Howdy!

The phrases "family-friendly" and "safe-for-work" are often used as bludgeons by people with a selfish agenda to bash people who have the temerity to openly disagree with them. Note well that I am not trying to tar you with that brush.

Having looked at that node in its context, it appears clear to me that it was an attempt a humor. George Carlin milked that word (and six others) for a lot of laughs in a famous routine. Perhaps your personal sensibilities are more tender than others. You considered the node, in accordance with your understanding of the guidelines, and that consideration was turned down by the expressed opinions of others. It happens. I hope the conversation you started sheds helps you understand how the end came to be.

I could see a node getting reaped for obscenity, but it would need to contain more "content" with a clear expression of obscenity. Merely using a word ought not necessarily make an expression obscene. Context is critical. Filters that focus on individual words throw too many false positives and false negatives.

yours,
Michael

In reply to Re: Consideration for obscenity by herveus
in thread Consideration for obscenity by ptum

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":