Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl Monk, Perl Meditation

Re: Front Paging Profanity

by ignatz (Vicar)
on Oct 15, 2002 at 18:33 UTC ( #205456=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Front Paging Profanity

Back in my salad days I wrote this thing called the f___ filter for a web portal I ran. It allowed one to strip out profanity on the site. ( an Easter egg was that it could also increase all of the site's profanity ) Perhaps filtering the content through Regex::Common::profanity as a default option may be of interest.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Front Paging Profanity
by RMGir (Prior) on Oct 15, 2002 at 19:09 UTC
    s/as a default option/as an option/;
    and then I'll agree to it.

    I don't think profanity adds anything to the site, but I'm not interested in reading it through a filter that might inadvertently alter meaning, unless it's something like this :)

      a filter that might inadvertently alter meaning
      That reminds me of a story I heard about some javascript that mysteriously failed when run from home, even though the code ran just fine from work. It turned out that the childsafe filters installed at home were transforming the javascript variable 'HashItem' into 'Hash**em'. Doh!

      Another interesting case is the origin of the "word" medireview


      Seeing the Malkovich filter reminded me of one South Park episode where everything was identified as a Marklar.

      As for cussing on PM, I don't see it as a major issue because we're more concerned about the topic of the node rather than the words used to write it. However, considering that some monks here are viewing the site from work as a reference tool, I do believe that several of the more obscene words should not be used in node content. It would be a slap in the face for everyone here if a site visitor got fired or received disciplinary action from a supervisor because of a co-worker viewing something here as being offensive.
      If there is an OPTION you can toggle for this, then I'd support it. As long as the option is disabled by default (ie, swearing isn't filtered by default). If it became a hard rule that swearing was filtered out, I would leave.
Re: Re: Front Paging Profanity
by bart (Canon) on Oct 16, 2002 at 09:32 UTC
    Perhaps filtering the content through Regex::Common::profanity as a default option may be of interest.
    Before you get too enthousiastic about this approach, may I point you to this journal entry on

      WARNING: You must be at least 21 years old or authorized by a guardian to read this post.

        Sigh. There's nothing wrong with the module. Try using case insensitivity:
        /$RE{profanity}/i and print " contains profanity";
        And you'll need $RE{profanity}{contextual} to catch that seventh word, since there is nothing profane about members of the avian family Paridae.

        Oh, and the test will work better if you don't try to import the non-existent profanity subroutine.

        Surely, I can't be the only one who recognized the "seven dirty words..." sounds like a snack. You could have "tater tits" and "taco tits." Betcha can't eat just one!
        --- George Carlin

        ...and don't call me 'Shirley.'

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://205456]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chanting in the Monastery: (3)
As of 2023-03-24 02:38 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    Which type of climate do you prefer to live in?

    Results (60 votes). Check out past polls.