Censoring words

[Joseph Krol]

A censor button which stops any rude words appearing, for when you are apterousing in front of an important person. For this we must make a list. Spindlex perhaps?

List
PENIS
GOBSHITE
BUGGER

[Mark James]

Words are not rude in and of themselves, it's the context in which they are used that makes them such. A truly important person would understand this.

[Gavin Chipper]

A censor button which stops any rude words appearing, for when you are apterousing in front of an important person. For this we must make a list. Spindlex perhaps?

List
PENIS
GOBSHITE
BUGGER

I think these four words pretty much cover it. LIST is the worst of course.

[Charlie Reams]

A censor button which stops any rude words appearing, for when you are apterousing in front of an important person. For this we must make a list. Spindlex perhaps?

List
PENIS
GOBSHITE
BUGGER

no

[Matt Morrison]

A censor button which stops any rude words appearing, for when you are apterousing in front of an important person. For this we must make a list. Spindlex perhaps?

List
PENIS
GOBSHITE
BUGGER

no

Didn't you listen to Mark, Charlie? He's already explained it's only the context where they are used. NO isn't that bad unless you are saying something like "No, I won't suck you off, even though you made me a lovely dinner."

[Lesley Hines]

Is there a reason why you can't input non-existent letters for conundrums? I had a conundrum where the answer was WEEKENDED and I saw it as WEEKENDER, so it didn't let me type the final R. So if I'd been more on the ball, I could have blagged that, although I would have been watching out for Corby-shaped shadows for the rest of my life. But anyway, I think it makes it easier to blag conundrums as it is now.

Just a thing where the reality of a keyboard gets in the way. It makes typos much less likely at the expense of allowing a very occasional blag. Now the letters get hidden it's also that much harder to blag.

OK, cheers - I thought it might have been to stop GANDISEEG.

Don't think it's worked

[Lesley Hines]

A censor button which stops any rude words appearing, for when you are apterousing in front of an important person. For this we must make a list. Spindlex perhaps?

List
PENIS
GOBSHITE
BUGGER

I can't believe you think any of these are actually rude - perfectly reasonable biological / descriptive / legal terms AFAICS

[Gavin Chipper]

A censor button which stops any rude words appearing, for when you are apterousing in front of an important person. For this we must make a list. Spindlex perhaps?

List
PENIS
GOBSHITE
BUGGER

I can't believe you think any of these are actually rude - perfectly reasonable biological / descriptive / legal terms AFAICS

He probably means that he doesn't want his parents to see them (cos he's scared they'll stop him playing), rather than a statement of what he thinks of the words. This is all a guess of course.

[Joseph Krol]

A censor button which stops any rude words appearing, for when you are apterousing in front of an important person. For this we must make a list. Spindlex perhaps?

List
PENIS
GOBSHITE
BUGGER

I can't believe you think any of these are actually rude - perfectly reasonable biological / descriptive / legal terms AFAICS

He probably means that he doesn't want his parents to see them (cos he's scared they'll stop him playing), rather than a statement of what he thinks of the words. This is all a guess of course.

Basically yeah.

[Charlie Reams]

He probably means that he doesn't want his parents to see them (cos he's scared they'll stop him playing), rather than a statement of what he thinks of the words. This is all a guess of course.

Basically yeah.

If your parents are actually terrified of you seeing the word penis then you've got bigger problems than apterous.

[Gavin Chipper]

I think it would be a good idea to have a numbers only duel once a week (which can be any variant). It's probably come up before, but I'd probably have fewer conundrums in most of the duels. I find it a bit annoying when I think I'm doing quite well and then a conundrum comes along and can make or break (usually break) the whole thing. So I'd have no conundrums at all most of the time (certainly lots of the time anyway). I think you could polarise it a bit more so that you either have no conundrums or loads of them.

[Mark James]

I think it would be a good idea to have a numbers only duel once a week (which can be any variant). It's probably come up before, but I'd probably have fewer conundrums in most of the duels. I find it a bit annoying when I think I'm doing quite well and then a conundrum comes along and can make or break (usually break) the whole thing. So I'd have no conundrums at all most of the time (certainly lots of the time anyway). I think you could polarise it a bit more so that you either have no conundrums or loads of them.

