TexasCHLforum.com

The Annoyed Man wrote:Yes, I agree with all of this. For the record, I have occasionally let something get past my own internal censors. I recently had a post edited for using a 3-letter shorthand acronym to describe something which causes "discomfort in the posterior regions". I wasn't trying to be rude, but I typed it without thinking about it. I didn't take it personally when the post was edited. If deleting the post is what will happen going forward, I am OK with that. I am not trying to push the limits or antagonize the management, so there is no harm no foul from my POV.

I do have a question though...... what about the unintentional double-entendre?

I once was dinged for referring to a certain public figure as the latter half of the word "Jackass".....in other words, a donkey/mule-headed fool. In my understanding of the english language, my usage of that word was the same as that used in the Bible in Numbers 22:21 in the KJV - a reference to the animal, not the body part. Is there ever any leeway to account for the entirely appropriate use of language where the moderator in question doesn't use/perceive language the same way as the poster, but no violation was intended?

In other words, are there some situations where a post like I am describing could be edited instead of deleted?

puma guy wrote:Thanks! Can we assume that includes using alpha+asterisk substitutes?