DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Fan Feedback Forum NSFW Tag?

Hi Forum Overseers,

I was wondering if we could include a NSFW tag so that we could post links which include NSFW language. Currently, posting links that include NSFW language gets that post and subsequent replies deleted. The goal of including a NSFW tag, would not give carte blanche on dropping curse words, but would rather inform forum members of when NSFW content was on the forum, so they could view it at their own home. I believe NSFW tags are needed as internet football is getting more democratized and filling a larger role on the internet. Unfortunately a lot of these people think they are on a football field and use flowery language to describe what they are seeing on the field. For example, last month there was a good hour long interview posted to this forum, with Joe Thomas, where JT drops a curse word(s?) over the course of the interview. The post was deleted due to forum rules. JT is not the only person on the internet talking about football while cursing, and we're losing this content on our forum. However, under a NSFW tag, we could properly inform forum users of NSFW content while allowing it on our forums. I would like to hear some feedback on if we could implement this into our forum. If we're in desperate need for BBCode, we could just repurpose the spoiler tags because This way the content can still be hidden while at work, but able to be seen on the forum. Again, I don't want the tag to become the place where you can work out your anger through aggressive profanity laced beat poetry, but a spot where you can place links to a video that might include a curse word.

Thanks for your consideration

There are also a lot of articles written by online media that contain quotes with expletives that are not censored in the story that we can't post. A NSFW tag would give us a way to post these into the forums. I'm sure you, refs, are talking about this in private, during your busy lives. I just wanted to add this as an example. I would also say that any NSFW article would be censored if the post was copied to the forum. Also I think any video that has NSFW language should not be embedded into the forum, but keep all NSFW material off-site. Again, thank you for your consideration.

First, I do understand your examples and I share the same frustration regarding certain articles and videos that are not able to be posted because of one or two word bombs of some sort contained in them.

This is going to take some discussion, however, for a lot of reasons.

The reason profanity is not allowed is not due to people getting in trouble at work. That was never once a consideration nor will it be now. I realize it can be used just to warn people so they can decide if they want to view or read. We, at one time, had quite a few pretty young posters and we still have a number of posters who don't even like the amount of "profanity" that we do allow now.

The biggest problem comes from where we draw the line. How much is too much? This will cause a lot more work for moderation, and frankly, with some of the current posters on this site, who are already so overly sensitive regarding having anything removed, we will hear that we remove their profanity posts because they are liberal, conservative, white, black, hispanic.....on and on and on. We don't have the time nor the inclination to add to that silliness.

So, yes, this will take some discussion. Perhaps some other posters can add their thoughts as well.

I almost posted a Twitter link to Landry's speech .... before I remembered that it would not be allowed.

It's news, but people can do a simple Google search and find such things.

I don't know if the board has the functionality to do so or not, but maybe an underage tag that would use a poster's age to eliminate their access to such material posted on the board. Maybe the board software has a way to show a link ... like the spoiler link .... where a poster would have to decide to click on it.

Just an idea rattling around my poor, abused brain.

How about this? Make anything that would be tagged with NSFW (or similar) be content specific to football and limit it to that? Posters still don't get to use profanity, and the codes of conduct still apply. I sounds like there is a consensus of sorts that there is some useful football information the Boards are not largely subject to because of the language restriction. I don't think anyone else can make that argument for other topics (i.e. politics).

As to the content of any such video, I'd think it ought to be around a PG-13 level (I believe a movie can drop 1 F-bomb and still maintain that rating) and I'm hoping I'm not giving too much credit to my fellow Dawgs when I say I think we all have a good sense of what PG-13 is. Clearly no repetitious usage of F-bomb variations, no N-words, nothing akin to Full Metal Jacket, nothing sexual, etc.

Also, videos posted are to be for informational purposes only and not used to directly attack others. For example: favorite DNC ad against Trump ended with him saying "And you can tell them to (blank) themselves"... there's no reason to post something like that aimed at CHS just because we disagree on what flavor Gatorade should be served on the sideline.

It should be orange.

Orange is the best. Although, the flavor is really strikingly different, in my opinion. Just don't do the blue stuff. It makes the next bathroom trip.......uh, odd?