I personally think every duel should have at least one numbers round, one letters round and one conundrum. I'd like a slight increase in the variety of variants for the duel, although its been good on this front recently. Just no more goatdown where we don't get to pick the final letter please.

[Gavin Chipper]

I think it would be a good idea to have a numbers only duel once a week (which can be any variant). It's probably come up before, but I'd probably have fewer conundrums in most of the duels. I find it a bit annoying when I think I'm doing quite well and then a conundrum comes along and can make or break (usually break) the whole thing. So I'd have no conundrums at all most of the time (certainly lots of the time anyway). I think you could polarise it a bit more so that you either have no conundrums or loads of them.

I personally think every duel should have at least one numbers round, one letters round and one conundrum. I'd like a slight increase in the variety of variants for the duel, although its been good on this front recently. Just no more goatdown where we don't get to pick the final letter please.

I used to think that was a bit weird, but I think the purpose is that the duellist is supposed to always pick the best letter, so you use the last letter as a clue to what might be there.

[Jon Corby]

If your parents are actually terrified of you seeing the word penis then you've got bigger problems than apterous.

Don't be stupid Charlie, it's a perfectly reasonable request. My 7 year old plays lots of games on the computer, would I rather that they didn't occasionally display rude/sexual/adult words? Of course. I know you're not making a game for kids, but it's not explicitly an adult game either, loads of kids (and elderly who would be offended by rude words) watch Countdown. Whether or not penis even falls into the category of "words you shouldn't see" is also kinda debatable.

Yeah it's in the nature of the game, and it is a bit of a tricky one to work around (I haven't given it a huge amount of thought, would you disallow "rude" words in such games if the player themselves comes up with one etc), but don't go on like he's being stupid for bringing it up, or has some kind of issue because his parents would rather he didn't see such things.

It's a bit of a moot point in Joseph's particular case, in that it seems he's given the freedom of the forum (I wouldn't allow my kids on it), but you can't honestly find it that crazy can you? Look at the (mini) furore over SHITHEADS appearing as a conundrum on the Wii game. That shouldn't have happened IMO (bad oversight on the developers' part), the same as Mario shouldn't say "course cleared, you clever cunt".

[Jon O'Neill]

The fact that Mario is a cunt isn't integral to that game. Swear words are integral to this one, in that they make up the dictionary. The dictionary is our sacred text. To Bowdlerize it would be blasphemous and an insult to young people who want to play this game.

[Joseph Krol]

I'm not sure how it came across, but I attempted to ask for a censor button which just asteriskised all rude words, in chat and in games. I don't want them removed from the dictionary, that would be ******* idiotic.

[Lesley Hines]

Yeah, sorry, I'm with Charlie on this one. No-one's trying to be offensive in their use of the word - they're just declarations that are valid from the word list offered by the ODE. I'm also pretty confident that not a single younger player will learn an offensive word from playing apterous, so if they already know them where's the problem? I'd be inclined to agree more about the Junior version since that does actively describe itself as a junior version, but again if they're words the child already knows where's the problem? They've shown obscenities on the show (granted not displayed them on the board) where they've been valid declarations, and TV probably reaches a wider audience than apterous.

I do agree strongly though that I wouldn't allow my wee ankle-biter the freedom they've been afforded on the internet.

Edit having read Joseph's post: sorry, again I'm not into censoring adults' conversations. I think it should be more of a case that if your parents are concerned by it they should be monitoring your internet use more closely, rather than a child exercising censorship to hoodwink your parents about what it is you're seeing.

[Ryan Taylor]

Edit having read Joseph's post: sorry, again I'm not into censoring adults' conversations. I think it should be more of a case that if your parents are concerned by it they should be monitoring your internet use more closely, rather than a child exercising censorship to hoodwink your parents about what it is you're seeing.

