Striking the right balance between having a welcoming environment and salty language

Right there with you, ElsieDee. And everything you said seems to comport with the site guidelines, which I quote here:
Civility – ‘Is it kind/ helpful?’ Please support a civil and respectful environment and use the forum to share knowledge skills and interests. Please no
personal attacks, e.g. name calling, disparaging remarks
harassment, e.g. stalking, bullying, verbal abuse, active and passive intimidation
offensive language and content, e.g. profanities directed at others, excessive profanities, bickering
hate speech around e.g. race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability or other traits,
sexual content, e.g. sexually explicit content, avatars, pictures, innuendos.”
And if anyone doesn’t feel like reading the longer version, this image sums it up perfectly.

1 Like

At this point I’m fairly sure of a few things:

1.) If reading this thread Marssy is probably sitting back laughing her t*ts off while saying; “It’s not as easy as it looks is it”

2.) That harder you beat a dead horse has never made it go faster.

3.) It’s probably better to re-lock this thread and make our decisions and move on.

4.) I’m pretty sure George Carlin already debated both sides of this argument way back in 1972.


I don’t think anything about promoting Hooter’s is kind or helpful or civil to the community at large.

Well, folks, it has been a short and interesting experiment, but I’ve heard enough here to not make me want to post on Hungry Onion anymore.

I think all of you do actually have lines you would draw about where you would eat based on what the servers were wearing. Fair bet none of you would dine at Injun’ Joe’s if the help were all Hispanic males made to dress up like “braves” when they brought you and your kids your “wampum fries”.

Hooters doesn’t cross a line for you, but it crosses a line for some people, and I think rightly so. And what was begun as a discussion of specific words that might offend, has morphed into several people defining “civility” on the site as banning content and even clear disagreement against a majority consensus, and telling people who stick to their guns about offensive marketing tactics in the food industry that they are being against the Hungry Onion “community”. If you go look at the Hooter’s thread now, people are forbidden from talking about anything but the “food.”

I saw enough of Chowhound to see the same attitude. Not interesting to me. Not inspiring.

It is necessary to criticise things like Hooters and Injun Joes, and that might not feel kind, but trust me, the world would be a much kinder place without stuff like that and it is helpful to say so.


1 Like

I hope so. I think she seriously mishandled a lot of the complaints, but the way she’s been maligned here and at Chowhound is pretty disgraceful when you think about what’s actually at stake. (Not a whole hell of a lot.)


What Hooters is is a business with a particular shtick. Whether or not it’s a place someone would choose to patronize, based on the shtick and the food, is up to them.

I also said:

1 Like

Thank you all for the feedback. Let me get back to what I meant by PG-13 when I came up with the site guideline

The intent is that profanities and more salty language can be used in ways they are used in a PG-13 movie (instead of PG/ G). Drunk sailor language that creates an unwelcoming/ hostile environment for fellow participants and potential participants are meant to be excluded from the site. Attacks on others using these words are meant to be excluded.

I am not in favor of auto censor that blanks out words deemed ‘offensive’ by default. Besides being ineffective, I am of the opinion that one should take responsibility of his/her own language in the interaction with others.

I am not in favor of censorship because of saltiness. I certainly recognize the irony that this came from me given of what many perceived to be excessive censorship on the Hooters thread. When the salty language definitely wades into offensive territory like racism, sexism, etc then it should be removed. The grey area is what should be debated- the area where it may be offensive or has the potential to get into offensive territory but not there yet dependent on whom you ask.

The hooters thread- food should be a topic to discuss of course. The attire of the servers as its business model and impact on tips to me, and this is a personal opinion, is fair game as long as the discussion is done in a respectful manner, to correct on a statement made earlier.

If you go look at the Hooter’s thread now, people are forbidden from talking about anything but the “food.”

Some potential solutions for threads with explicit language that has concerns:

  • Label the thread title with Explicit language once complaints are received to warn people of language and enter at your own risk. I am leaning towards this one.
  • Move all those threads into one board where these things go. Similar idea, just put them all one place. More work and seems more random to have various topics on cooking, cookware, restaurants all lumped into this place just because of the language)
  • Censor with various method like (which I am not a big fan of)
  1. asterisks,
  2. word replacement,
  3. with the spoiler feature

I am all for intelligent discussions, like this one. Its certainly not easy, but I’d rather have an honest discussion as the site grows and figures things out, than to just hurl a new rule out that may or may not make sense.


One additional clarification, once the label is labeled Explicit language, that a reminder be posted to posters to keep it respectful. It doesn’t mean its a free-for-all afterwards. Offensive stuff is still offensive and should be dealt with.


