• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Can I swear on Talkbass?

Status
Not open for further replies.
#202
48thStreetCustom said:
Hey man, don't shoot the messenger. I din't make the rules. I just copy and pasted because no one was giving the OP a straight answer. Besides, you're in violation of Rule #5 ;).

Rule #5: Questioning a Moderation Decision Publicly If you have a disagreement with a moderator (If your thread gets deleted, if you get a warning, etc.), DO NOT post your complaint publicly on the forums. If you would like to raise a complaint regarding a moderator's actions, start a private conversation or email the moderator. If the moderator's response is unsatisfactory, please contact the forum admin staff by clicking the "contact us" link in any page's footer.​
Click to expand...

Hehe, thanks man! I love y'all so was absolutely not shooting you, it was just the first time I had actually read the rule and I'm fascinated by language. Please note that I am NOT knowingly in violation of Rule #5 as I am not disagreeing with any moderator's actions. I don't have a complaint and while I'm aware that the author of the rule might be a mod, it is not certain. Senators write the laws, cops enforce 'em, right? (My one forum complaint was about a different forum altogether where I advocated successfully for a rule change.)

In general, I really like the tone of TB. Some members might get snarky over silly things like carrots, but overall there is a very civil vibe. I'm sure credit goes to the mods (such as the gentleman that chimed in earlier in the thread) but I like to think also that it reflects well on bass players in general. Sure you have your occasional Sid Vicious or Gene Simmons, but bassists are generally a level-headed bunch compared to many other musicians :D

I'm a lover of freedom over security, so I wish we could have an unmoderated environment. But then I see the endless vitriol and offhand heinous statements on Yahoo News and YouTube comment sections and realize that maybe we humans aren't ready for that in the virtual world yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 48thStreetCustom
#204
Lobster11 said:
I think the reason for the perception that the quality of social-science research is going downhill is related to the explosion of new open-access and pay-to-play journals over the last decade or so. This has diluted the average quality of published research by providing an outlet for studies that doesn't meet the standards of traditional peer-reviewed journals. The quality of research published in traditional peer-reviewed journals has increased over time, not decreased.
Click to expand...

That combined with how much genuine research is immediately locked behind a paywall. That leaves a lot out of reach of the media who aren't in the habit of paying to get access to people or things they're reporting on. So what gets remaindered and put on open shelves is not what it was in the past.

Lobster11 said:
Well, I do social (psychological) research and teach research methods and statistics for a living, so I'd like to think I know something about it.
Click to expand...

Please accept a tip of my hat if that's the case. Although I'm not a researcher, I did wade through a lot of the subject matter and course material regarding experimental design while my SO was completing her graduate degree in experimental psychology. I'm an IT professional and a bit of a closet mathematician. I got vey interested in what she was studying because the statistical procedures and test methodologies closely resembled some of the diagnostic analytics used in my own field of work. Especially as it related to adaptive fail-over in critical network systems.

Fun days those were.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikewalker and HolmeBass
#208
40Hz said:
Have memes back then?

Boy did we ever. The place was crawling with them. Big as sea lions they was! Just as soon bite your head off as look at you too. ;)

View attachment 3035322

As far as smartphones go you'd have to wait until decades later. You'd first have to get through the having a CB radio in your car fad. That was all the rage for awhile. Then it was getting a pager. (Those were small enough.) Then a portable phone. (Big.) Then a mobile or "cell" phone. (Smaller but still pretty clunky.) Those were all basically just phones although a few had rudimentary PDA features like a calculator, memo pad and calendar built in. (Anybody remember PDAs like the Apple Newton or Palm Computing's PalmPilot?)

But the first real smartphone had to wait until Christmas 1999 when Ericsson finally released a very basic one. However, it wasn't until the advent of the RIM BlackBerry, and later the iPhone, that things really got small and finally took off. But we were well into the millenium before that happened.
Click to expand...
My dad still has a CB radio and a shortwave ham radio in his car!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikewalker and 40Hz
#209
I'm sure you can swear in other languages. I can provide an extensive and colourful repertoire in French by private message if requested LOL in the meantime Deadpool explained it well ;)

20e72da314e68c535c905c4c73d6905d.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wisebass, mikewalker, Kragnorak and 1 other person
#213
Lobster11 said:
This I completely agree with, and in fact the cited article is a good example: Some writer at Good Housekeeping magazine --not exactly a bastion of rigorous science -- used the word "experiment" inaccurately to describe one of the (correlational) studies reported by the original researchers. I strongly suspect that the original, peer-reviewed paper did not make that mistake.
Click to expand...

Just so's you know, I take such studies with a huge grain of salt. This particular study is very popular in FaceBook memes, which are always an impeccable source of data. /s I linked to Good Housekeeping not because their article was good, but because I wanted to avoid a polarizing news source such as HuffPo or Fox (which have also gleefully trumpeted this one).

Here's an example of an honest headline (with some funny details): Invalid Link Removed

Here's an example of a dishonest headline: Science has proven that swearing makes you more honest. I don't even want to link to that one, because it's so wrong (from VT, a privatized wing of the BBC). 'Science' didn't do anything at all, and nothing has been proven on the subject.

My suspicion, borne out by the Australian article, is that your average blue-collar Joe might find other plain-spoken people to be more honest, and the rough speech is a corollary. To such people, those who stick to high-falutin' language tend to be salesmen, actors, politicians, lawyers, corporate sharks, and others that are experts of nuanced speech but not necessarily known for honestly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wulfensteiner
#217
Kragnorak said:
To be pedantic, I don't see swearing mentioned in there, unless the swear is profane in nature. I imagine some acceptable swears in today's society would be:

  • "By Odin's beard!"
  • "I swear to God, our band outnumbered the audience last night!"
  • "DAAAYYYYUUMMMM, that is a tasty burger!"
  • "My favorite song is Hell's Bells"

I see that curse words are not outlawed by this rule, but I believe it would be in poor taste to verbally attack a fellow forum member by saying "Damn you to Hell for not recognizing the inherent superiority of Fender P-Basses!" Such a curse would be a little extreme considering the topics normally covered here.

Most interesting to me is that vulgarity (potty language or sexual euphemisms) is not specifically mentioned, although the banning of such is implied by their examples.
Click to expand...

Many words have both narrow and broad meanings. In their narrowest senses "profanity" and "vulgarity" are two distinct things, in broad (and common) usage they are synonyms. The rule you're exegeting carefully uses "profanity" in a broad rather than a narrow sense, as should be evident from its context.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wisebass and Wulfensteiner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back