Yep. This is the internet. If you're allowed access to internet at that age then you should be prepared for things like bottleguy, 2 Girls 1 Cup, the word "cunt" and mild racism.

Edit: I was even grossed out by this that I heard someone discussing today.

[Lesley Hines]

this

Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwww. I learned something there.

[Jon Corby]

Incredible.

Let's say you're at a family occasion, maybe playing a game of Scrabble after Christmas dinner.

You're playing with your 7 year old niece and your 85 year old grandmother.

Would you play the word "cunt", or would you deem it inappropriate to do so?

(Edit to add that if you're not from one, pretend you're from a regular, nice sort of family)

[Jon Corby]

They've shown obscenities on the show (granted not displayed them on the board) where they've been valid declarations, and TV probably reaches a wider audience than apterous.

When? And how did they "show" them if not on the board?

[Joseph Krol]

Incredible.

Let's say you're at a family occasion, maybe playing a game of Scrabble after Christmas dinner.

You're playing with your 7 year old niece and your 85 year old grandmother.

Would you play the word "cunt", or would you deem it inappropriate to do so?

What would my rack be?

[Adam Gillard]

TV probably reaches a wider audience than apterous.

High praise indeed, Charlie...

[Jon O'Neill]

I really don't think kids having a free reign on the internet is a big deal. I reckon bombarded with all aspects of the internet, Alaskan Pipelines and all, teaches you enough valuable life lessons to make it all worthwhile, even when you consider the negatives: mild (sometimes severe) addiction to hardcore pornography, the playful (sometimes brutal) trolling and what it can do to a young person's all too fragile self-esteem, and the mild (sometimes Innis Carson) addiction to hardcore word games.

Everything negative I read in the media about the Internet seems to involve people doing retarded things that I was already too Internet-savvy to do by the time I was eleven and had had a free reign on the internet for a year or two.

[Jon O'Neill]

Incredible.

Let's say you're at a family occasion, maybe playing a game of Scrabble after Christmas dinner.

You're playing with your 7 year old niece and your 85 year old grandmother.

Would you play the word "cunt", or would you deem it inappropriate to do so?

(Edit to add that if you're not from one, pretend you're from a regular, nice sort of family)

No way I play "cunt" there. You may find this hard to believe Jon, but the Internet is not a family gathering, even if we are related.

[Jon O'Neill]

I want to try an analogy. Let's say your daughter wanted to read a book that, although the subject matter was fine (we're not talking Lolita here), had the word cunt in it. Would you stop her? At what age do you stop shielding her from that word, even if she knows that it exists?

[Jon Corby]

No way I play "cunt" there. You may find this hard to believe Jon, but the Internet is not a family gathering, even if we are related.

Sure, the internet is not a family gathering. This isn't really "the internet" though, it's an incarnation of Countdown. Should children/the elderly (if you'll forgive the generalisation) be able to play Countdown?

Do you think it's fine that the Wii game (which presumably advertises itself as 6+ or something) presented SHITHEADS as a conundrum? Come on, you can't possibly think that.

[Jon Corby]

I want to try an analogy. Let's say your daughter wanted to read a book that, although the subject matter was fine (we're not talking Lolita here), had the word cunt in it. Would you stop her? At what age do you stop shielding her from that word, even if she knows that it exists?

Yes, there is an age at which you shouldn't be exposed to that word. What that age is depends on the individual, and as a parent you help to decide that. I personally don't think playing a word game* should carry that risk.

Do you think a child's speak and spell toy should include the words FUCK, SHIT and CUNT? I know apterous isn't "for children", but I do think it's a worthwhile discussion whether they should/could be censorable to enable a wider audience to enjoy it.


* I'm not actually saying that I think Charlie should do any of this - I wrote a Countdown game which was never intended for mass consumption and even I wondered whether to exclude them (ie from Conundrums, Dictionary Corner etc) because people like my mum would play but in the end the main reason I didn't was because it's not an easy thing to do - like I said, where do you draw the line, do you disallow the words altogether etc) I just don't think that Joseph should have been mocked for suggesting it, or told that he (or I think his family, was the implication) had "issues" because the presence of that word in the game wasn't desirable.

