> > In all seriousness, why is Tarzan never ever drawn with niples?
>
> huhh-huh, huhhuh, hunh, he said "niples", huh-huh.....
>

In all seriousness, why does the family-content checking code in the RinkForum forbid "n-i-p-p-l-e" but not "d*mn" or "h*ll" ? The former is fairly scientific; the latter two could be allowed since their usage can be theological as well as profane. But it's uncommon to see them used in a proper theological sense, and there are certainly acceptable substitutes, such as "condemn" and "Hades". Maybe it's worth adding them to the content checker.

--two minutes elapse--

Hmm.

Actually, I don't think I'd necessarily want to recommend any change in the content checker, but I am curious about the rationale behind some of what's permitted/restricted. Maybe I'll try typing (but not posting) a test message with various scientific anatomical references, to see where the boundaries are.

Anyone remember Beverly Cleary's "Ramona" series of children's books, and the scene wherein Ramona threatens to say a bad word in front of her family? The word was "guts". :-)

Iss "the pest" achar