay don't think that what i wrote you can tell , or get the full impact on being what is said . could you understand what i just called a man . well ?.........i do not think that from reading bio anyone could get the full impact from dealing with this person .he is down on the same level as rapists and murderers he has the same respect for someone else as those . but from bio the only thing one gets is he takes your money and has a foul mouth . i have seen a woman with her arms legs and head removed . who did it a man . he has the same mentality , absolute no respect . saying about sending the hells angels after someone . come on.i just think that when it is quoting someone else you should be able to post at least most of the quote so those that read it can get the full impact of the person in question.(Nicole Simpson was murdered . but after the whole storie was brought out her breasts were removed and placed next to her . her head was cut thorough the spine , the law changed and it was passed that if a woman calls she was hit the man gos to jail . not just told to take a walk)with the whole storie out and not just part because you are afraid of getting reprimanded i think the bio will have a lot more impact.

I realize you are talking about Chris Sulwer and his vulgar emails to the female customer he had wronged. However, to put him on the same level as a rapist or murder is just plain ridiculous. He's a fool, he's vulgar, he's a rip-off, he's a liar and a potential thief. He has shown he has very little honor or character, a bad temper, a foul mouth and isn't above even stupid threats. He's absolutely someone to avoid doing business with.
Your diatribe about Nicole Simpson and whatever other heinous murders you were talking about has absolutely nothing to do with censoring emails on a public message board! Again, this the BOI, not Court TV or the National Enquirer.

Anyone with even a modicum of intelligence can figure out the general tone and context of an email, even if certain words are censored out. The exact censored word may not be immediately recognized, but if it's bad enough to censor in the first place then it shouldn't matter. A reputable business person should not need his or her emails censored in the first place. If they must be, then it's not difficult to get the gist of the mail and figure out the writer probably isn't someone you would want a business relationship with.

I'm well past "young adult". I'm grown with grown kids. I can curse like the best sailor ... however, I'm with Kelly. I'm 100% for the profanity rules.

 

[hhmoore]

Maybe it's me, but I don't need to read uncensored profanity to "get the full impact"...nor do I think censoring profanity out of emails negatively impacts the effectiveness of the BOI (thanks, Laura). It has been mentioned that there isn't a clear cut understanding of what constitutes profanity, but I think most people have a pretty good idea of what is acceptable. If you have to pause to wonder if you can post something, you probably shouldn't. It doesn't matter how much one curses in "the real world", most people employ some sort of filter at times - whether it be in front of their boss, their grandmother, children, a room full of strangers (especially members of the opposite sex), etc. Is it SO hard to put together a few typed sentences without including profanity? It isn't a slip of the tongue where by the time you realize it, it's too late....there's the extra step of having to click Post or Submit.
I've also seen comments about the way moderators gauge or respond to profanity.....or, perhaps commonly, how we deal with "masked" profanity. Masked profanity can mean different things to different people. Intentional spelling errors are a popular method - ie. using kk instead of ck, an ! instead of i, $$ instead of ss. Then there is the use of stars to make cussing appear as cus*ing, or c*****g. Oh - what about acronyms (btw for by the way or fwiw for for what it's worth , for example - not that those include profanity...I just didn't want to set a poor example because I know some people have been issured infractions for using the ones that do). What is acceptable can sometimes vary according to who is looking at it...and possibly even by the situation in which it appears.

In the case of the emails that I posted, members did not know that the c word had been used until Dennis said so in a post.

Perhaps it says something about me as a person, but I read "the C word" in the censored email the first time I looked at it....I didn't need Dennis to point it out to me.

i think editing as much as bio does takes the impact out of what was said
The BOI doesn't edit. When somebody posts profanity, it isn't removed by the moderators (except in rare cases, when the whole post is removed due to rule violations...and even then it is more likely to be other infractions that led to the deletion, not the profanity).

If you (general) think that so much of the impact will be lost by not posting the profanity intact...well, then post it & take your lumps. Hopefully, anybody inclined to quote the post will have enough sense to it

 

[rosebud945]

Anyone with even a modicum of intelligence can figure out the general tone and context of an email, even if certain words are censored out.