[Michael Wallace]

I think the world has an utterly retarded obsession with 'swear words'.

[Mark James]

Incredible.

Let's say you're at a family occasion, maybe playing a game of Scrabble after Christmas dinner.

You're playing with your 7 year old niece and your 85 year old grandmother.

Would you play the word "cunt", or would you deem it inappropriate to do so?

(Edit to add that if you're not from one, pretend you're from a regular, nice sort of family)

Yes I play it. Particularly if I can put the c on a triple letter score tile. If my niece doesn't know what it is and asks, I simply explain that it is a rude word that you wouldn't want to say to people but is fine to use when playing scrabble.

[Lesley Hines]

They've shown obscenities on the show (granted not displayed them on the board) where they've been valid declarations, and TV probably reaches a wider audience than apterous.

When? And how did they "show" them if not on the board?

IIRC, for example, when Charlie submitted WANKING they showed him saying the word but they didn't put it on the board. That's a question of semantics, really.

In the case of playing Scrabble of course I wouldn't submit your example, but a quick search will show that's not a word I've ever written on here either. I don't like it and don't use it. My personal preference. I'm not that desperate to win a friendly game of Scrabble with family that I would offend an elderly family member or teach my son words he's too young for. I would certainly play it at a competitive level though if it was the best submission available. Also, fwiw, if you play with phonics toys you can quite often get them to say fuck or similar. Bad planning on the manufacturer's part.

I think Joseph's query is a bit different though. His objection is from preventing people he sees as authority figures from seeing words that may be deemed unsuitable, rather than himself seeing them or, having seen them and not understood them, researched them and found them to be unsuitable for himself at his age. I maintain there's an argument for limiting the word list of the Junior game, but since he plays the adult/full version (surely defined by implication as there's an alternative Junior game) there's no argument for limiting the word list or introducing censorship. He also very much shot himself in the foot by starting a list of words I shouldn't like my son at that age repeating (not BUGGER or GOBSHITE anyway - he has a penis and knows what it's called), further underlining it's an objection to "being caught" rather than the words. I'm sure his parents are mature enough to realise they're valid declarations and won't criticise him for them being part of the game, but rather recognise that since he plays the full game well, coming to contact with these words will be an inevitable consequence of him growing up. I highly doubt they've gone through their family dictionary with Tippex. Either way it's their responsibility to censor his internet usage, not Charlie's. Also I don't think Charlie was suggesting his family has "issues", just that PENIS was a funny inclusion for the list. That was how I read it, anyway, but he's a big boy and can speak for himself.

Oh, and I said probably as I have no data either way, but apterous is only available on the internet and Countdown is available both on TV and the internet, and amusing / unusual submissions are more likely still to become internet clips. I may be wrong, and frequently am.

[Jon O'Neill]

I want to try an analogy. Let's say your daughter wanted to read a book that, although the subject matter was fine (we're not talking Lolita here), had the word cunt in it. Would you stop her? At what age do you stop shielding her from that word, even if she knows that it exists?

Yes, there is an age at which you shouldn't be exposed to that word. What that age is depends on the individual, and as a parent you help to decide that. I personally don't think playing a word game* should carry that risk.

Do you think a child's speak and spell toy should include the words FUCK, SHIT and CUNT? I know apterous isn't "for children", but I do think it's a worthwhile discussion whether they should/could be censorable to enable a wider audience to enjoy it.


* I'm not actually saying that I think Charlie should do any of this - I wrote a Countdown game which was never intended for mass consumption and even I wondered whether to exclude them (ie from Conundrums, Dictionary Corner etc) because people like my mum would play but in the end the main reason I didn't was because it's not an easy thing to do - like I said, where do you draw the line, do you disallow the words altogether etc) I just don't think that Joseph should have been mocked for suggesting it, or told that he (or I think his family, was the implication) had "issues" because the presence of that word in the game wasn't desirable.

He wasn't mocked, there was clearly a misunderstanding. I think Joseph's concern wasn't 100% serious. Your concern is a different one, and we're having the worthwhile discussion now.

