When will Mudcat clean up its act?

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 09 Aug 10 - 10:39 AM

I wonder, how does all this filthier-than-thou stuff fit in with the hysterical hullabaloo caused when I defended someone's right to call me a c**t without having their posts deleted? Excommunications were called for, cringing apologies demanded & I received some very colourful Pontifical Missives (to say the least) for the sort of thing that is chuckled over by fans of Catspaw49, many of whom, said Pontiff included, were in the forefront of the righteous outrage.

For those who missed this fascinating episode of Mudcat Folklore checkout the True Traditional Music thread which was split off by Papal Decree into the True Traditional Music-uncivilised annex.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Aug 10 - 10:23 AM

You know.... I wonder if AOL and others bothered to block 'teats', which is the correct spelling of what they were trying to block.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 09 Aug 10 - 07:26 AM

name of the site is Mudcat. Note: mud is dirty hence dirty words perfectly acceptable.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Tootler
Date: 09 Aug 10 - 07:15 AM

Some years ago a member of a forum I used to belong to (I forget which now) spent a great deal of effort trying (unsuccessfully) to persuade AOL to unblock his website in the USA. It had been blocked because one page contained the word "tits" times. He was an ornithologist and the tits in question were members of a species of small bird widespread in the Northern Hemisphere - including N.America, though they are known by other names there.

More info on tits in Wikipedia.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Aug 10 - 01:43 PM

Peter K: "Well... If it hadn't been for the phantom Sean Mc, I would never have learnt that "tits" is banned from American radio..."

....But not from the silver screen!! ..Ahh, sweet mysteries of life. 'Udderly' amazing!

GfS

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: kendall
Date: 08 Aug 10 - 12:05 PM

Yawn

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Aug 10 - 11:57 AM

'tits' is merely one of the words in the famous comedy routine by George Carlin..

"The seven dirty words are seven English-language words that comedian George Carlin first listed in 1972 in his monologue "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television". At the time, the words were considered highly inappropriate and unsuitable for broadcast on the public airwaves in the United States, whether radio or television. As such, they were avoided in scripted material, and bleep-censored in the rare cases in which they were used; broadcast standards differ in different parts of the world, then and now, although most of the words on Carlin's original list remain taboo on American broadcast television as of 2010. The list was not an official enumeration of forbidden words, but rather was compiled by Carlin. Nonetheless, a radio broadcast featuring these words led to a Supreme Court decision that helped establish the extent to which the federal government could regulate speech on broadcast television and radio in the United States."

(from Wikipedia)



The problem in the US is that for a long while, much broadcasting was commercial, and sponsors were OH so very worried about offending the uptight 'Christian' audience. At one time, TV programs showed married couples using twin beds, with all sorts of silly rules about what was said and who could touch or kiss whom...and where. Many of these rules have been relaxed or ignored, but one still hears 'bleeping' of 'naughty' words on news programs and prime-time 'sponsored' shows.
   Some comedians make a point of using words they KNOW will be bleeped, and at least one has cute little images flashed over his mouth...presumably to keep lips-readers from being offended. *grin*

Yes, there IS still a lot of tiptoeing around certain subjects on American radio & TV, but stuff is creeping in, especially late at night, and it's really sad what gratuitous crap is being foisted on us as the boundaries are pushed by hucksters with no taste.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 08 Aug 10 - 10:39 AM

Well... If it hadn't been for the phantom Sean Mc, I would never have learnt that "tits" is banned from American radio. (It really is?) So some little purpose has been served by his entertaining jape.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: sciencegeek
Date: 08 Aug 10 - 09:47 AM

Dear GUEST,Guest from Sanity - PM
Date: 08 Aug 10 - 03:00 AM

So, ONE day, and for ONE day only, Sean Mc, opens a thread (this one), and it goes on, for another 161 posts, mine will make 162, and Sean is never heard from again!.......interesting. Sounds like a frantic and hysteric journey to the center of nothing!

GfS

I too pondered on how worked up folks got on this thread, while the originator & one other were barely heard from.... HOWEVER, it does point out one or more "hot buttons" that people around the world same in common. Mudcat - thanks to the worldwide web- has an international membership & audience. While cultural values may vary, people learn at a young age what is or is not appropriate in their situation. What they do not seem to be taught is to recognize that their values may differ significantly from others and that difference is not a "bad thing".

