[VicAjax]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PinkFloyd /img/forum/go_quote.gif You'll have to order a painters special instead.... the caulktail

hmmm, tastes a little... chalky.

 

[blip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth /img/forum/go_quote.gif If one should not or would not say something in front of or to a parent/grandparent/civil authority/pastor/priest/rabbi/head of state...then don't write it here either.

Apparently you haven't met my parent/grandparent/civil authority/pastor/priest/rabbi/head of state all of whom are somewhat profane individuals when they let their hair down a little. (Okay, I don't have a priest and a rabbi, but you take my point)

The simple fact is that profanity are simply words that people have chosen to object to because they violate some vague and empty cultural norm. They are words which identify others as members of an out-group, generally seen as inferior or uncivilized. Such symbols thus must be crushed with all due diligence or else the sky will apparently cave in. It has nothing to do with morality, civility (at least meaningful civility) or family values. It has about the same significance as using the proper salad fork.

 

[Zanth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blip /img/forum/go_quote.gif Apparently you haven't met my parent/grandparent/civil authority/pastor/priest/rabbi/head of state all of whom are somewhat profane individuals when they let their hair down a little. (Okay, I don't have a priest and a rabbi, but you take my point) The simple fact is that profanity are simply words that people have chosen to object to because they violate some vague and empty cultural norm. They are words which identify others as members of an out-group, generally seen as inferior or uncivilized. Such symbols thus must be crushed with all due diligence or else the sky will apparently cave in. It has nothing to do with morality, civility (at least meaningful civility) or family values. It has about the same significance as using the proper salad fork.

Despite the fact that you are plainly wrong in your gross generalization of "[violation of]...vague and empty cultural norms" the point stands that language is an embodiment of a culture of a people and as such one is able to transmit ideas and emotions via this mode of communication. The fact that a population at large views certain words as encompassing certain meanings reflects exactly that, certain words = certain meanings and if such words are not appropriate as deemed such by the majority, then that's the way it goes. You have isolated profanity to your strict definition which of course left out a good load of other words which will remain offensive until the end of time.

Here is a nice way of saying it: we have rules here; every single member agreed to those rules upon registration. If one does not like said rules, the door is open, don't let it hit you on the way out.

This community enjoys plurality. It grows from it and I would expect that everyone should want more and more people to join because collectively this engrosses the entire site. No one wants to see members leave, least of all the administration, that said, it is not a democracy, rules are the rules and if one doesn't agree with them fine, but disputing them openly is futile and breaking them equates to a warning, multiple warnings and/or a ban. The choice is left up to the individual.

 

[blip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth /img/forum/go_quote.gif Here is a nice way of saying it: we have rules here; every single member agreed to those rules upon registration. If one does not like said rules, the door is open, don't let it hit you on the way out.

Uhh... Dude... no need to get angry about it. All I'm saying is that it seems a little silly to me to get so worked up about it. I'm not starting a revolution here or anything, it just seems silly that's all.

While I can understand how some broad concepts are offensive to people, many (perhaps even most) pieces of profanity appear to be profanity simply because they are profanity. It just seems circular and irrational to me. It also seems like a point that is worthy of consideration.

What I'm looking for really is a logical justification of it that goes beyond group consensus but really explains the phenomena. In other words, if some things are profane... then why are they profane? Certainly through history, little remains profane over long stretches of time. (Incest, defiling corpses etc.) Or to put it another way, what benefit does profanity provide society?

But hey, we're all entitled to our own opinions. I'm sorry that you took such umbrage at what was intended as a somewhat playful entry to encourage a more interesting discussion. I did not expect it to appear so profane.

 

[PinkFloyd]

Quote:

Here is a nice way of saying it: we have rules here; every single member agreed to those rules upon registration. If one does not like said rules, the door is open, don't let it hit you on the way out.

And members, longstanding and new, who have built this place over the years with their time and dedication (ie: this place only exists because of its members and the material the members contribute) have no say or opinions when it comes to the rules?? Is that what you're saying Zanth?