The children's toy shouldn't include those words as they're slang, along with a load of other words that aren't at the core of our vocabulary. Again I'm not really following the analogy though.

The point is, that parent probably saw shitheads and thought, who can I complain to? That's what some people are like, unfortunately. They think the world's against them. Is this ACTUALLY a problem? Of course it isn't. Does the kid have psychological problems caused by the trauma of seeing shitheads spelt out in white on blue? No. We've had wankers, bastard, all sorts on the program before, I don't see how this is any different.

The whole debate reminds me of when the lottery had just started, and my mum allowed me and my brother one swear every week she didn't win anything. We came out with stuff like bugger and balls, and then one week I did cunt. She went apeshit at me, I got slippered big time. Also I remember a time I shouted SIT! at my old dog Wilfred but I accidentally said SHIT! and my parents didn't mind, which was cool. It's all about context.

[Joseph Krol]

The point of my original post was because my teacher was thinking of using Apterous as a warm-up activity in English. Of course if you don't want me to I can easily dissuade her...

[Rhys Benjamin]

The point of my original post was because my teacher was thinking of using Apterous as a warm-up activity in English. Of course if you don't want me to I can easily dissuade her...

Apterous spins quickly throughout your school - I have only 1 person converted to the good addiction.

[Jon Corby]

The point is, that parent probably saw shitheads and thought, who can I complain to?

Yeah, undoubtedly they weren't "horrified" and whatever else the Sun said, but nonetheless it shouldn't have happened. It's marketed as a family game - hell, it IS a family game, and unsuitable words should not appear like that. Absolutely not. You wouldn't expect the board game to have printed conundrum cards with profanities on them, and the programmers definitely had a responsibility to deal with this sort of thing, and they fucked up. No doubt about it.

Charlie's not quite in the same boat of course; he doesn't have the brand to think of, he isn't marketing apterous as a family game, etc etc.

Nobody's going to be traumatised by seeing such words, and I'm not suggesting that. But nonetheless, you don't want your kids being unnecessarily exposed to such things. I've got young kids, they like to play Countdown occasionally. As it stands, apterous isn't really an option for them to play. We have plenty of other "family-friendly" implementations we can use though. Joseph's classroom example is a great one - Countdown's a great game for improving spelling and numeracy (and just getting the brain going) and ideal for a classroom setting, but apterous probably precludes itself from being a viable implementation to use because of this. IMO.

[JimBentley]

Countdown's a great game for improving spelling and numeracy (and just getting the brain going) and ideal for a classroom setting, but apterous probably precludes itself from being a viable implementation to use because of this. IMO.

I do think both sides of this argument have valid points, but assuming that a bowdlerised version of the apterous dictionary was made available, wouldn't it also be necessary to rig the letters selections to ensure that obscene words didn't appear as selections were being made? Choosing consonant, vowel, consonant consonant could easily bring out CUNT on the letters board itself, even if it had been taken out of the lexicon.

[Charlie Reams]

Nobody's going to be traumatised by seeing such words, and I'm not suggesting that. But nonetheless, you don't want your kids being unnecessarily exposed to such things. I've got young kids, they like to play Countdown occasionally. As it stands, apterous isn't really an option for them to play. We have plenty of other "family-friendly" implementations we can use though. Joseph's classroom example is a great one - Countdown's a great game for improving spelling and numeracy (and just getting the brain going) and ideal for a classroom setting, but apterous probably precludes itself from being a viable implementation to use because of this. IMO.

Sure. If someone else wants to make a website sanitized for adults' strange perception of what's appropriate for children, good luck to them. apterous is not that website.

[Jon Corby]

Choosing consonant, vowel, consonant consonant could easily bring out CUNT on the letters board itself, even if it had been taken out of the lexicon.

Hmm.. CVCC also could yield (wield) FUCK or COCK. It looks like this particular problem can be easily rectified by removing all the 'C's from the consternant pile.

[Jon Corby]

Sure. If someone else wants to make a website sanitized for adults' strange perception of what's appropriate for children, good luck to them. apterous is not that website.