Our "disgusted" posters may only have been intending to stir up the pot... but it is never a bad thing to go back an revisit one's assumption/position and ensure ones self that it still makes as much sense as it did before. I applaud Max for his clear sighted commitment to an ideal that I happen to share, not because it adheres to some "party line", but because it seems the most logical and fair minded.   So, thank you, Max.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 08 Aug 10 - 05:52 AM

Well that's you fucked for being both hurt AND offended mate :)

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: gnu
Date: 08 Aug 10 - 05:39 AM

I apopolgize for my "piss poor" choice of words in my 07 Aug 10 - 02:29 PM post. As pointed out to me by PM, there is a big difference between being "offended" and being "hurt".

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Amos
Date: 08 Aug 10 - 05:36 AM

Sounds like a frantic and hysteric journey to the center of nothing!

That's a beautiful description for it!! LOL!

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 08 Aug 10 - 04:38 AM

I suspect Sean Mc is an alias for an existing member. Why else would a thread which belongs in BS, have stayed in the music related section for so long?

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Aug 10 - 03:00 AM

So, ONE day, and for ONE day only, Sean Mc, opens a thread (this one), and it goes on, for another 161 posts, mine will make 162, and Sean is never heard from again!.......interesting. Sounds like a frantic and hysteric journey to the center of nothing!

GfS

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Amos
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 09:58 PM

I think it is a courteous thing not to make thread titles seem vulgar or ribald unnecessarily, and not to use harsh terms where more precise ones will serve.

Not to say I don't occasionally resort to vulgarities in a fit of colloquial creativity. Sheet-fahr, boy, no question!


A

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 07:55 PM

No censorship is required. Decency in behavior is suggested.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 06:12 PM

We're only discussing the bylaws....vol.4, article 27, paragraph 3, sub-section 19, lines 3-17.

You HAVE read those, haven't you?

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 05:34 PM

Are we really discussing how Mudcat is run? Usually threads that do that, get shut down pronto!

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: gnu
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 02:56 PM

I am guilty of same, Jeri. But, only in response to (percieived) provocation. If I ever grow up and lose my Irish/French temper... oh, who am I kidding? Myself? I was brought up to never back down and to come big or stay home. I am a gnu, eh? >;-)

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: GUEST,Bert
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 02:55 PM

Sean Mc, Mudcat does have something for you

Here

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Jeri
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 02:41 PM

The "one simple rule" is a lot harder for some to follow than keeping certain words out of their vocabulary. The latter involves reigning in language and the former, reigning in their emotions such as outrage, scorn.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: gnu
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 02:29 PM

I've said it many times before...

The Mudcat Café is the best Café because the "coffee" is free and and so is the "speech"... thanks to Max. His dedication to free speech with only one simple rule has made this community what it is. And I, frankly, am darn happy that he has done so.

Fact is, if Max did not do so, far more people would leave than the odd (and I mean that BOTH ways) affronted visitor.

Here's your hat and coat and come again when you can't stay so long.

PS... if children are offened, you are a piss poor parent.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Howard Jones
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 01:20 PM

Mousethief, that had occurred to me but I doubted whether many people wanting to use an internet forum would rely on using a public PC - but I may be wrong.

Surely there is a way of getting individual sites unblocked if you can satisfy the library authorities that it is legitimate?

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: mousethief
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 11:12 AM

Howard -- the exception to your scenarios is people who are surfing from the public library and don't have a computer at home. Probably not a lot of those visiting Mudcat, I know.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Tim Leaning
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 06:58 AM

Sean MC
I agree its disgusting.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Howard Jones
Date: 07 Aug 10 - 05:58 AM

I think the question about visitors to the site being blocked by certain words in thread titles is a red herring. Why are they being blocked? It seems to me there are two possibilities:

The first is that the content settings in your browser or security software on your own PC are blocking the site. The solution is simple - change the settings.

The other is that the site is blocked by restrictions set by your employer on a PC at work. However in most companies private browsing is not allowed, or at least is strictly controlled. Again, the answer is simple - you probably shouldn't be looking at Mudcat at work in the first place, so accept the restrictions and wait until you get home.

Neither situation is a good reason to change the policy.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: katlaughing
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 10:14 PM

I was just asking, Joe. As BillD said, we're not talking about euphemizing the lyrics.

When the Run Nigger Run thread title came up, years ago, many of us were concerned about what the casual visitor might think of the site if they saw that first thing.

Max, you may say that words don't hurt people, but I don't agree, esp. when it comes to younger folks. Words can be very hurtful, esp. when written; with the written word there is a permanency which gives an everlasting effect.