 

[Zanth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PinkFloyd /img/forum/go_quote.gif And members, longstanding and new, who have built this place over the years with their time and dedication (ie: this place only exists because of its members and the material the members contribute) have no say or opinions when it comes to the rules?? Is that what you're saying Zanth?

Well in an absolute sense, of course. This is Jude's house, we all play by his rules. That said, he is not a fascist dictator. He takes suggestions very seriously but again, if certain words are be used in filtering software then obviously this is an indication that such words are generally frowned upon and being that Head-fi strives towards reaching the greatest number of folks possible (or rather, being open to the greatest number possible) if words are hurting filters (not overly rigorous ones mind you, even pretty tame ones) then such words are prohibited. Again, PG style writing is appropriate, always has been and from what I gather, will be for the forseeable future.

Sure some words like the tried and true F word may in fact be a legal acronym the point is that it has morphed into something entirely different. Even if this word were to become quite acceptable in the future, there will always be some words that will remain off-limits because they have more serious connotations for others. If one really requires defaulting to these select words then that is a true shame that a dictionary/thesaurus can't be used to come up with something better. That isn't to say that a well placed cuss word can't be funny, but again...we are not trying to be funny here (though we don't prohibit humour of course). Restraint and common sense is all that is asked.

 

[Sleestack]

We need to take a "Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid" approach, you forgin corksuckers.

 

[mr_baseball_08]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blip /img/forum/go_quote.gif The simple fact is that profanity are simply words that people have chosen to object to because they violate some vague and empty cultural norm. They are words which identify others as members of an out-group, generally seen as inferior or uncivilized.

I think anyone with a bit of maturity realizes that "simple fact" is true, but there are words that society, as a whole, feels shouldn't be allowed in a PG environment. If you had kids, you wouldn't just walk around spouting out obscenities left and right, or at least I hope you wouldn't. And as a whole society that same rule holds true. Sure there are some out there that don't care what they do or say in front of their kids, but there are a lot more out there that DO care.

Anyway, while most here realize they are in fact, just words, the words do carry certain implications and have no place here in this PG setting. Plus, it's simply the rules, and the rule isn't that hard to follow.

 

[mrarroyo]

I honestly think this is being blown out of proportion, and this thread should be closed because it is not adding any value.

 

[mbriant]

Quote:

And members, longstanding and new, who have built this place over the years with their time and dedication (ie: this place only exists because of its members and the material the members contribute) have no say or opinions when it comes to the rules?? Is that what you're saying Zanth?

Taking only part of what was said can sometimes put things out of context. I believe Zanth further qualified the point he was trying to make with the following: Quote:

rules are the rules and if one doesn't agree with them fine, but disputing them openly is futile and breaking them equates to a warning, multiple warnings and/or a ban. The choice is left up to the individual.

Key words being "disputing them openly". Everyone's ideas, suggestions, and concerns are welcome and always have been. But not when presented in a confrontational or subversive manner designed to stir up trouble .... such as posting them publicly instead of simply bringing them to the owner's attention ... or worse .... by continuously breaking the existing rules .... rules as Zanth points out, that have already been agreed to when joining the site. Any member has the option of accepting or rejecting these rules at any time, ie: they can chose to participate under the existing rules or they can leave. Breaking the existing rules, being disruptive and/or continuously attempting to stir up public controversy and discord simply because an individual, any individual, feels things should operate exactly the way they want them to, is not an option.

Quote:

this place only exists because of its members and the material the members contribute

This is not completely true. Would you also say that telephone subscribers and the telephone calls they make are the only reason the telephone company exists? Do you not think that perhaps the person or people who built the company, finance the company on an ongoing basis at their own personal financial risk, make the company available to subscribers so they are able to make telephone calls, not to mention repair and maintain the equipment 24/7 so the subscribers are able to make calls, might be an important part of the telephone company's existence as well? Who sets the telephone company's rules and direction? Is it the owner(s) of the company or the subscribers? Of course every subscriber has a choice as to whether or not they want to operate under the telephone company's rules and regulations, and they are welcome to contact the management of the telephone company if they strongly disagree with a given policy or procedure ... but they are not allowed to disrupt other subscriber's calls, or offend other subscribers while doing so. Of course, if the telephone company is completely out of touch with the majority of their subscriber's wants and needs, they will lose more subscribers than they gain. That's what creates a balance.

