Profanity filter filters more than it should (at least in italian language)

Feedback Bug report
21

Gentlemen, I’ve finished updating and testing the lists of filtered words and expressions for the German, Italian and Portuguese languages:

  • German: I organized the list in alphabetical order, suppressed a repeated entry, then removed a few unnecessary words and included a new one according to @smurph’s suggestions;

  • Italian: The updated list was provided by @lysnew;

  • Portuguese: The updated list is on me: I removed unnecessary entries and included the most commonly words and expressions, plus their usual variations.

I’ve already submitted a pull request for @anoek and @matburt’s consideration. You can keep track of further developments by checking the issue I’ve opened.

In the meantime, the updated file is available at my fork:

I did what I could with the resources I had and I hope you find the result satisfactory.

Now, back to translating 81 Little Lions (based on a second edition, substantially changed, that I’ll release here soon) and A Go Book from a Beginner into Brazilian Portuguese.

Have a nice day! :slight_smile:

2 Likes
22

I think “disabling profanity filter” should also be a lot easier. It is not very clear without searching around or asking how for something that should be as simple as the click of a button. Or is there a reason that it is as difficult as it is?

23
The current solution of changing the profanity filter to a different language is as simple as the click of a button—and the relevant option is right at the top of the settings page. I mean, it's not ideal, but it works, and since the developers are volunteers and don't have much free time, it makes sense that they should focus on more pressing issues.
1 Like
24

That is amazing job @lucasfelix thank you :heart:

1 Like
25

I think maybe there is a misunderstanding in what I said. But, un-colorfying and colorfying the languages on the area that says language filter isn’t conveyed very well. As in while it works and is not “ACTUALLY” difficult. It still is more challenging then it should be.

As for the “pressing issues” I can’t entirely agree or disagree with this. As I don’t know what “pressing issues” there are. But, I will say that you would be shocked how important quality of life updates make a community happy. Not just speaking from someone in a community but someone who runs and ran a larger community then OGS.

But, if there are more pressing issues then I agree. Just nothing I have noticed yet.

26

I did understand, but my point still stands: what we have may not be ideal, but it works well enough. The developers volunteering their free time, harmonizing their contribution with the demands of their personal lives and professional careers, it’s understandable that they choose their fights, so to speak, and prioritize.

I don’t know the inner workings of OGS, if it’s facing any Pressing Issues, but I can think about stuff I would categorize as more pressing than implementing the option to disable the profanity filter. There are 199 open issues at the moment, and glancing at the list I see a number of items that others might find more frustrating:

Anyway, I doubt the devs are even aware of the matter you’re pointing out—at least I haven’t seen it mentioned before, so there’s that. You can always start a thread at the development section or submit an issue of your own.

But the beauty of it is that we don’t even have to wait for a change to take place. OGS’s interface is open source, anyone can contribute. If we’re really keen on a particular improvement, and if we’re willing to put some time it, there’s always the option of implementing ourselves.

I didn’t quite enjoy the fact that, in Portuguese, one couldn’t write “I’m an amateur Go player” without the word “amateur” being filtered while, at the same time, one could be told to “go frak oneself” without any filtering take place, so I decided to do something about it. I hadn’t written a line of Javascript in my life, so I read about regular expressions, learned to write my own, then tested/debugged/rewrote them until they worked the way I wanted. It only took 34 revisions…

…while using a netbook dating from the Mesozoic Era, one that turns itself off whenever someone sneezes in Japan, literally requires a screwdriver to be turned on again, and seriously considers melting should I use it for anything more elaborate than running Nethack, working during stolen hours between putting down metaphorical fires, starting a business, studying, and occasionally making a few absurd moves in correspondence Go matches.

If nothing else, I can say I understand the constraints OGS’s developers have to deal with, working and making do with limited resources, which is why I took the time to write this in the first place. But more importantly: if, despite my own limitations, I was able to do a little bit to fix an issue that bothered me, others can do even better. I mean, this community is filled with some rather amazing individuals.

27

Mm, just the way you respond does not sound like you quite understood it. But, none the less on the points of pressing issues. I think those are “bugs” and not really quality of life updates. In which I agree those are definitely more pressing issues.

In my opinion when it comes to creating a good game and or server the most important thing is bugs. Then quality of life features. Then new features.

As for the “devs balancing there OGS volunteer stuff and there professional jobs” I am not 100% about this but, I am pretty sure one of the devs works on OGS full time as an actual job. I believe anoek quit his job a while back to work on OGS full time.

As for “the do it yourself” part. I don’t think just because someone doesn’t like the way something is done mean they have to do it. I dabble very little coding and plan to keep it that way. But, someone is more then welcome to if they want to shove time into it. And, if OGS doesn’t want to do it that is also fine. I learned how to use the profanity filter and it doesn’t bother me. Just found it more challenging then it should have been.

28

Well, yes, @Miks, I’m probably missing something since I don’t see a contradiction between what you last wrote and my own argument. Then again, neither do I understand how one could read that

[…] if we’re really keen on a particular improvement, and if we’re willing to put some time in it, there’s always the option of implementing it ourselves.

and possibly interpret it as

[…] just because someone doesn’t like the way something is done mean they have to do it.

So, yeah.

@lysnew, @anoek’s already implemented the changes and the updated profanity filter is live.

1 Like