There's nothing strange about not wanting young children to see swears unnecessarily, you cunt.

[Charlie Reams]

Sure. If someone else wants to make a website sanitized for adults' strange perception of what's appropriate for children, good luck to them. apterous is not that website.

There's nothing strange about not wanting young children to see swears unnecessarily, you cunt.

Your kids know these words already. They use them all the time when you aren't listening, and no one is any the worse for it. How is it that every child knows this and then conspires to forget it as an adult? (And by the way, it's not unnecessary -- this is a word game and swear words are words. It's not like the game is actually calling anyone a cunt.)

[Jon O'Neill]

Sure. If someone else wants to make a website sanitized for adults' strange perception of what's appropriate for children, good luck to them. apterous is not that website.

There's nothing strange about not wanting young children to see swears unnecessarily, you cunt.

Your kids know these words already. They use them all the time when you aren't listening, and no one is any the worse for it. How is it that every child knows this and then conspires to forget it as an adult? (And by the way, it's not unnecessary -- this is a word game and swear words are words. It's not like the game is actually calling anyone a cunt.)

You'd understand if you had kids.

[Jon Corby]

My 7 year old daughter does not know the word 'cunt'.

Okay, I'll rephrase slightly - there's nothing strange about wanting to children to play a word game without it involving swears. (You cunt.)

[Lesley Hines]

Choosing consonant, vowel, consonant consonant could easily bring out CUNT on the letters board itself, even if it had been taken out of the lexicon.

Hmm.. CVCC also could yield (wield) FUCK or COCK. It looks like this particular problem can be easily rectified by removing all the 'C's from the consternant pile.

WANK

[Lesley Hines]

Joseph's classroom example is a great one - Countdown's a great game for improving spelling and numeracy (and just getting the brain going) and ideal for a classroom setting, but apterous probably precludes itself from being a viable implementation to use because of this. IMO.

That's not an example, it's a business opportunity Give it a customised dictionary and flog the subscription to schools for a classroom sized user list (32 + 1 teacher should do it) - mute and disable the chat for those users and the bank manager's your new best friend.

[Mark James]

Sure. If someone else wants to make a website sanitized for adults' strange perception of what's appropriate for children, good luck to them. apterous is not that website.

There's nothing strange about not wanting young children to see swears unnecessarily, you cunt.

Someone should probably start a new thread to continue this discussion rather than taking over the feature request thread but I just wanted to know what age will your kids have to be for you not to mind them being "exposed" to swear words?

[Mark James]

My 7 year old daughter does not know the word 'cunt'.

Okay, I'll rephrase slightly - there's nothing strange about wanting to children to play a word game without it involving swears. (You cunt.)

Actually that is strange. I'd much rather my kids (admittedly I don't have any that I know of) discover the word cunt in a word game where its completely neutral rather than discovering it in an offensive context like someone actually calling them one with intent.

[Jon Corby]

My 7 year old daughter does not know the word 'cunt'.

Okay, I'll rephrase slightly - there's nothing strange about wanting to children to play a word game without it involving swears. (You cunt.)

Actually that is strange. I'd much rather my kids (admittedly I don't have any that I know of) discover the word cunt in a word game where its completely neutral rather than discovering it in an offensive context like someone actually calling them one with intent.

Great, we're now veering completely the other way then into having a swears-only version of apterous for young children, so they can discover rude words delicately. What a lovely idea.

I can't work out whether you're just being obtuse for the sake of it, playing devil's advocate, or are genuinely retarded. It really isn't strange to want young children to be able play a word game that won't involve swear words. It's totally, totally normal.

[Jon O'Neill]

My 7 year old daughter does not know the word 'cunt'.

Okay, I'll rephrase slightly - there's nothing strange about wanting to children to play a word game without it involving swears. (You cunt.)

Actually that is strange. I'd much rather my kids (admittedly I don't have any that I know of) discover the word cunt in a word game where its completely neutral rather than discovering it in an offensive context like someone actually calling them one with intent.

