This is COMPLETELY in jest… Apologies to those who may be easily offended at the light treatment of animal murder!
10. She won’t stop barking!
9. She won’t stop barking!
8. She won’t stop barking!
7. She won’t stop barking!
6. She won’t stop barking!
5. She won’t stop barking!
4. She won’t stop barking!
3. She won’t stop barking!
2. She won’t stop barking!
1. She won’t stop barking, dernit, and it’s now 4:40am!!
Reasons NOT to kill your dog:
1. Your conscience won’t let you, and besides, it’s illegal…
Curiously, Spiff, access to the site you quote is blocked here at my work… on the grounds that "sex" is a filtered category!
In case anyone else suffers from mad filtering software *, here’s another link. I haven’t read the book yet, but it’s had good reviews on BBC radio too.
Coemgenus
*In our case, "Websense", which is based, I believe, in Framingham USA. I once had to get special permission to read an article about Czech railways which Websense had decided was sexual—and it wasn’t even about the film "Closely Observed Trains".
Tim, the bright side is that you can participate in the Agora at 4:40 am; plenty of opportunity for posting. By the way, I didn’t know that killing a dog was illegal, not that I would kill any animal just for the fun of it.
In another animal related issue, two days ago I saw a t-shirt with something like "I’m not a vegetarian because I love animals but because I hate plants".
I know, Sitra, I know… And I felt awful for wanting to wring her neck. I really did. Shannon handled it much more gracefully than I did, by the time 6am rolled around, by cleaning out the utility room and letting her lay down in there.
Do you have any idea of what the filter did not like? I have read the review a couple of times, and the most arousing thing I found was a reference to "prime numbers".
The strangest filtering I have seen so far (I have only encounter filter effects here) was when the name of a famous Rembrandt painting was mutilated (WOTD/wake, if I remember correctly). The filter should at least invest in some good parsing software, but who needs it?
A Swedish union leader once used a c-word. I think that he had to resign, but the reason was not the word in itself, but that he had used it in a depreciatory reference to a group of women. The word was later used in the title of a book, without any protests being heard. The Swedish tolerance regarding words is rather total. I hope this is a sign of our concentrating more on deeds than mere sounds. On the other hand, if our Prime minister would refer to God in the way some presidents do, I earnestly believe that he would be laughed out of office even before the news hit the front pages.
[quote author=anders link=board=omni;num=1071654124;start=0#12 date=04/22/04 at 04:16:48] . . . The strangest filtering I have seen so far (I have only encounter filter effects here) was when the name of a famous Rembrandt painting was mutilated (WOTD/wake, if I remember correctly). The filter should at least invest in some good parsing software, but who needs it?
. . .
M. anders, meet M. ekkis! ;D
The parsing software definitely needs some work, but remember that you get what you pay for. The Agora is free, so to keep expenses down they used the free YaBB BBS software, with all its inherent limitations. While I’m normally a pessimist on my best days and a cynic on most, I try to look for the humor in the filter—it’s errors make humans look good for a change!
Let’s see what’s been corrected, if anything, over the years:
Alfred Hitchcock
Cockney
Pussycat
Nightwatch
My assumption
[hr]Well, I guess two out of five ain’t too bad . . .
The last example took some time for me to figure out. I had to cheat by using the search function. The little hints I found helped.
But why start with "I"? My assumption was that the reaction was triggered by the combination with the possessive pronoun.
Ha! Passed!
<edit:> Or so I thought, because it worked in the preview window. Now I understand: the switch "My"-"I" was the filter’s doing. Does the filter know Chaucer? What about erseumption?
The fact that it finds offensive words-within-words makes it more of a hindrance than a help, in my opinion. I never would have thought of the twat in nightwatch, for example!
The dog is fine, and about 9 months old. She’s very smart and loves people, so I’m sure it was hard for her to be outside in the cold of winter, all alone… :-[
[quote author=anders link=board=omni;num=1071654124;start=0#14 date=04/22/04 at 18:11:10] . . . The last example took some time for me to figure out. I had to cheat by using the search function. The little hints I found helped.
They’re always weird the first time you see them.
Originally, "Cockney" came out "thingyney" and "Hitchcock" came out "Hitchthingy." Now whenever I see "I disagreeupmtion" I know it is "My" followed by "assumption."
"Nightwatch" threw me for a moment but it didn’t take long to figure it out.
But why start with "I"? My assumption was that the reaction was triggered by the combination with the possessive pronoun.
The unfiltered phrase for "My Ass" is similar to the phrase "My eye!" and is an emphatic way of saying "I disagree!"
Ha! Passed!
<edit:> Or so I thought, because it worked in the preview window. Now I understand: the switch "My"-"I" was the filter’s doing. Does the filter know Chaucer? What about erseumption?
Yes, it only filters when it posts, and never changes the original text of the post, so it really isn’t censorship like the "Bleep" that replaces a word in a delayed audio feed.
