Your censorship is getting ridiculous

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Takama, Jan 21, 2021.

  1. Takama

    Just tried to set up a message of the day for the outfit
    I get "petits" changed automatically to "Bouncing Betties"

    Am I the only one troubled by this ? Censorship is so hard it doesn't let you write the most basic of words, we got a problem here.

    What's happening devs ? Are you like full radicals left, full on SJW or something ?

    I urge you to stop with this, it's becoming problematic, stop trying to "teach" us how we have to speak, how it's "ok" and what's "forbidden", if someone has a problem there are laws and can take it up with the justice system, that's not your job.

    And to fellow gamers here, stop letting companies abuse you >< defend yourselves.
    • Up x 2
  2. Demigan

    I think it's a legal problem.

    Let's say the developers have no problem with swearing in general and words like **** (which is why "petits" is changed to bouncing betties), that doesn't mean that the players or the parents of some players have no problems with them. The game is rated "teen" with the warning of violence. So I suspect that the devs have to actively filter out swearing in order to maintain that.

    They allow you to de-activate the swearing filter if you want. I'm not sure if that will stop the swearwords in your Outfit title to be uncensored, but it's worth a shot.
    I wouldn't call a company installing a swearing filter "abuse", especially when you can deactivate it. It's your choice if you play the game but their choice what they allow and not allow in their game.

    I personally think that there is a correct way to swear and that this fiddling around protecting children from every type of swearing is a horrible practice. Swearing when done properly is a release of stress and helps people, it's as important to learn to children as laughing and humor is (and yes laughing is taught, try to make adults who grew up in warzone's laugh). It's when swearing is done purely to hurt others, such as the constant stream of racist slurs you'll hear if you go into certain games, that that player should be censored. Censoring words makes no difference, you can insult people without swearwords easily enough. And this swearing to hurt people is also a symptom of "protecting" children from swearing. Just like "protecting" children from sexual education and influences increases bad sexual practices and unwanted pregnancies.
    • Up x 1
  3. Takama

    You can't justify censorship by calling it "protection". Censorship is the practice of actively banning certain forms of speech, which is contrary to the concepts of freedom of speech.

    Again it's not the job of game developers to educate children or protect them, at least not like that, you do know there is such a thing as the justice system right ? You can't just enforce your own rules about speech even if you manage a multiplayer game. People have to follow the law so, harrassment or racism can be punished by the law, not by game managers.
    And that is actually something different from what's happening here.

    Here i'm not complaining about some sort of punishment, the problem is the censorship basically they decide for me what kind of words are allowed. And that shouldn't be ok for you.

    Do you really want to live in a world where others tell you "nop, you can't say that it's offensive we forbid you to use this specific word because we're protecting others just in case" ?

    And yeah my profanity filter is disabled, it's actually the first thing I disable in all games, that's not the profanity filter acting up here.

    Try it for yourself, make an outfit and try to write "petits" which just means "small" in french btw, in the message of the day .
    It's not a filter for the reader it actively forbids you to write some words by replacing them.
    • Up x 1
  4. DarkQuark

    This may or may not apply here but the whole thing is a very slippery and dangerous slope. Because this is where we hear the phrase, "it's a private company they can do what they want". Typically uttered by those who agree with the censorship until it happens to them.

    But when it comes to a single company that is true. However, the fact of the matter is you have a group of Silicon Valley companies who combined essentially control much of the internet as well as how money is moved through the internet. And in a very monopolistic way they work together to protect their combined territory banning people, words, groups and in some cases forcing certain speech. Speak/act how they wish or a large portion of the internet is off limits to you. And before someone says "build your own", sure you can do that until they ban you from their app stores, platforms and ways to move money.

    The real irony is all of this is done in the name of some agenda or another. But it never is, it's just about protecting their place in and control of their market.

    Does any of that apply here? You be the judge of that but I very much understand the strong dislike many have for this sort of thing.
    • Up x 2
  5. Demigan

    1. Freedom of speech does not allow you to say anything you want, and you should have a good look at the concepts of freedom of speech:
    2. Freedom of speech works both ways. You are using the intelectual property of the developers, who are in fact responsible for the internal content of the game. It does not matter if the game is educational for 3-year-olds or it's a game about demons fornicating, they hold not just the right but the requirement to protect it's users, and the amount of protection is handled by the ESRB ratings.
    3. The very laws that help protect those people from racism, harrassment etc are the rules that cause the developers to insert these types of protections. GTA's hot coffee mod is an excellent example. While the Hot Coffee content was officially cut and inaccessible in the game, 3rd party content (some modder) made it available. This caused the game legal problems because the game wasn't rated for sexual actions this explicit (however tame it actually is). This is also why this forum uses swearing filters.
    4. The fact that you are trying to use free speech to get your way despite the fact that the swearing filter is optional and you can opt out of it whenever you want isn't a sign of a strong character. PS2's swearing filter isn't just lenient in allowing you to shut it off if you want, it's one of the better designs in that is just transforms the swearwords. "****" into "bouncing betties"? Come on you have to have some measure of humor in you don't you?
    I'm against swearing filters, I'm for tracking swearing and punishing players that take swearing too far. However since that is much more difficult than a simple swearing filter I'm A-OK with letting them have an optional swearing filter in the game.
    What is more insulting is that you are trying to tell me what I should find OK or not. Also you are complaining about some sort of punishment as you find it punishing to be censored (despite being able to opt out).

