Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The naughty username checking system used by Twitch

ghostbin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 348 posts

Re: The naughty username checking system used by Twitch

#251

Post by dkdbejwi383 »

noneeeed wrote: post #192
marcus_holmes wrote: post #167

We used to call this the "Scunthorpe problem" - how do you filter for obviously rude names while still allowing people to have their actual names? Bearing in mind that some people's names are actually rude. I worked on the application form processing for the Nectar card launch in the UK back in the early 2000's, and we had several cases. Luckily we had human data-entry clerks in the loop, so all we had to do was flag…

It's getting particularly problematic for international sites. What constitutes offensive language in one country might be a perfectly normal name, or product, in another country that uses the same language, let alone in another language. There's been a running joke on the UK Reddit subs recently about people getting short bans for using the term "faggot" as it's now on some automatic, site-wide blocklist. The bans a…

There's the opposite problem too, where "fanny" has a different meaning in the UK vs. USA. There's the classic line from "The Office" about it ("over there fanny means your arse. Not your... minge") and I think most folk are pretty aware of the American meaning here these days.

I wonder, is it too much to ask that we (as in, the various English speaking places) understand the different meanings of words that are offensive in one dialect but have a different and mundane meaning in another dialect?

Re: The naughty username checking system used by Twitch

#252

Post by pjc50 »

mnsc wrote: post #204
marcus_holmes wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We used to be taught that "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me". I'm not so sure that has ever been true. Emotional bullying was always a thing, and it did hurt. I'm glad that we're now taking that more seriously. But it's also true that my emotions are my responsibility, and my emotional reaction to words is unique to me. I cannot force everyone else to be responsible for how I feel abo…

>I suspect that this balance is what we call "good manners" or "politeness". Or "empathy". And I think on an interpersonal level this is easy. You can't force anyone else to be responsible for how you feel about their words, that is true. But if you say to a colleague or a friend that "when you call me X, that makes me feel bad, could you call me Y instead?". Depending on the friend they might want to understand why…

> "when you call me X, that makes me feel bad, could you call me Y instead?"

There are absolutely people who will use this as a reason to put X on a billboard.

Re: The naughty username checking system used by Twitch

#253

Post by cauliflower99 »

mcintyre1994 wrote: post #250
marcus_holmes wrote: post #167

We used to call this the "Scunthorpe problem" - how do you filter for obviously rude names while still allowing people to have their actual names? Bearing in mind that some people's names are actually rude. I worked on the application form processing for the Nectar card launch in the UK back in the early 2000's, and we had several cases. Luckily we had human data-entry clerks in the loop, so all we had to do was flag…

Random story I remember my ICT teacher telling us in school along the same lines as Scunthorpe. They installed some nonsense web blocking thing that schools like to have and a lot of teachers complained because it blocked weightwatchers.com

:)

Re: The naughty username checking system used by Twitch

#254

Post by pjc50 »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #225
OJFord wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We used to call this the "Scunthorpe problem" Fwiw, it's well-known as such, after relatively high-profile incidents involving people with that address: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scunthorpe_problem

Is that just well-known in the UK though? I've mentioned this to people outside the UK and only occasionally have they known it.

Nobody outside the UK has heard of Scunthorpe because it can't make it through the filters.

(There's a ridiculously large list of innuendo place names for tiny villages: https://anglotopia.net/ultimate-list-of-funny-british-place-... )

Re: The naughty username checking system used by Twitch

#256

Post by mbg721 »

pjc50 wrote: post #254
marcus_holmes wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that just well-known in the UK though? I've mentioned this to people outside the UK and only occasionally have they known it.

Nobody outside the UK has heard of Scunthorpe because it can't make it through the filters. (There's a ridiculously large list of innuendo place names for tiny villages: https://anglotopia.net/ultimate-list-of-funny-british-place-... )

Hey now, it's not Bielefeld. In Ohio at least, the word it's concealing is taboo enough that nobody who does know wants to explain to their more-sheltered coworkers why the situation is funny. (Clearly the filter wasn't designed in Australia.)

Re: The naughty username checking system used by Twitch

#257

Post by andytruett »

mkr-hn wrote: post #244
wodenokoto wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was something along the lines of "sticks and stones may break my bones but words can break hearts" Basically, the pen is stronger than the sword, kind of morale.

I've never heard that one, but it might be a regional variant. I always heard the other one.

I grew up with 'words can never hurt me', but this variant is my favorite:

Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will hurt forever.

Re: The naughty username checking system used by Twitch

#259

Post by RHSeeger »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #237
mnsc wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I suspect that this balance is what we call "good manners" or "politeness". Or "empathy". And I think on an interpersonal level this is easy. You can't force anyone else to be responsible for how you feel about their words, that is true. But if you say to a colleague or a friend that "when you call me X, that makes me feel bad, could you call me Y instead?". Depending on the friend they might want to understand why…

> But on a collective level we aren't yet (if we'll ever be) as developed a civilization to have empathy on that level. I agree. Which is why we have rules around politeness and manners, which roughly conform to same actions as actual empathy. Which makes sense - people don't always have the same level of empathy, there are lots of neurodivergent people who will never understand empathy but who can learn a set of rul…

> I feel like this respect for being nice to each other so we can all get along is on the wane.

In my mind, part of that is that the rules are getting stricter, so people respect those rules less. Over time, the needle has moved further towards the idea that anyone can be offended by anything anyone else says. Even if it's clear (to the average person) that the speaker meant no harm (or even intended a totally different meaning for the words), the fact that someone is offended means that the speaker is wrong. Professors get sanctioned for using a racist word in a discussion about racism (and sometimes that word in particular).

At some point, people start seeing those rules as ridiculous and no longer respect them (though they may still feel compelled to follow them, for fear of repercussions).

Re: The naughty username checking system used by Twitch

#260

Post by jonathanstrange »

kypro wrote: post #188
qwerty456127 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People should just be taught (I would consider this is an essential skill which should be put in basic school curriculum to psychologically prepare people for the life, many support/sales professionals learn it quickly but the rest of the people don't) words are just words and they don't have to take them seriously. No word is rude until you consider it rude. No word can actually harm you directly. It's you who is in…

I'm quite a feminine guy and I was always called various homophobic slurs at school. Even though I wasn't gay I didn't understand why it would matter if I was so I would just say "ok". Even when the insults could be considered objectively offensive I'm still generally okay with it. I've been called names quite a bit in the workplace over the years and I'm okay with it if makes them happy. Being autistic I don't reall…

The thing with basic etiquette and other secondary virtues is that if you have none of them, the climate can become horribly rough and unpleasant but you can also overdo them. It's all about a reasonable equilibrium.

As for name calling and slurs at work, I don't see a reason why these should ever be tolerated. Someone who cannot demonstrate a minimum of politeness towards their colleagues shouldn't be part of the team. To me this is a no-brainer.

Usernames are a bit different IMHO. In a general social network, offensive usernames give important clues that allow you to avoid all contact and block users before you even talk to them. So maybe banning them does more of a disservice than a service to other users.

Post reply on HN