b a t m a n

[Shambles]

Just wondering why sm.org's censored word list is transforming the characters "a t m a" (remove the spaces) into a capital "I"?

As in "b a t m a n" (remove the spaces)   

It does this even within [code] tags

[Illori]

this was changed due to a user that would not stop using that word in reference to themselves.

[Arantor]

Wow. Who was that?

[Illori]

https://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?action=profile;u=360055

[Shambles]

Ah yes, I remember that member. Kept referring to himself in the 3rd party.

Wow. Who was that?

Spooky that you should post here - I was trying to refer to you in an earlier thread as "b a t m a n" (but changed it to superman).

[Arantor]

He was an... interesting person.

Also, just assume I read everything

[Shambles]

On an unrelated matter, these post times are interesting...

[Arantor]

SMF doesn't order by time, but by creation. There are circumstances on the cusp of a second where race conditions occur that can cause this. But it's pretty rare.

[LiroyvH]

Might have to replace that avatar for a DeLorean.

[Shambles]

Good one 

[Steve]

this was changed due to a user that would not stop using that word in reference to themselves.

Since that user hasn't been here in over a year, can this be changed?

[Irisado]

Considering he has a habit of dropping back in at random intervals, I think that we're better off leaving things as they are.

[shawnb61]

Was it really that bad?  Who cares if he refers to  himself as the Caped Crusader?

If the posts are bad, moderate them.  If not, who cares?

In the meanwhile, everyone else is robbed of one descriptive metaphor/refetence/archetype.

I'd get rid of it.   Just my thoughts...

[Arantor]

He must *really* have annoyed people with his posting. I've only ever seen this place do that kind of censoring in relation to one other person in the past, and that's ancient history.

[Shambles]

I've had a word with Shambles and Shambles agreed.

Now, if Shambles weren't to agree then Shambles and I would have to agree to disagree.

Shambles might disagree with that agreement though.

[Gluz]

Not even close to what Shambles posted. It was a challenge to try to understand what they wrote, I just lurk in those threads, but I remember that.

[Gwenwyfar]

Just curious, but if his writing was already so bad, what would censoring one word out of it help with? (And not sure I follow where it would even make sense to use the said censored word to refer to himself...)

[Shambles]

Shambles understands your question.

[shawnb61]

The old posts are hilarious.  From a distance.

But judging from the language, I think it was actually Alfred posing as the Dark Knight, not the Caped Crusader himself.

[Steve]

I think it's silly to censor it. As shawn says, who cares? jmo

[Kindred]

Because the idiot user kept referring g to himself in the third person as atma n and it was really really really annoying to read

[Steve]

So, it's annoying. Why is that a big deal? Why should thousands of other members have to put up with a restriction because of one knucklehead? Warn him and if it continues, up the warning. Don't make the rest of us have to change what we do just because he's annoying.

[Arantor]

The same argument could have been made about the previous situation, although the circumstances were somewhat different where a specific URL was censored and so was a specific person's name.

I didn't find sangham THAT annoying, beyond a certain point I just ignored him entirely, seemed easiest.

[Illori]

the user has not made a post in over a year. maybe this censored word could be removed. at this time it would not make sense to warn the user due to the time away from the forum.

[Steve]

the user has not made a post in over a year. maybe this censored work could be removed.

Exactly my point in my first post so +1.

[Irisado]

So, it's annoying. Why is that a big deal? Why should thousands of other members have to put up with a restriction because of one knucklehead? Warn him and if it continues, up the warning. Don't make the rest of us have to change what we do just because he's annoying.

He was warned, he was banned on more than one occasion, and he was repeatedly asked not to behave in this manner.  He disrupted numerous topics, irrited multiple members of the community, was disrespectful and sexist towards female team members, and he became extremely irritating to deal with.  Censoring his references to himself in the third person was, finally, one of the measures which did have an impact and reduced his activity here.  Given that the censor only affects a particular combination of four letters, I say that we let it stand.

[Arantor]

Because bans don't work?

[Shambles]

My flatmate is a hatmaker.

His seatmate in the shop is a boatman.

They are both Mahatmas and enjoy watching batman movies.

[Arantor]

Although possibly less typical here...

[Steve]

Given that the censor only affects a particular combination of four letters, I say that we let it stand.

And I disagree. So, if he's not here for another year, we should still keep the censoring? For pete's sake, how hard is it to re-censor the letter combo IF he comes back and causes problems?

I shouldn't have to find innovative ways or jump through hoops to type a non-offensive word like b*a*t*m*a*n, or any other word for that matter just because of one idiot.

[青山 素子]

The same argument could have been made about the previous situation

Talking about the crazy spaceman guy?

[Kindred]

No... the crazy religious one

[Arantor]

No... the crazy religious one

No, gri was annoying as heck but banned, never censored to my knowledge.

The previous situation I referred to where censoring occurred relates to the... situation of .January 2010 where censoring was used because someone didn't like their name being used.

[Steve]

Make a decision about it Illori (or whoever makes censoring decisions) and I'll shut up.

[Irisado]

And I disagree. So, if he's not here for another year, we should still keep the censoring? For pete's sake, how hard is it to re-censor the letter combo IF he comes back and causes problems?

I shouldn't have to find innovative ways or jump through hoops to type a non-offensive word like b*a*t*m*a*n, or any other word for that matter just because of one idiot.

If you'd had to deal with him as a moderator or Team member, I think that you'd be far less inclined to do anything that would be of benefit to him, even though he is currently inactive.  Regarding your second point, the fact that he was censored over two years ago and this is the first time that anyone has noticed demonstrates that it's not an issue to leave the censor in place.

[Arantor]

If he was such a problem, why not just ban him and be done with it, rather than actually doing things that make the site slower for everyone? (The ban will be cheaper when amortised over all the page views compared to the censoring )

[Irisado]

He was banned, more than once, for fixed periods of time.  Permanent bans aren't necessarily the best way of handling troublesome members, as you'll be aware of and as you alluded to earlier in this discussion .

[Arantor]

I'm sorry, your sarcasm detector is broken.

If he is really that much of a problem, ban permanently.

[Steve]

Yeah, that.