I'm just going to go out and say it. The censor is crap and needs to be fixed. There had been one time where I was warned because the censor didn't censor out what I said. Sure, it wasn't the exact word, but there should still be a wildcard for words that are suppose to be filter.

As of now, the only words I have found that aren't filtered are the combination o "O+shizzle". You can replace the letter O with any other letter just as long as it is one word and it won't get censored. That is one of the words I got a warn for because I thought it would have got censored.

Another one is "nice doggy!+in'". For some reason it will censor "nice doggy!+ing" but not "nice doggy!+in'".

So.. Some sites have it made where you can have a variable for the word like "*shizzle" and the asterisk represents any letter. So a word like "O+shizzle" would be censored. Same goes for "nice doggy!*" for "nice doggy! + in'".


Hope that made sense.

So are you saying that the censor needs to censor more things or censor less?

If you're saying less than I completely agree. This censor is for 8 year old kids who live in a perfect family that doesn't say bad words at all. Seriously.

I've seen censors that can go for partial match, dunno if IPB has it.

If you can't express yourself with the words limited I think you may have a problem. The censor is fine. It's annoying but just find a work around.

He isn't talking about the limits of the censor. What Josh means is that variations of a censored word aren't censored, and he's gotten warned for stumbling upon one.

If we're going to stick with the censor until the end of eternity, then I support this suggestion. All variations of a censored word should be censored.

If he saw that it had evaded the censor after he had posted it, he should have edited it.

Some people click off the topic after posting

And if he didn't see it...

I know, but I was saying that if he did go back and reread, he should've edited it.

I'm not saying that I don't support this, because I do, but his warn could've been avoided by action on his part.

This is exactly what I mean. I explained it oddly.


I pretty much always leave the topic I posted in. Not really my fault anyway. I expect the censor to pick up a word that shouldn't be there or any variable of it.

Solution: Don't swear

Your problem has now been solved.

Solution: Fix the censor.

Problem has now been solved.

I just lol'd.

"nice doggy!+in" is warnable?

I've seen all types of members saying it.

I believe so.

Why would "nice doggy!+ing" be censored and "nice doggy!+in'" not?

I've seen mods saying "nice doggy!+in'".


But yea it should be censored, because fudgein' is.

The filter for the two mentioned words should be fixed... the first was looking for an "exact" match of the word, and obviously a variant was missed so it wasn't censored out. The second was indeed looking for a "loose" match on the word, but I think that a similar censored word was conflicting with it and causing it to not work properly.

Oshizzle

nice doggy!in'


Awesome. I guarantee I will come across more unless you think you fixed all of them.

id like it to be like irc

/mode username +/- f

The ability to chose whether the filter is on or off by user choice.

But IPB won't let that happen, I know how it's like.

We should move this forum to irc. That would be sexy.