monkdiscuss
princepawn
I think most people took my original node in the wrong light. Did I say that he should remove his signature? The person who reaped the node ([mrpilot]) did so with the reason
"Not the way to handle this sort of thing" as if I was trying to get him to remove his signature... I was simply airing my opinion. And wanted to field others.
<p>
And this is clearly an item for <i>Perl Monks discussion</i>. It involves a <i>monk</i> (or two, if you add the posting party) and obscenity is certainly an item of <i>discussion</i>... in fact what are the rules regarding obscenities?
<p>
And why did others not get to vote on whether or not to preserve my node? At least one person concurred with my offense to the signature and <code>/msg</code>'ed me with a <code>++</code>
<p>
Please dont allow your personal opinions to influence what is clearly a monestery matter of great importance (read: dont go around deleting nodes when you have no good reason to do so other than your own opinion, which is clearly flawed). Oh did I hear the word 'monastery'? Have I not been told this is a place to come in work and peace and harmony? What happens when things become disharmonious? Do you squash me with authority? Do you discuss it? Ask yourself these questions.
<h3>on to the discussion</h3>
I find the following text:
<blockquote> MJD says "you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo!"
</blockquote>
unacceptably offensive on two grounds
<ol>
<li>It uses the word "shit"
<li>It makes a negative and insensitive reference to the mentally handicapped (retardo)
</ol>
<p>
If you want to filter out obscene words, I recommend my own [cpan://Regexp::Common::profanity_us]
<P>
<div class="pmsig"><div class="pmsig-10395">
<hr>
<small><i>Carter's compass: I know I'm on the right track when by deleting something, I'm adding functionality</i>
</small>
</div></div>