No member of Head-fi, new or longstanding, is more important than the place as a whole. That includes all of us. That includes both you and me. Getting back to your original comment however, certainly everyone can have a say or an opinion with regards to the rules. There are limits however as to how we go about expressing and presenting our opinions.

 

[blip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr_baseball_08 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think anyone with a bit of maturity realizes that "simple fact" is true, but there are words that society, as a whole, feels shouldn't be allowed in a PG environment. If you had kids, you wouldn't just walk around spouting out obscenities left and right, or at least I hope you wouldn't. And as a whole society that same rule holds true. Sure there are some out there that don't care what they do or say in front of their kids, but there are a lot more out there that DO care. Anyway, while most here realize they are in fact, just words, the words do carry certain implications and have no place here in this PG setting. Plus, it's simply the rules, and the rule isn't that hard to follow.

I'll ignore the ad hominem because I want this to remain civil.

But what I'm still not getting here is an answer to the question why should profanity even exist? I can certainly follow that various concepts are inappropriate for good reasons... (though if we were to apply that standard strictly we would have to ban LOTS of words) but a very large percentage of what is considered profanity appears to be profane simply because everyone believes it to be. To phrase it in your terms, what if a profane word does not have an implication beyond its profanity?

For example, why should some words for describing the human antatomy be profane while others are not? According to your argument it is because of the implication that the word carries. But quite a few pieces of profanity (to my mind) do not have implications beyond their obvious meaning. Of course they could be used in unpleasant ways but so can any other word.

Yet we provide them with these peculiar strong but invisible meanings. Shouldn't we rigorously examine why we do this? Why we seem drawn to create these kinds of distinctions absent of an easily explainable implication or meaning?

Perhaps the root of the problem is in the term itself. To profane is fundamentally an act of religious significance... it is to somehow reduce or otherwise defame that which is holy. Perhaps it is an incoherent concept because it has become too abstracted from its roots?

 

[PinkFloyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth /img/forum/go_quote.gif He takes suggestions very seriously

Yes, maybe he does but not from the 45,659 membership... but from the same old handful of moderators (how many are there by the way... 5 of you? 10 of you? more?) It's the membership that make this place what it is... if they all left there would be nothing here! without active members this place has got nothing in back up, it's just a forum, please be careful with your " the door is open, don't let it hit you on the way out" comments Zanth... that door may swing back and hit you in the face.

 

[mbriant]

blip. Perhaps your argument should be taken up with civilization as a whole. While you're at it, ask them why we wear clothing on warm days.

.

 

[PinkFloyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbriant /img/forum/go_quote.gif No member of Head-fi, new or longstanding, is more important than the place as a whole.

Easy to say now you've got 45,000 punters. Wasn't the same when you had a couple of hundred. Same old, loyalty is short lived when the bucks start rolling in.

I hope I don't get banned for saying that but that's exactly how I see head-Fi these days.... it's all about money, in one way or another. It's a "member of the trade" in the biggest sense of the word

 

[blip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbriant /img/forum/go_quote.gif blip. Perhaps your argument should be taken up with civilization as a whole. While you're at it, ask them why we wear clothing on warm days. .

Point taken on some level. (Though that used to bug me to no end as well! It is so pointless...but then I read about skin cancer... now it all makes sense... also it has a certain atavistic appeal when you think about it)

Anyway, I am willing to chalk this one up to a sort of Camusian absurdism... perhaps the reason that profanity exists as a discrete concept is simply because it does exist. It has no rationality but perhaps when you examine anything closely enough rationality falls apart.

Still I continue wishing for an argument for the recognition of profanity as a discrete, justifiable phenomena. I've searched for one for a while now, and it just never seems to appear. Ah well.