    On the street? No I don't. In a game where policing and social backlash are much lower due to the anonimity of the internet? Yes ofcourse!

    I know what petit means, and you also know what "ti ts" mean. The swearing filter is designed to try and detect players from avoiding the swearing filter, so adding letters to the sides does not work. This does mean that in some languages you might get accidentally filtered due to the english filter. In my language "H o e" just means "how", but it'll obviously get filtered. Is that a problem? No, why would it? If the devs had a perfect filter lying about they could use that could filter based on language and intent then it would have been a problem. There is no such thing, we make do with what we have. Trying to make a problem out of it just means you are the problem.

    It's likely to do with the fact that the outfit text area's are coded differently in the game. It'll show up on different ways in the game, so the swearing filter has to work regardless of you having the filter off or not.

    What I'm concerned about though is that you think that the developers are trying to silence you just because you use a different language.
    • Up x 2
  6. pnkdth

    This is a video game, made by a relatively small studio. They don't want spend money and effort on moderating the community.

    It is as simple as any business owner not wanting to have raving lunatics causing a scene in their establishment. To call this a freedom of speech is a stretch at best. If a person is acting up at my place I throw them out, end of story.
    • Up x 2
  7. Takama

    I never said that. Won't even read the rest of your post, the whole thing smells fallacy a miles away, you misrepresented what i said in your first sentence.

    I said they are laws in place around freedom of speech, I also said it's not the job of video game sto enforce those laws, especially by means of censorship. So Stop your fanboy attitude and use your mind.

    Except you don't allow people to just enter your house whenever they want. And you don't make them pay either I'm guessing.
    You cannot compare a public square (video game, social network platform or a public forum), to your own private house.
    They don't have the right to just throw out people they disagree with for example.
    Why would you want them to spend money on moderating the community ? Wouldn't rather they spend money on making games and improving them ? Do gamers really need chaperons in mmo theses days ?
    • Up x 1
  8. Demigan

    It's what you asked for. You wanted to abolish the swearing filter altogether and despite naming that legal issues could be involved you proclaim that the developers have no hand in preventing legal issues in the first place.

    I smell someone who has actually read the rest and doesn't want to really respond to it, knowing he's been had. You quite literally "cut off" the moment the actual definitions and considerations of Freedom Of Speech come up. That's suspiciously convenient wouldn't you say?

    But that's the point: It is the job of the video game to enforce the laws, either by preventing it or reporting it. You can't allow players in a childrens game to first scar children and then say "oh but they've been punished afterwards". The point is that you have the option to prevent it, why shouldn't they take it?
    Yes PS2 isn't a childrens game, yes PS2 is about shooting each other's brains out, but that doesn't mean they do not have the right or the responsibility to put some measures in place.

    Actually you can. Any type of platform can be held (partially) responsible for letting others use that platform to spread messages of hate, murder, torture, genocide etc. Just like the owner of a bar can't say "well I'm sorry they just came in here and held a 'the ****'s kinda had a point' party and I let them" a public platform can't just do nothing.
    • Up x 1
  9. pnkdth

    I notice you decided to completely sidestep the comparison to a business owner and his establishment + Demigan's reply.

    In my younger years I used to work in the service industry (bars and restaurants) and we frequently threw people out for being loud and obnoxious. We wanted people to enjoy themselves and come back another time. At no point did we feel obliged to act as a megaphone to every loudmouth with an opinion.

    At some point you have to stop and ask yourself the question, "am I the snowflake?"
  10. Takama

    Again there's a strong difference between a physical business like a restaurant, and a digital place.
    You can't just hit the ignore button in real life, so yeah I would expect exactly what you're saying in a restaurant, no argument there, but on a digital place people have the option to just ignore themselves annoying ones.
    But that's not even my point actually, I wasn't talking about retributions for acting out, I was talking about censorship, which is a different issue, again i'm guessing when you worked in the restaurant you didn't went around tables to listen to what they said and to tell them whenever they said something you considered "offensive" that it was forbidden, quite a strange way to get your customers to come back.

    I actually didn't, but I do know quite well that definition don't worry about me.