Regardless, I do respect the scholarship here and the authenticity of the age-old ballads, sea songs, etc., but like Bill, I'd just as soon see some care taken in the titles only of threads.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 08:50 PM

Oh, you're in fine form tonight, Amos....

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Amos
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 08:47 PM

Max:

I agree with your perspective, whole heartedly. I don't use four-letter words unless I am using them as intended, to describe scatological functions, sexual appetites or actions, or peaks of momentary disapprobation. I use the to encourage perverse objects such as frozen bults to cooperate with me. I use them to chastise unexpected obstacles such as doorknobs or small boulders when I encounter them too enthusiastically. But I don't use them to --for example-- describe mini-cephalic obstructionist or reactionary prepubescent pea-headed attitudes on the part of the less than bright. That would be unkindly.


A

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Brian May
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 07:51 PM

Well said Max and thanks to Joe too.

There are just too many places, both real and virtual, where 'freedom' is a joke. (See above referring to the Banjo site, the Acoustic Guitar forum is similarly afflicted).

Undeniably political, but in UK there is actually legislation to prevent the indigenous population stating simple truths.

Sadly, that constraint does not apply to so many of those that the law was originally intended to protect. It's left us in a situation where 'we' have fewer rights and subject to outrageous exploitation. Self confessed terrorists exhorting hate and intolerance at the taxpayers' expense

This site makes me feel better because I can just 'say' what I think. I don't usually swear on forums, there's little need to do so.

BUT, I abhor being told I can't do something - especially by sanctimonious, judgemental, busy-bodies who presumably go through life wincing at every comment they hear in the street.

So, well done - you'll rarely see me swear, but thanks for the freedom to do so if I feel so moved, it IS appreciated.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 07:09 PM

Our language is an interesting beast. Rafflesbear speaks of swear words, although we really aren't talking here of swearing at all. In fact, I can't think right off of any situation where people swear objectionably any more. I found a good list - the words people are objecting to here are profane, obscene, blasphemous or scatological (traditionally); and also racist and sexist (in these modern times).

I guess for me, the only words I find objectionable are hateful words.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Rafflesbear
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 06:14 PM

your house, your houserules but the suggestion that the details of the histories of our lands and lives can only be communicated properly with swear words in the thread titles of the music section of Mudcat is interesting

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 06:06 PM

Thanks, Max. I've never had a disagreement with Bill D before, and I was wavering....

Kat, the "PG13" tags, much as I hate them, are only present when they are inserted. They aren't automatically triggered by naughty words. If we find that people are getting blocked because of bad-word filters, THEN we can insert the PG13 tags. So far, I have seen no need, but we developed the tags in case a need arises.

If you've studied sea songs to any extent, you know how hard it is to get the actual words of real sea songs. Generations of collectors obfuscated the genuine lyrics behind their euphemisms. The singers themselves changed lyrics because they didn't want to offend upper-class Caucasian collectors. And to some extent, what we have left is entirely suitable for children's records, but hardly a realistic collection of sea songs.

That's why I'm sensitive about euphemizing folk songs - because then it starts looking like it's the right thing to do, to obscure reality behind what we think reality ought to be. For those who love folk music, cultivating the ethic of euphemization is dangerous path to take.

I prefer to a call a spade a spade - which, by the way, is NOT a racist remark.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Max
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 05:30 PM

Blame me, not the moderators. It is my rule.

I am not careless, thoughtless or crass. It is with much thought and great purpose that it is so.

I am sorry that you are offended and I do regret that we cannot provide a more suitable environment for you.

Just as I cannot revise the histories of our lands and lives, although not proud of some of it, I cannot leave the details of it on this site behind asterisks and bleeps.

Words don't hurt people, forgetting them does.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: katlaughing
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 05:08 PM

I think the slight 'euphemization' of just titles, with full text available INSIDE a thread, is minor.....

Exactly.

Joe, does the PG13 filter out racist terms or just the usual fuck etc.?

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 05:00 PM

Joe...when I worked in grocery stores many years ago, we were told to take ALL complaints seriously and treat ANY 'store problems' we saw the same way. His feeling was "if a potential customer is frustrated and disappointed and goes away, we have no way of tracking what happened and can't address their concerns."

In the same way, a survey of problems encountered by regulars really doesn't deal with or anticipate problems which 'might' have occurred with those who found the 'door closed' and never came back.
(It reminds me of the sign "If you can't read this sign, call 1-800-555-1234")

"...75 days from 1996-2005." And since?