Thread moved to the smack shack so I can educate you fools on the benefits of fruit punch via a verbal waterboarding.

Can we all agree Gatorade in the glass bottles was the best?

You lost me at, "Can we all agree".

Mostly you need to decide what the rating for this forum is.

http://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings_guide.aspx

Or rating like Tv/Movies. Then people accept the rules if there is a definition somewhere.

And not have it be ambiguous.

Like on my games we are PG13. So, they can only have up to PG13 topics and swears. My main rule about swears is that if the FCC says it's ok on regular TV, then it's ok on my game. As long as it's not used excessively or directed at each other.

And these are games with lots of teenagers on them. Now, mind you, there are a lot of people on my games who complain about things that are PG13 because they expect a G rated experience.

Example: Username "Daddy's Brothel" got lots of complaints.

They just need to be told nooooo, it's PG13.

2 cents.

Double post.

Bumping because it's Highlight reel season, and the best highlight reels have a lot of cursing

That's not my/DT's problem.

It is if people post highlight reels that include the n word and get banned for it. It might not be your problem, but it would be DT's.

Personally, I don't think this should be a DT problem. The idea that kids are reading forums, especially a Browns forum is hilariously antiquated. Maybe in 2005 it was a different story, but nowadays every kid uses reddit to find a forum. And if anyone has been on /r/browns you'll quickly understand that cursing is the primary language used.

At the end of the day, this is a discussion board, so I believe the question is rather simplistic. Should we try to foster conversations or should we stomp them out?

I like the "no profanity" stance of this board. I don't feel I'm missing out on a great deal of info because of it. Some people always push the limits, and the refs probably have their hands full just managing the bickering and whining here....let alone if they had to monitor video links, twitter feeds and articles.

Personally, I think the "no profanity" rule was due to the forum being on the teams actual website.

Now that DT is and has been for a while not associated with the Browns website - you could make the case that it should be changed.

But again, personally, I like the no profanity rule. I personally its one of the reasons I prefer this board over others. JMO

It's not broke, let's not fix it.

Agreed.

I don't want to hear a lot of swearing.

Good point, we should break it first.

You first.

The No Profanity Rule is Nice, Go to Some Other Teams Message Boards and See How Nasty They Get

It’s not the inability to use profanity that is the biggest reason actual conversation doesn’t take place.

Yeah it's because people can't read on the forums and enter topics with their mind made up.

At no point do I advocate that the NSFW tag allows users to curse. Just post material that features a small amount of cursing. Whether that's an article with someone saying the s word or a highlight reel of a draft prospect with the n-word in the background.

I don't believe that users should curse, but I also think that an article or video that includes light cursing won't make Allah split this forum in two and send us straight to hell.

I get it though. Reading is hard :eyeroll:

And this is not a response to DD, just a response to this forum.

Once again I see how pointless conversation is on this forum. Refs lock the thread.

Frankly, I want nothing to do with a message board that uses childish, so called "adult" language.

There have been many different Browns boards throughout the years that were no holds barred as far as language goes. I knew people on those boards, and went and checked them out. I just don't want to see and or hear F-Bombs, and other such language. It's just not my thing. I never got started on those boards, because I don't like that kind of language.

Just to expound upon my $0.02 worth.

I don't want cursing either, but I think that people spreading rumors and telling lies is far worse of a crime that profanity and those two things are allowed. Just yesterday, we had a poster talk about how one of his fellow officers thought that Big Ben was most likely a rapist.

That is far worse than someone cussing.

Big Ben is a rapist.

but that is an opinion , you cant regulate someones opinion just because you dont agree with it

No, it isn't and wouldn't.
It isn't a problem at all.

If it is a problem in any way, it is that it's a problem for the folks that deliberately post things knowing that they don't belong here. It is NOT a problem for DT and DT refuses to even attempt to see it in a light where it is.

I think we're saying the same thing in different ways. It's your problem, because you have to moderate the forum to your standards, but ultimately the person who breaks the rule by linking to swearing has to suffer the consequences. What your semantic definition of problem is differs from mine, but conceptually we agree. Anyway, you can lock the thread now.