    That's actually false, in the US there are laws for publishers, publishers can be held responsible for what's published, you cannot hold a platform responsible for what the users are publishing on it as per Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act : No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” In essence, Section 230 exempts online platforms from legal liability for the content their users post.
  11. Nikushimi

    Except you can, because they are not a public square. See online video games, Social network platforms, and forums are all private property (quite literally they are all on a server in a building owned by private individual/group). They are not within the public domain (unless it was owned by state/fed). Same concept applies to businesses as well. For example if say walmart says you cannot open carry in the store then, you cant.
    • Up x 1
  12. Pelojian

    free speech only protects you to a certain extent from the government.

    when you use a private service they have the right to alter or delete posts or videos you put out there. most forums also should have in their TOS that they can use any reason to remove content you post or ban you.

    practically speaking free speech just means the government can't silence you on most things, but you are still legally responsible for what you say.
  13. DarkQuark

    The problem is not at all with one business saying you cannot say X or banning you. The problem is that most of Silicon Valley will work in unison so that you cannot say X or be on ANY mainstream platform. And when you take into account this also goes for moving money through the internet and attempts to have your own competitive business it becomes super monopolistic. Want to make your own social platform? Do it, let it get somewhat popular and then watch it get banned by the same folks who say you cannot say X on the internet.

    The issue runs very deep and well beyond simple censorship by 1 private business.
    • Up x 1
  14. Takama

    Ok well, you should really stop the comparison games, things are different stop trying to say they are the same, they're just not that's a fact. A physical business is different from an online platform.

    But that's besides the point, fact is, private or not, you don't have the right (or you shouldn't) to decide what people have the right to say to each other, Sure you can make sure people follow the law (Not required by the law again, can't be held responsible), ok about that, but having censorship engines in place doesn't do that, it just prevent free speech by changing your words without your consent.

    Am I really the only one here who has a problem with that ? Like you guys really don't care that you join forums and games, possibly where your friends are, and you just wanna talk to people and some things are forbidden to say ?
    Am I the only one who enjoys using the full range of my vocabulary without constraint when i feel it's appropriate ?
  15. Takama

    That shouldn't be ok though, there's a lack of regulation actually because online platforms are still young, and lawmaking takes time and is done by old guys.

    But online platforms today are meeting places, they act like public squares.

    practically speaking, it's difficult to live today completely cut off from Google, Facebook, Discord, Apple, LinkedIn, Twitter, Reddit, etc
    difficult to game cut off from Steam, or Epic.

    That's a fact, all those places host millions of users who communicate and share contents, and just because they are private should they have the right to control speech (effectively control society and have greater power than governments minds you). ?
  16. Nikushimi

    But there not, in a constitutional sense public domain is that owned by the public (such as a town square being owned by the city/state and thus owned by the people). Doesn't matter if you perceive it as "public square" or not.

    As i stated they kinda do have the right. Whether you think it should or should not is irrelevant.
    • Up x 1
  17. Liewec123

    the annoying thing is, there is an option to turn language filter on and off.
    and yet if you type a "naughty" word, while the filter is off, it will still be censored.

    what is the point of giving us censorship options if they're just gonna censor everything anyway?!
  18. Pelojian

    if you want an open discussion with people you can do so unobstructed via voice chat or conference calls, the reason why they don't even try to enforce filtering on voice chat is the fact it's not as semi permanent as a post on a forum or the other platforms you've mentioned. unless someone actually records voice chat in progress there's nothing people can use to complain about, even then there are actually legal issues about recording people's speech without their consent.

    ps2's system of changing certain words even with profanity filter off is more a thing so they don't have to resubmit themselves to the rating boards.

    if a game company wants a game to be inclusive of all age groups there is a price in what you can and can't say.

    also no matter how many times the mainstream social media alters or deletes content the more extreme people will just immigrate to a new platform that is looser with enforcement of rules.

    as for stuff like steam, origin or epic, considering those are linked to your game accounts i'd consider it common sense to be better behaved on those platforms (and any others that are essential to daily tasks).

    unobstructed free speech in this digital age is restricted to person to person meetings, phone calls, SMS text messages and voice chat.

    if you really want to get a message across you still have ways to do so, you shouldn't expect companies to just let you say controversial things that could harm them on their platforms.

    lastly, politicians are always slow in understanding technology and current culture, which is one of the reasons i think there should be an age cap on being a politician or some sort of advisory board system on a range of topics that politicians have to pay attention to and prove they understand enough about the topic.
    • Up x 2
  19. Johannes Kaiser

    I also like the fact that they exchange words. Try something stronger than "idiots" (or maybe even that, didn't check) and you get "Trusted Companions". Problem is, as in the OP, when they restrict words that contain parts of, let's say ... less than ideal language to use in an open online context. For example, it also filters the german word "weniger", which means "less". Try telling german squadmates you'd like less friendly fire while they have the filter active... The list of kind of hilarious examples goes on.
    Fact is, since we can deactivate it, this all is simply a very minute grievance aboutf people not thinking of other languages when designing the filter, with slightly annoying but completely optional results.
  20. Takama

    No we cannot

    • Up x 1