I haven't read this whole thread, just a caution to my opinion...

Here would be a cool feauture to he UT, it probably involves re-writing a single part of it though. A sysop should be able to take a public message where it looks like its been reduced to two indviduals swearing at each other and make it private, then the two can continue the string of private messages without being disrupted or disruptive.

Or will this fuel the raging censorship crusade? Anyone?

>What we are really concerned with is obscenties.

Accoring to the US Supreme Court, something is only obscence if it is only there to "excite lust" (that means erotic, and I could make it simpler ;-) and lacks political, social, scientific or artistic value. Fwiw.

>To continue, I was informed that what can be heard on network T.V. is okay to say. A couple of questions arise from this guideline:
>1) I don't have a T.V. so I don't know what is current. I haven't had one in several years.

And its always changing too.

>2) Would one need to document the T.V. show that they heard the word on?

Good point, I was watching "Arliss" the other day ... ;-) Seriouslly, I've heard the s word on ER or Chicago Hope or something like that, and the F word on SNL, if thats of anyhelp.

>Finally, I was told that it is not that hard to know what is "acceptable in normal social discourse."

Here is my purposed guidline: DOn't slam anyone (Already documented) and don't be dropping F-Bombs or obscenities (the erotic but tasteless ones). Lets see how long something like that lasts, and I'm not about to propose any punishment.

Oh, and BTW, nearly all the banned books at the website, Nancy, or on our suggested independant reading list for our High School English course. And the majority of the ones read for the class are on that list too. Interesting link, thanks.