This statement is not necessarily true, as Roy's example points out. Censorship can work both ways. However, relaxing the profanity rules will not prevent the doctoring of words as an act of malice or as a means to self serving ends cloaked in a feigned sense of propriety or decorum. History is full of vivid examples of both. In fact, Chris has now accused me of doing just that, but even here, given the piles of evidence against him, his latest version of things is a blatant and gross revision of what transpired between us.

Censorship does mitigate the impact of language. When I first read those last few emails from Chris, I was shocked, and felt assaulted! But unlike physical rape, the impact of those words was short lived. You really can't make the leap from abusive, sexist language to rape and murder. While both forms of degradation stem from a general disrespect and latent hatred of women, there is no proven causal relationship between the two. I do not feel like I have been raped, nor do I feel seriously threatened with gang retaliation. I do feel that Chris Sulwer is an A Moral jerk and a rotten excuse for a human being, but I have no proof that he is a rapist or murderer. I think the threat of punishment for either of these two crimes is enough to dissuade a coward like Chris from acting on his mysogenous impulses.

Censorship should never be taken lightly or accepted blindly, because it is, by definition, a form of suppression and oppression. But, unless we wish to give ourselves over to chaos, it is a necessary evil in some cases. Rich, I am fairly new to this board, but I have picked up on how out of control the BOI got prior to this rule. In the thread, someone suggested to Toni that if she wished to post emails uncensored and avoid infractions, she could do so in Hell. Her response was that she had no desire to expose herself to the level of profanity that she expected to find in that forum, but that revealing the full depth of depravity in Chris's character belonged in the BOI conversation. Toni, after reading Rich's reasoning and all of these responses, I now disagree. The depraved individual known as Chris Sulwer is fully exposed, and the c word was never spelled out. The thread is still a safe place for a child who is looking for his first pet snake, or beardie or frog to decide that Chris is not the person to buy from, and the site is still available to me when I am away from home and trying to read the latest dirt on BOI from my work, a university, computer. :laugh:

There is always a way around censorship. We proved that. Most of the adults that are viewing or are involved in this conversation now know what the offending c word is, but a child or innocent probably still doesn't. Does that child or innocent get that s/he should not buy a pet from Chris? Most likely.

 

[hhmoore]

In the thread, someone suggested to Toni that if she wished to post emails uncensored and avoid infractions, she could do so in Hell.

May I ask who made that suggestion? I thought I remembered seeing it, but was unable to find (the post number would be great, if you can find it...but I'd settle for the member's screen name)

 

[rosebud945]

Sure. It was Dennis H., post #448.

 

[Seamus Haley]

I'm just going to sum this up...

"Waaaaaagh! I never bothered to read the rules of the site and I got a warning point for half-masked profanity! Waaaaagh! Everyone else is to blame, the system is wrong, the world is unfair, waaaaaaaaaaaagh!"

Pretty simple really. Read the rules. Follow the rules. Don't follow the rules, accept the consequences. It's not like these things were made up on the spot and retroactively enforced.

 

[gillian25]

like i said i have a 10 year old . she has no business on this link . if she wants something this is my money purchasing it for her . when i pick out something i let her see it and if it is in my price rang i will perchance it .and as for language i have seen a ten year old boy get off the bus speaking more foul language then centered out on boi . and as for the harshness of a rapist and murderer my point was . things such as allowing someone as low as Chris , with his mouth and behaver will not change unless the severity of it all is shown .and rape Donna ? and my self yes he did . anyway it was violation and will stay with me at least for the rest of my life , early in this link someone said to me don't through fauna out because of one bad person . well if this kind of behaver is not punished after showing the severity who can be trusted ? he is only going to do it again . looking at his feedback all you see is good ,why can't some post? if we had negative dealings with him we should be able to post it . also this poor excuse for a human being just went to another sight and blasted Donna as a layer . so he has no repercussions for his actions . so in other words he just moves on to their things and makes up stories and blasts something else .i think efforts should be posted on how to leave feedback and what would be the next step . not in worrying how BOI is spelled several times wrong . its a joke!

 

[gillian25]

no one is crying like a little girl about getting reprimanded i think maybe you need to read it again . they are complaining about how the censuring is cutting the impact of some words . if someone came along and said something about you that you needed to post to prove a point how would you post it ........ OH so in so said i am just a sniveling cry baby . this is not giving the full impact of what you were called and is not telling what your called . from your response it would show me that you relay do not understand what is being said .and waaaaaaawaaaaawaaaaa is a very childish response.