On several occasions now I have seen a post removed but everyone was still able to read what had been said because later posters had quoted it.

If something is going to be removed from a thread because it is offensive, quotes should be removed too. Otherwise the action is pointless and a waste of moderators' time.

I'd recommend that if you see that information, such as swearing, is removed in the original post and you see that it was quoted by someone and still shows there, please report the copy.

Not that you're saying exactly this:
I can agree that a code enhancement "would be desirable" to manage this, but I feel there are too many complications which could cause this to be either cumbersome, or impossible.

Three ways to quote, that I know of:

1. [QUOTE=hazel;6079603]
2. [QUOTE=hazel]
3. [quote] or [code] plus copy-paste

As a result, I feel a forum software code change could be impossible.

Case 1:
Members many times do not quote the entire post, verbatim. As a result, how is the edit then conveyed automatically to the other quote which is no longer an identical match?

In fact, for extremely bad terms, people have been seen to quote the surrounding, then omit or edit to clean it up and then state something like, "I'm not sure the language is productive", or whatever they wish to say about it.

Cases 2 and 3:
I cannot see a code modification (other than a global bad language filter) which could contend with this. At least to the effect of automatically removing in a quoted place.

Oh, darn. I think I've used naughty words in posts around here in the past. It was usually when referring to MS Windows, though.

How about a warning in the first removed post that it may be quoted so those offended by <the reason it was removed> should read no further?
I'm confused why anyone would worry about a written word enough to avoid it, though?

I'm pretty sure I've seen moderators doing exactly this in the past. Since they're human, occasionally they're going to miss some cases; that's just how it is.

On those occasions that I have had to edit such a post I usually look in the immediate page or two for quotes and edit them as well. Sometimes the quotes may be much later in a thread, and sometimes a different thread is quoted, so it can be difficult or impossible for a human or machine to get them all.

As said by others, when you see this happen simply hit the report button and ask that it be considered for edit.

While researching a topic on natural language parsing recently, I ran across a study (actually there were several) into how and why the brain treats swear words differently than others. The main point I took away from a superficial reading of the topic was that we are wired in such a way that we cannot ignore certain words, whether spoken or written - they grab our attention involuntarily.

A quick search did not turn up the article I remember most, but this one looks relevant A Special Place In The Brain for Swearing.

This is an english only forum, and there are some words in the english language which are commonly considered to be among those which involuntarily grab the reader's attention in an unpleasant way that we call offensive, vulgar or obscene. In order to make every visitor's LQ experience as pleasant as possible, moderators may at times remove those words or expressions known to evoke such an unpleasant response. That is also the reason there is a rule against their use in the first place:

Seems relevant to the recent discussions about LQ moderation:
Feel free to insult me

Swear words are a treasure, I wonder how many lives their venting nature has saved, possibly more than they ruined.
Now, insults are a different thing, even if there's some overlap, but an appropriately used OHFORF! ?

Good stuff.

(Edit: Oh, right. With insults I mean the no brainers, of course.)

There's something to be said for that, but the more the F-word is used, the more it loses its cathartic power. Then it just becomes lazy and stupid.

The particular post I'm thinking of contained personal insults directed at a specific moderator and that was more offensive in my opinion than the words used.

1 members found this post helpful.

There most definitely is a difference between tossing around expletives in a post when trying to make a point or explain something or even just attempting humor and directing those expletives at someone in an insulting and belligerent manner. There's no place for insults and belligerence in venues such as this.

That being said, I've been a forum owner and Mod/Admin of many forums I've participated in over the last two decades. There's a fine line to the lightly-tossed expletive and the insult. It's a mod/admin's job to deal with that tactfully. It's not always an easy thing to do.

I've always found it to be a very strange concept to let mere so-called "swear words" actually offend you. "Poo" sounds worse than "[removed]" to me personally...

I take it you're talking about my post where I quoted freemedia2018's attack... I have edited out the "swear words" along with RT's username.

Don't say I don't do noth'n for ya Hazel

This is a well-known phenomenon. Euphemisms always end up by becoming just as offensive as the word they replaced. For example, the place where one went to eliminate was once called a privy ("private place") or jakes ("Jack's place" and never mind what he did there!). Those terms, themselves euphemisms, became offensive and were replaced by lavatory (where you washed your hands after doing the deed). Then that became offensive and was replaced by toilet (personal care but not necessarily hand washing). That became offensive and was replaced by loo (French lieu, the place) and so on.

Racial designations show the same trajectory. A term becomes offensive so it is replaced by another term. And ten years later...

As I said before, it's not the words, it's the anger and aggression with which they are often used.

On the continent we mostly use the abbreviation WC (for Water Closet), you can find those on signs in airports and train stations.
And Americans often use bathroom, even when no bath can be found there.

Don't get me wrong Hazel, I absolutely agree that the actual words used is really rather irrelevant. But that's the problem with some members here; they are more interested in how someone phrases the point the other member(s) concerned are trying to make, rather than looking at the meaning and intent behind the actual words used - which should mean a lot more than just the actual words used. I noticed this on a number of occasions here - and *not* just with things I've said myself. So it seems the "professionally offended" isn't just limited to "social media"...

I think with all of the things and people I've put up with over years, online and particularly offline, I've become a pretty good judge of knowing what the likely meaning and intent is when comes to what's said. Like when someone is really just having a dig at someone else because they just don't like the person, and/or have taken something they said the wrong way and have become "offended", etc. Some people here also have some very strange definitions of things like, people being "rude", "offensive", and similar. So all I can say to those same members is: don't deal with some of the people I've had to contend with over the years, whatever you do - as they'll know all about someone being "rude", "abusive", etc then, that I can assure them of, if nothing else.

I remember working with a guy that said "[removed]" as almost his every second word - regardless of whether he was angry or not - didn't matter. But you know what? He was one of the nicest guys you could ever hope to meet, that was just way he talked. The biggest problem was that you'd end up laughing and not getting anything done - because you were still laughing - even the gas crew wasn't immune to it.

PS: I wasn't referring to yourself Hazel in any way whatsoever in my above comments - you seem to look at the meaning and intent rather than just the words used. Pity we can't say the same about everyone else...

1 members found this post helpful.