I think this is the best way forward – then once that “explicit” label goes up, the reader really has no way to complain about language – there’s a warning. There might also be a higher threshold for complaints – someone is going to be offended to just about anything that could ever appear on any forum – when it becomes a trend (what number? don’t know – probably depends on the context and the activity on the thread) then it gets the warning.

This does not, however apply to gratuitous or anything motivated by hatred or ignorance. Obnoxious and antisocial should still not be tolerated, whether it’s in Shakepeare’s English or Tupac’s.


I noticed with my IOS 9 update that we received some new emojis. One the most notable is the middle finger :fu:t3:, which I found interesting to say the least. Maybe we adopt that as the visual warning that things might be a little “salty” if the reader decides to proceed then he/she has been warned.

After all :no_entry_sign: Kind of got worn out after Ghostbusters in the 80’s/90’s we need a hipper new millennium visual warning. So the :fu:t3: gets my vote.


Just in case anyone had any problem seeing them in the body of text.

I’ll admit, I did not read every word of every response on this thread because, quite honestly it grew tiresome. With arguments going round and round and some posters extrapolating notjr’s suprise at how good the wings at Hooters were to support for an immoral business model.

Anyway, my .02. There have been parallels drawn between CH moderation and HO moderation. But honestly, CH has a small staff of paid mods and who knows how many volunteer mods. HO is Sampson, who I assume has a “real” job and cannot by himself monitor every post. And as this site grows, that becomes truer every day.

Second, as many have pointed out terms such as tits, boobs, ass, etc. are permissable in PG-13. I see no harm in stating the obvious, such as the Tilted Kilt uses T&A to attract a certain clientele. But I wouldn’t want to call an individual poster an ass. (Although, I am fond of Harter’s arse/arsewipe terms . . . but we’ve already established the gap between “naughty” words on the two sides of the pond.)

Sometimes, when building a new community, you have to accept that not everybody is comfortable in every community. Sampson founded this community (and I’m sure some days he wonders why :wink: with the priciples of civility and PG13-appropriate language.


It REALLY is, Scoobie. “Tits” and “boobs” have the potential to offend someone? Little amazes me at my advanced age - but that’s amazing.


My day job is at the New York Public Library - like most librarians I am anti-censorship and pro-free speech. More interestingly Mr Rat has worked for many years for WBAI radio in NYC (the NYC station in the Pacifica Network). I assume most of you are familiar with what is sometimes called the Carlin Case:

so he feels the same, of course. But you will note that Pacifica lost the case and ever since this whole question has been something of a legal mess. The government can’t infringe on your first amendment rights - but generally a private entity can.

I would understand the discomfort with the Seven Words if this site had more children and teenagers on it. I don’t really get it, but my feeling is that posting on some person’s website is like being a guest in their home. If they don’t like shoes in their house, you kinda gotta take your shoes off.


This is true. Next time, something else will come up, which will be different than this one, and whatever solutions one may come up this time may not entirely apply next time.


Ok just because I need to ask, is it just Hooters or all sexually “charged” establishments such as the Tilted Kilt too? If it’s all places like they fine, if it’s Hooters specific can I ask why?

Absolutely. While this is a community, Sampson has the final decision. The reason is not simply because he owns the site. In my opinion, a stronger reason is that he has responsibility of this site. If this site fails, it will be his responsibility. Because he has the final responsibility, he also makes the final decisions. While I didn’t like Chowhound recent changes, I never challenge the fact that it is their right. If the new Chowhound crash and burn, then it is their responsibility, not mine.

It is nevertheless helpful for Sampson to hear the overall suggestions/opinions from his guests. In this particular case, if I am correct, the host (Sampson) got a complaint from a guest or two and acted upon it. Then, a few other guests complained about the initial response. So in a sense, it is a “guests vs guests” situation.

I think it is more like guest A played some music and guest B didn’t like guest A’s music of choice. Sampson got involved. Guest C, D, E chimed in…etc.

At the end, Sampson will make the final decision.


But I appreciate his willingness to open the subject to the community and hear the diverse opinions. In the end it is up to him to decide.

So far I find HO a better alternative to both CH and FTC.


Me, too.


From what I’ve seen of Ftc I would prefer spending time in a funeral home.

That’s just mean. It’s a left coast site with R-Rated language. Boston/Philly/NYC is very different than LA/SD/SF.

Philly is a Quaker City–the every other “F” word of LA? Nope, we use “freaking” and “dang.”

I cannot say anything about FTC since I have not registered over there.

Hey, I see myself a San Franciscian. In fact, I will say in general people in the East Coast is rougher than West Coast in term of attitude and language. (hey are we off topic again).

Edited: If you drive through SF and drive through NY, then you will know which city is far more aggressive.