"I would guess that most people first get to Mudcat by Googling the lyrics of a song ...etc..
That 'might' be so.... but maybe we ought to worry a bit about whether our guesses were accurate? *grin*

"..euphemization is far more repulsive to me."
*shrug*...as is obvious, I think the slight 'euphemization' of just titles, with full text available INSIDE a thread, is minor.....

Ok...I've said all I can....I'll put the soapbox back in the corner now...

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 03:18 PM

Hi, Bill-
When we last visited this issue in 2005, I counted the days since Mudcat's inception that the word "fuck" had appeared on the Forum Menu - 75 days from 1996-2005. I asked who had been barred from Mudcat because of profanity on the Forum Menu, and very few said they had actually been blocked. We have devised a solution for the few "regulars" who encounter the problem. If they're blocked, all they have to do is Google Mudcat FAQ and use the Filter in the first message of the FAQ.
Therefore, I must conclude that it isn't much of a problem.

Now, I admit that some people on library computers might be blocked from access to the Forum Menu at times - but I would guess that most people first get to Mudcat by Googling the lyrics of a song and finding it in a thread, not the Forum menu. The people who come to Mudcat through the Forum Menu, are generally people who have been here before.
Therefore, I must again conclude that it isn't much of a problem.

I still cringe when I see "fuck" and "cunt" and "nigger" on the Forum Menu (and I cringe when I type these words now), but euphemization is far more repulsive to me.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: MikeL2
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 02:33 PM

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: sciencegeek - PM
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 01:18 PM

Hi sciencegeek

Couldn't have put it better myself.

Each to his own and if anyone doesn't like what the moderators do.....well you know where the door is !!

cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 02:07 PM

color me obstinately logical and tedious....but....

Joe...re: "If **you** (my emphasis) are on a computer that blocks you from Mudcat because of profanity, Google Mudcat FAQ....etc."

How, (he asks guilelessly), is that supposed to help my favorite example of a casual user who tries to drop in, but can't GET in to read your well-done explanation, because there is a thread with 'fuck' in the title showing for a few days?

If one is a regular user, and knows the issue, and just happens to have a temporary problem on a 'protected' computer, and has read the FAQ or remembers this thread...why, all well & good. Otherwise, they get the idea that the **site** is on a forbidden list....and.... *shrug*.

(Before 14 more folks make comments about free speech and for or against censorship, I repeat...I am NOT advocating censorship of lyrics or discussion, but merely looking for a way to avoid filtering programs from keeping out those who don't KNOW what is here.)

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: sciencegeek
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 01:18 PM

It is pretty evident that there is absolutely no way to please everyone all the time - or even most of the time, so the obvious fall back position is that when a site is formed and is moderated, that the owners of the site make the ground rules. They set up rules that conform to their beliefs and sensibilities.

No one is forced to visit their site or agree with their standards, nor should they be expected to conform to anyone eles's standards... unless there is jail time associated with non-conformance. ( joke here, guys)

Just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder - so is "inappropriate" language (or whatever else is being objected to. And anyone who is truely upset by some of the threads on this site is perfectly free to go elsewhere to find less "disturbing" material. Enjoy the view from your bellybutton.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 01:00 PM

I thought Cnut was a Danish king who couldn't stem the flow of the tide... I think I see the connection!

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: TopcatBanjo
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 12:00 PM

Chortle. As a relative newbie to Mudcat I am quite taken aback by how much is permitted here. Swearing doesn't bother me (I use far too much "bad" language myself, must try to cut down) but don't often feel the need to do so much online.

I'm probably more taken aback by what seem to be the complete lack of limits on here in terms of being able to say WTF you like to anyone with seemingly no consequences, in terms of banning/threads or posts being deleted etc.

Talking of UK/US forum characteristics, in my (admittedly fairly limited) experience the Americans tend to be far, far more puritanical. For instance, on the Banjo Hangout you can't even say "damn" or "hell", much less anything stronger!! And in general they get very touchy about what you might call robust debate, which makes it all rather anodyne and boring, although there is lots of good stuff in terms of musical resource, playing advice etc. On the other end of the scale a motorcycling forum I used to be on a lot is even more "robust" than here in terms of swearing and arguments. But it does have software which blocks "profanity" but then people just write "cnut" and so forth...!

Different strokes eh?

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 04:32 AM

"An English TV program run on the BBC features an English chef(?) who can't utter a sentence without 'fuck' or 'fucking' in it. "

And I refuse to watch ANY program with that Foul Mouth C*** in it!

