I note that postings to the forum are automatically editted, substituting words that may be found offensive by some readers. I am unhappy that this is done without annotating the substitute in some way, as this would not only be perfectly acceptable but would help readers to make sense of what is posted.

The lack of annotation means that the substituted words take on the meaning of the words that they replace. If I refer to "people" in a posting, readers are encouraged to assume that I drafted a quite different word.

I suggest that the list of substitute words that now carry an offensive meaning in this forum be published, without having to list those that they replace. This would enable us to avoid them, in order not to perhaps convey a meaning that we did not intend.

I see that this substitution is in effect when using the Preview feature. One may therefore have fun seeing what one can "get away with" and in constructing quite bizarre sentences by allowing the substitution to be made. Members seeking to entertain may wish to reply in response to this challenge.

Here's a list to get you started.... (don't click if of a nervous disposition.)

Thank you.

Many potentially offensive words and phrases on the list are considered acceptable and others are substituted by words and phrases that one would be unlikely to use for any other purpose.

Putting that list through the Preview feature reveals that the following words and phrases should not be used in the forum by those not intending to be offensive.

"not a very nice person", "nuts", "person", "rubbish", "sleeper", "thingy", "very *friendly* person"

The first of these seems highly suitable to convey an undeclared degree of offensiveness. Whoever compiled the translation was apparently unaware of litotes.

---

Some experimentation shows that one may refer to the common diminutive of Richard and a small cut on the skin but not a male bird. This provides further evidence to show that only American sensibilities are being protected.

irrelevant wrote on Feb 8^th, 2009 at 11:07am:

Here's a list to get you started.... (don't click if of a nervous disposition.)

Intersting - golliwog isn't there!

All substitute words are now prefixed and suffixed with '«' and '»' respectively.

Thank you Dave.

We can now say that some people are - without causing confusion.

I had not expected this to be within your powers. Can you add words like Ofc*m and PhoneP*yPlus to the list, with suitable alternatives?

ROFL....

Interesting that quoting a message shows the original word in the edit box...

I must therefore apologise for any offence caused by use of a word that I feel can be acceptable in general public discourse, depending on how it is applied. We are mistaken in thinking that there are some simple rules that can be followed, when everything depends on a finely-drawn understanding of context.

It's not even a very accurate substitution. Surely it should say «illegitimate children» or something similar?

No, that is the whole point. In this case, the offensive meaning (if any) is caused by the slur on the status of one or more particular individuals, at whom the comment is directed, not by the word itself. As it now has a more general usage as a meaningless insult, due to more liberal attitudes to family structures, to substitute it as suggested would only refine the offensiveness.

Words do matter, but only as the tools we use to convey ideas, which is what matters more.