Great, we're now veering completely the other way then into having a swears-only version of apterous for young children, so they can discover rude words delicately. What a lovely idea.

I can't work out whether you're just being obtuse for the sake of it, playing devil's advocate, or are genuinely retarded. It really isn't strange to want young children to be able play a word game that won't involve swear words. It's totally, totally normal.

Well it used to be normal to beat your kid to within an inch of their life to get discipline across to them. It used to be normal to force left-handed kids to write with their right hand. Nobody's being obtuse or accusing you of not saying what's normal, we're just trying to rationalise it. I think we're all agreed that swearing isn't the end of the world, so why do normal parents react so strongly to their kids being exposed to it?

[Lesley Hines]

It really isn't strange to want young children to be able play a word game that won't involve swear words. It's totally, totally normal.

Fine, absolutely. It's just then maybe apterous isn't the word game for them, and it's not like there aren't others available. Again, there's an argument for limiting the word list on the Junior version, but that's it. The true beauty of apterous is that word list is awesome: you know exactly where it comes from and it's complete.

I'd take your point of view more seriously Jon if you hadn't liberally peppered this thread with swears in the full knowledge that at least two under 10s are reading it. It's up to their parents to censor it. There's stuff for kids and stuff that's very definitely adult on YouTube, but it's my responsibility to control what Danny watches rather than his to hide from me what he might be watching. Same difference I reckon.

[Mark James]

My 7 year old daughter does not know the word 'cunt'.

Okay, I'll rephrase slightly - there's nothing strange about wanting to children to play a word game without it involving swears. (You cunt.)

Actually that is strange. I'd much rather my kids (admittedly I don't have any that I know of) discover the word cunt in a word game where its completely neutral rather than discovering it in an offensive context like someone actually calling them one with intent.

Great, we're now veering completely the other way then into having a swears-only version of apterous for young children, so they can discover rude words delicately. What a lovely idea.

I can't work out whether you're just being obtuse for the sake of it, playing devil's advocate, or are genuinely retarded. It really isn't strange to want young children to be able play a word game that won't involve swear words. It's totally, totally normal.

First of all when, you say "discover rude words"; Words are not rude. Context makes them so. And you still haven't answered my question as to what age you think will be appropriate for them to discover these words. Over eighteen? If you were against the word outright I could slightly understand your position but you're clearly not.

[Charlie Reams]

It's totally, totally normal.

Surely you don't really think this is an argument in favour of anything?

[Ian Volante]

Sure. If someone else wants to make a website sanitized for adults' strange perception of what's appropriate for children, good luck to them. apterous is not that website.

There's nothing strange about not wanting young children to see swears unnecessarily, you cunt.

Your kids know these words already. They use them all the time when you aren't listening, and no one is any the worse for it. How is it that every child knows this and then conspires to forget it as an adult? (And by the way, it's not unnecessary -- this is a word game and swear words are words. It's not like the game is actually calling anyone a cunt.)

I remember discovering FUCK at around eleven years old. And I certainly didn't know CUNTFLAPS until quite a bit later.

[Jon O'Neill]

The lottery thing I mentioned earlier was soon after its inception, so I knew "cunt" certainly by the time I was 6.

[Jon Corby]

Fine, absolutely. It's just then maybe apterous isn't the word game for them... It's up to their parents to censor it. There's stuff for kids and stuff that's very definitely adult on YouTube, but it's my responsibility to control what Danny watches rather than his to hide from me what he might be watching. Same difference I reckon.

Yes, I completely agree - the point is that apterous is a way to play a popular television game renowned for its educational qualities, and in teaching youngsters letters, numbers, spelling, arithmetic. In fact, it's not just 'a' way, it's by far the best way. Should it really be off-limits to youngsters* in the same way that an obscene/inappropriate YouTube video is?

First of all when, you say "discover rude words"; Words are not rude. Context makes them so. And you still haven't answered my question as to what age you think will be appropriate for them to discover these words. Over eighteen? If you were against the word outright I could slightly understand your position but you're clearly not.

Cool, option three it is then.