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Monique
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 02:39 AM

Kids being chocked, true stories…
My sister started teaching some 35 odd years ago in a class of 3 years old in a neighborhood where the kids would say "bugger off, you cunt" to one another as easily as others say "Hi, how are you doing?" Once one of her student was sobbing desperately "What happened?" and the little girl pointed at another one "She called me naughty!"
A friend of mine teaching in pre-school (age 3) asked one of her boys "Where do you live?" (in French "Où tu habites?" pronounced "où t'habites" when you speak fast) and the boy said "Là!" ("There!") pointing at his groin because he'd understood "Où ta bite?" (Where('s) your cock?)
In both cases, guess who was shocked!
IMO many people tend to want to protect their own sweet vision of childhood. If they want to protect the actual children why don't they use some parental control software and/or do they let the children surf on the internet unattended?

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Aug 10 - 12:33 AM

I thought this thread was "deja vu all over again," but I couldn't find the previous discussion until just now. You'll see other threads on the subject in the crosslinks at the top of this thread. We came up with the PG13 tags in the Bawdy song thread. We were not able to get a permanent, cookie-enabled PG13 block, but we did work up a filter that will do the trick. If you are on a computer that blocks you from Mudcat because of profanity, Google Mudcat FAQ and go to the FAQ page. I added this to the first message of the FAQ in 2005.

The Filter (searching by thread title) Toward the top of the Mudcat Forum main menu (click here), you'll see a "filter" box - put an appropriate word in the box and set the age to whatever is appropriate to cover the period you want to search. Click the grey "reset" button, and all threads with that word in the title should appear (a "thread" is a series of forum messages, posted on a specific topic). Here's a filter box you can try: Filter Age 1 Days -------------- 1 Day 3 Days 7 Days 14 Days 30 Days 90 Days 180 Days 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years All Filter Out Help Note: The forum menu is set to display all threads for which messages have been posted in the last 24 hours. If your thread has disappeared, please don't start a new one. Just use the "filter" or "search the forum" links on the main forum menu, and pull your thread up and post a new message in that thread - that will bring your thread up for another 24 hours. Your new message can be just the word "refresh" if you have nothing else to add. If you're viewing Mudcat from work or a library or another location that has a "profanity filter" on its computers, you may not be able to view our Forum Menu if we happen to have a so-called "naughty word" in a thread title. We've tried to tag these titles "pg13." If your profanity filter blocks your access, try putting pg13 in the Filter box and check the "filter out" box.

"Filter Out" Filter: Age: 3 Days -------------- 1 Day 3 Days 7 Days 14 Days 30 Days 90 Days 180 Days 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years All Filter Out

---

Or as a link you can bookmark:

http://www.mudcat.org/threads.cfm?Title=pg13&Age=1&submit=Refresh&FilterOut=1

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: mousethief
Date: 05 Aug 10 - 11:54 PM

Maybe Lawrence Welk fans have something he would like.

Mitch "Sing along with Mitch" Miller just died. I'm sure there is a resurgence of interest in Mitch, and maybe there's a new website with a policy about language that would suit our tender noob.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 05 Aug 10 - 11:28 PM

Just noticed this thread. So someone who has all of 41 posts here at Mudcat is offended and wants the site to change?

What hubris.

Please, someone help the man find a site more suited to him. Maybe Lawrence Welk fans have something he would like.

SRS

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 10 - 11:22 PM

The incarnation of that intellectual entropy is the movie "Idiocracy".

A

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: mousethief
Date: 05 Aug 10 - 10:34 PM

An English TV program run on the BBC features an English chef(?) who can't utter a sentence without 'fuck' or 'fucking' in it.

But why? It's just becoming meaningless fluff. What are people going to use when they REALLY need to show they're angry? They say that it's possible the universe will end in a blah heat-death soup where everything is exactly the same temperature and consistency and nothing happens or changes. Our language is growing that way now. As we overuse hot words we make them cooler and cooler, until they all die a heat death and we all speak in a monotone and have no way to show excitement or anger or any other strong emotion. It's like 1984 but we're doing it to ourselves.

Subject: RE: When will Mudcat clean up its act?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 Aug 10 - 10:04 PM

Kids seem to know a heck of a lot more about bodily uses and language describing bodily contact than I do.
Who or what is protected by 'clean' language nowadays?
Anyone using the current complete Oxford English Dictionary will find an entire column on fuck.
An English TV program run on the BBC features an English chef(?) who can't utter a sentence without 'fuck' or 'fucking' in it.