Optional Chat Filter

[IAmLesbian]

Type: General


Change Petitioned For:
      A chat filter each player can turn on and off when they want. (You don't need to use the filter but the option is there for those who do want to)
      Each player would have the option to enable a chat filter where swear, slurs, and such are replaced with asterisks.
      This would only affect people who decided to have it on, and turning it back off would be as easy as just typing a simple command.
      Nothing is set in stone for the chat filter and I would love to hear suggestions for additions.
      The default would likely be off, though the players could be notified of the filter's existence upon joining.

Reasons for change:

1. Newer and younger players can be put off by the strong language used on the server.
   
2. Some people, myself included, don't want to see things like racial slurs and similar words.
   

Reasons for no change (optional but recommended):

1. A chat filter of any sort can be said to go against the idea of open speech on ORE.  (I understand that idea but I feel it's not as much revoking free speech as it is, allowing someone to avoid seeing something they don't want to see.)
   
2. IRC by it's nature doesn't have the option of a chat filter (at least as far as I understand it) which means the filter isn't universal.  (While not universal, lots of people who join the server never use IRC or even join the Discord server for ORE.)
   

[Fartonaut]

lol just use /ignore

[Bigbangboom68]

Well I don't mind the idea of having a filter just I doubt I will personally ever care about it too much.

[PabloDons]

lol just use /ignore

Currently there is no /ignore as a result of quite the heated discussion. Mostly this is because if a person becomes a problem, they should rather be reported so they can be dealt with such that they don't affect more players. But also because ignoring or filtering chat can be viewed as censorship, this has become a hot topic. That said I'd appreciate if we kept this civil.

My personal opinion is that this is in fact censoring chat, and I'd much prefer it if I was able to use my own language and it being actually received. If it is received negatively, that should be my fault and I should deal with the consequences. Though I also think that strong language is just a part of any vocabulary and makes language more expressive, which I value greatly. If I'm talking to someone I know have the filter enabled, I won't be able to express myself in the extent I wish. So basically I think it's like imposing limitations on what people can say to you and around you. Whether that's good or bad depends on the context. As a rule of thumb, if it's directed at someone's personal hardship or grief, you can keep it to yourself. Though at that point it basically becomes impossible to filter out specifically so human labor for this is really the only way.

Semi-related. It's about expression over chat:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fS4X1JfX6_Q

[IAmLesbian]

My personal opinion is that this is in fact censoring chat, and I'd much prefer it if I was able to use my own language and it being actually received. If it is received negatively, that should be my fault and I should deal with the consequences. Though I also think that strong language is just a part of any vocabulary and makes language more expressive, which I value greatly. If I'm talking to someone I know have the filter enabled, I won't be able to express myself in the extent I wish. So basically I think it's like imposing limitations on what people can say to you and around you. Whether that's good or bad depends on the context. As a rule of thumb, if it's directed at someone's personal hardship or grief, you can keep it to yourself. Though at that point it basically becomes impossible to filter out specifically so human labor for this is really the only way.

I totally get wanting to convey the meaning behind the original message in its entirety, but if someone doesn't want to see words blocked by the chat filter then I don't think anyone else should be more in charge of that decision than they are.  Sure conveying the meaning of a message is important, but if the user on the receiving end doesn't want part of that meaning (swears, slurs, nsfw content, etc) then that's their choice.  If someone doesn't want to see something, I see no reason not to let them.  I agree that there is a loss of meaning to some extent when a chat filter is in place with swears, but if the user makes the decision to accept that when deciding they don't want to see them then who is anyone to say they're wrong to do that?

In short: Yes, meaning can be lost, but that's something I feel should be left up to each user to decide for themselves.

[Clamintus]

In my opinion this can be fine, as long as the user has a choice. Chat can sometimes get a bit too overwhelming and disabling it from the client entirely cuts you off too much, what if someone wants to message you and you have chat disabled?
Also, if i can suggest another thing/improvement, a "plot chat" could be really useful especially if you are teaching or simply talking with another guy on your plot.

[klebdotio]

Once again, as long as its optional I am fine with it. But they are just words afterall and i'm sure that ORE is not the first time you have heard those words. I would never use it but as to respect the people that would use it, I voted yes. I dont really think it is necessary though

[Wigglebot23]

lol just use /ignore

What if you don't want to mute someone, but you don't want to see certain messages? I would support the addition of a /ignore that censors player's public chat messages only and has the features the original petition is for.

[Trecar]

I have to side with Don here, this will result in censoring, if not directly, then at least indirectly. If I know, somebody might limit the way I can talk to them, I would cease talking to them. Strong language can be expressive, and I think that is a good thing. Filtering things does not stop them from existing, so no problem is solved doing this.
I know this argument is used a lot as a vehicle to mask outright racist and absolutely dehumanizing expressions as "not poltitically correct" in political discussion in these times, but I do not think ramping up censorship and filtering is the correct response to this at all. If language hurt you, you should talk with the person doing it, and if they don't respond, knowing the Mods here, there will be somebody helping you eventually. At the same time, some slurs have evolved into being very much part of daily conversation, and people should be allowed to express anger(y)/surprise/sadness with the words that everyone uses for them.

I know that an optional filter does not prohibit you doing this directly. But as the possibility now exists that they do not reach the intended recipient, it is in the end very much the same thing.
In my honest opinion, Filtering/Censoring should not be the response to insulting language. A problem should be faced, not ran away from. For fucks sake.

[IAmLesbian]

I've seen a number of different reasons against the chat filter and I have to say I'm fairly convinced myself.  If people can't get punished for what they say then the chat filter doesn't really have anything backing it up.  The effort to maintain it and patch bypasses would be a lot for something that people could probably just install a mod for.  I don't quite agree with the argument about free speech but I somewhat understand the point.  I also agree with the point that if something is said that you don't like, the best course of action is to try to handle it with the person directly and involve staff later on if it's bad enough.

Summary: If people can say whatever they want then the chat filter isn't backed up by anything and it'll just become a somewhat useless pain to maintain

[IAmLesbian]

The poll time is well over and honestly I'm fine with the result, for my explanation see my previous reply.