Your question is unanswerable in general terms. It's not an 'age' thing per se, it will clearly vary depending on the individual - just like everything else that you gradually become exposed to as you get older. It's not just kids either though - I have no idea how old you are, but most people of an older generation wouldn't want or expect to see such words used in a game. Why do you think Channel 4 bleep rude words (WANKER), or scrap rounds altogether (SHITFACE) if nobody's bothered?

* - edit to add that I'm not actually trying to campaign for Charlie to do anything about this, but it is a reasonable concern to raise. I'm sure if apterous were to become mainstream or officially affiliated with Countdown, it would HAVE to be addressed.

[Jon Corby]

It's totally, totally normal.

Surely you don't really think this is an argument in favour of anything?

Not as such, but it can often be a concise way of saying something rather than spending pages explaining why something is the norm.

[Mark James]

Why do you think Channel 4 bleep rude words (WANKER), or scrap rounds altogether (SHITFACE) if nobody's bothered?

I never said people weren't bothered I'm saying they shouldn't be. I was on the other side of the coin in that I was offended when both of those situations occurred. There was a lexicographer on Irish radio who did an origin of words thing like Susie and he would discuss "swear" words, and this was at half three in the afternoon. I never heard of anyone complaining and even if they did he had already explained its context that makes a word rude. This could easily happen on Countdown too. By the way, he explained, although its only one theory, that cunt derives from a word that means fluffy like a rabbit's tale. The Irish for rabbit is coinin. That's not the exact word he said it comes from but you can see there's probably a similar root for them.

[Ryan Taylor]

By the way, he explained, although its only one theory, that cunt derives from a word that means fluffy like a rabbit's tale. The Irish for rabbit is coinin. That's not the exact word he said it comes from but you can see there's probably a similar root for them.

I thought "cunt" came from old English "queynte" as in "You shall have queynte right enough at eve" from Chaucer's Wife of Bath. At least that's what I put in my A-level exam because I wanted to say "cunt".

[Mark James]

First of all when, you say "discover rude words"; Words are not rude. Context makes them so. And you still haven't answered my question as to what age you think will be appropriate for them to discover these words. Over eighteen? If you were against the word outright I could slightly understand your position but you're clearly not.

Cool, option three it is then.

Your question is unanswerable in general terms. It's not an 'age' thing per se, it will clearly vary depending on the individual - just like everything else that you gradually become exposed to as you get older.

I was talking about an individual case, your daughter. Suppose we were family friends and you, your daughter and I enjoyed playing scrabble together, when would you deem it ok for me to play the word cunt?

[Jon Corby]

I was talking about an individual case, your daughter. Suppose we were family friends and you, your daughter and I enjoyed playing scrabble together, when would you deem it ok for me to play the word cunt?

She's seven FFS, so definitely not yet. Can't you see that it doesn't make sense to give you an exact date now beyond "not yet"? Seriously I think you're a bit fucked up to ever consider it necessary during childhood tbh.

Here's another similar example. She has Dr Kawashima's Brain Training: How Old Is Your Brain? on her Nintendo DS, which is advertised as being suitable for ages 3+. In one of the games, it shows you a big list of (random) 4-letter words, and you have to memorise as many as you can in two minutes, and then you get another couple of minutes to enter as many as you can remember. If you were supplying the list of 4 letter words for use in this game, would you have any qualms about including "FUCK", "SHIT" and "CUNT"?

[Ralph Gillions]

"Ma's out, Pa's out, let's talk rude,
Pee, poe, belly, bum, drawers."
Flanders & Swann (I think)

It always seems to me that there are two main bodies.
One body will be wary of using 'dodgy' words in public places, certain social settings, or with strangers.
They do not wish to offend, so they err on the side of caution. They may see it as being courteous.

There seems to be another group which feels free to use the 'dodgy' words in any setting. 'It's a legitimate word, so I'm using it' they feel.
Sometimes it seems to be done defiantly, sometimes to shock, sometimes in an immature and juvenile way, and sometimes because that is their natural way of speaking.

I suspect these two groups will never come together in a compromise.