chad_sux wrote:Ahh..so it isn't censored if you use bold letters. Well, that's fucking fantastic. What a bunch of cunts that run this site now. Glad you cock slappers got what you wanted. Hope your shit crashes and burns
I was going to tag your post with "pottymouth" but "pottymouth" is not permitted in this community.
Dolf wrote:
Hmm...Anderton posts what amounts to "deal with it".
And people are surprised?
Give me a better option, and I'll post that instead.
I asked this afternoon about how we could relax this, and the filter has already been modified to be less stringent than it was originally.
Some words were censored before with vBulletin, which you probably didn't know because you didn't use those words. On vB we were really hardcore (let's see if that gets bleeped) about only two things: No objectionable words in thread titles or sigs, because the actual text in posts mostly flies under the radar but thread titles and sigs don't. I'm hoping we can revert to a policy more like that.
Also, I double-checked about the Google/ads thing because I was only going on information I'd been told. Several people verified that was in the fact the case. I asked how come the AOL chat rooms and other sites are ten times worse and nothing ever happens to them. The answer was "they don't serve Google ads."
Just because I accept something doesn't mean I have to like it, nor does it mean I can't try to come up with some alternative solution. Nor does it mean I'm the only one here trying to find alternatives.
)
After being around for 2.0 and all the forum crashes, I can understand some frustration and agree even as a poster who doesn't swear all the time that something like a rated PG forum would be lame when it comes to some of the humor that has been a part of the forum probably since it started.
But from reading many of Craig's posts over time, IMO he's a cool person and seems to be trying to make the best of what's going on right now. IMO 2.0 was much worse, partly because it was also very slow and much less readable. The color scheme will probably be able to easily be changed or maybe customized by the user (hopefully), and some formatting changes could go a long way such as the quote function being improved.
Originally Posted by isvoid
Anderton wrote:
Dolf wrote:Hmm...Anderton posts what amounts to "deal with it".
And people are surprised?
Give me a better option, and I'll post that instead.
I asked this afternoon about how we could relax this, and the filter has already been modified to be less stringent than it was originally.
Some words were censored before with vBulletin, which you probably didn't know because you didn't use those words. On vB we were really hardcore (let's see if that gets bleeped) about only two things: No objectionable words in thread titles or sigs, because the actual text in posts mostly flies under the radar but thread titles and sigs don't. I'm hoping we can revert to a policy more like that.
Also, I double-checked about the Google/ads thing because I was only going on information I'd been told. Several people verified that was in the fact the case. I asked how come the AOL chat rooms and other sites are ten times worse and nothing ever happens to them. The answer was "they don't serve Google ads."
Just because I accept something doesn't mean I have to like it, nor does it mean I can't try to come up with some alternative solution. Nor does it mean I'm the only one here trying to find alternatives.
The two previously censored words I knew of were a certain C-word, i.e. **bleep** (<- yes, also censored here) and retard, which funnily enough isn't amongst the 780462570645 words censored here.
But yeah, you've always come across as someone actually wanting to make this place (and the old forum, and the 2.0 catastrophe) work for the users, even if your influence can only reach so far. So thanks for the efforts. 
![634296_stock-photo-sexy-young-man-musician-guitar-player-on-brown[1].jpg](/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/964i47FA1DC987EC5BE7/image-size/original?v=mpbl-1&px=-1 "634296_stock-photo-sexy-young-man-musician-guitar-player-on-brown[1].jpg")
Anderton wrote:
Flogger59 wrote:Welp, at least it loads. I figger a week before we're back to normal.
That is such a wrong attitude. What you're SUPPOSED to think is that less than 24 hours after launching a complex website on a new platform that was rushed into operation because of frustration with how the previous forums were, everything is supposed to be perfect and all the change requests people have asked for will have been implemented. Also, that nothing will ever improve or change, that I'm personally responsible, and MF has daily meetings about how best to kill the site.
Please re-edit your post to have the proper attitude.
I want it all, and I want it now. Every new feature possible, but don't change the look or functionality. Everything louder than everything else. And **bleep**.
Howzzat?
Help Desk