I would argue more generally that censoring words like this is unhelpful and counterproductive.

As seen in the link in the post body, not only can it inhibit clear communication, but anyone actually using the slur would be more clearly identified if the slur remained - thus allowing the mods to definitively identify the user as bigoted and banning them. Replacing it with 'removed' creates ambiguity in combating bigotry as well as edge cases and discussions of words - as in the linked case.

The post in question uses the word removed to describe a literal bundle of sticks and the fact that we are all adults but can't read the post limits the usability of this space.

Plus it's fucking cringe

Words shouldn't be censored, if you care that much then set up those posts to be flagged and moderate them individually

All of them.

Censorship, if ever truly necessary, should be reactive not proactive. Humans simply cannot correctly foretell the possible scenarios where an otherwise unacceptable word or term needs to be written down and discussed. A million correct removals do not justify killing even one meaningful discussion. That’s the nature of free speech.

You would think that now, more than ever, we (especially we here) would understand how important that freedom is and how inherently destructive any attempt at “pre-crime” always turns out to be.

Turn it off completely. I opened a thread about it a while back when I tried to recommend WGM Jennifer Shahade's memoir "Chess Bi tch" and both the title and link got censored. I could bypass the text censorship but the link was harder. Not good. We aren't kids here and if something needs removal, leave it to human mods and reports.

Should this censoring be pushed to the client side? That way users can choose what they want filtered.

hunter2