Links with explicit language, and Language Warnings?

  • Thread starter twitcher
  • 3 comments
  • 779 views
twitcher

twitcher

6,293
Canada
Canada
I’ve always been under the impression that when linking a video that has explicit language in it, we’re supposed to indicate what’s in the video by declaring a “Language Warning” in the post.

I’ve just had a post deleted because the video I linked had “too many expletives for a simple language warning”.

What is the appropriate number of expletives that can still get by with a simple language warning? Are we talking about different words, or does repeating the same expletive multiple times count?

Would I be ok to post the video if I gave a more detailed language warning?

Just looking for some guidance so I don’t make the same mistake again.
 
twitcher
What is the appropriate number of expletives that can still get by with a simple language warning? Are we talking about different words, or does repeating the same expletive multiple times count?
Click to expand...
The limit is 3 ****s and 2 *****, although just 1 **** is right out.

If you think that's too flippant, you will not get a precise answer.

twitcher
Would I be ok to post the video if I gave a more detailed language warning?
Click to expand...
In this case, I would say no. If it was a really important point that had to be made then possibly, but it isn't.
 
twitcher
What is the appropriate number of expletives that can still get by with a simple language warning?
Click to expand...
Acceptable Use Policy
You will not use profanity in the forums, nor link to content which contains offensive language without sufficient warning.
Click to expand...
Zero.

The warning needs to be sufficient. When your post is 98% directly embedded media and 2% "This is funny, language warning", that's not sufficient - someone can click on the content without reading and be immediately thrust into a video that would get them fired (or facing awkward questions while their six-year old is isolating with them) when it blurts out from their work computer or phone.

If you absolutely must share media of this type don't embed it. Put spoiler tags around it and make it crystal clear that the content isn't safe for work in any way. Like this:

Your sweary content here, for some reason.

That would qualify as sufficient - someone has to click through the warning to access the content. Nest them if you want to double-bag it.

Your sweary content here, for some reason.

Or consider not sharing it at all.
 
Famine
Zero.

The warning needs to be sufficient. When your post is 98% directly embedded media and 2% "This is funny, language warning", that's not sufficient - someone can click on the content without reading and be immediately thrust into a video that would get them fired (or facing awkward questions while their six-year old is isolating with them) when it blurts out from their work computer or phone.

If you absolutely must share media of this type don't embed it. Put spoiler tags around it and make it crystal clear that the content isn't safe for work in any way. Like this:

Your sweary content here, for some reason.

That would qualify as sufficient - someone has to click through the warning to access the content. Nest them if you want to double-bag it.

Your sweary content here, for some reason.

Or consider not sharing it at all.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I just didn’t know what staff were looking for in terms of “sufficient”. Now I know, thanks for clearing this up, I’ll follow these steps next time.

daan
The limit is 3 ****s and 2 *****, although just 1 **** is right out.

If you think that's too flippant, you will not get a precise answer.


In this case, I would say no. If it was a really important point that had to be made then possibly, but it isn't.
Click to expand...
Well that clears up nothing. Thanks for the non-help.
 

Latest Posts

Back