This thread is a perfect example of people on two sides of an issue, each side making a valid point, but neither side really listening to the other, and proceeding to refute the invalid point that they think the other is making.

One side says "Constant repeating of a few standard dirty words in lieu of any creativity in expressing yourself is low class, boring, and sets a bad example for the kids who might be reading the posts."

The other side says "But Mudcat should be an open forum, and any attempt to censor it would ruin it."

Both of the above statements are true, in my own personal opinion. But the propositions are not mutually exclusive. So could we decide which proposition we're actually debating?

Peter.