Mon 19th May 2008, 8:32pm
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Mon 19th May 2008, 8:26pm)
If you were French or even a Francophone like (say) Wjscriber, we could forgive you for that. But I fail to see what this does for Brits accused of being foul-mouthed.
I'm sure some of this is a class-thing (Maybe he's from the wrong part of Manchester?), but just about anybody with frontal lobes and age over 18 has learned to moderate speech in some way in polite society or discourse.
Has the Chunnel really resulted in more cunt-using Brits?
It is really depressing to even have to argue this. Using extremely bad language like this in public
is something that is simply jolly well not done in Britain. As I am sure I have said before, what is appropriate on the shop floor, or down the pub between friends
is not generally accepted - and in fact, if groups talked loudly using bad language in many civilised pubs they would be told to keep it down, or get on their bikes.
The level I would put Wikipedia at is that of a public meeting place where you know that you will be overheard. Any reasonable Brit would know to avoid bad language in such a context. Indeed, plenty of people would be happy to point out politely that bad language is not appropriate. The BBC 606 boards do not tolerate any bad language at all.
It is not that we don't hear it, it is not that we don't use it, it is that we think it doesn't reflect well on us. Call me old fashioned, but I do find it nicer to get through the day avoiding the issue of whether the someone who called me a wanker was really
my mate or not. Actually, being called a fool is usually much more hurtful, as there is no getting around the intent.
So this stuff about it being OK to go around Britain being foul mouthed is just more Guy lack of self-awareness. Guy is just taking people for a ride because he knows that the majority of Americans haven't a clue: America is the country where Phil Collins said wanker in Miami Vice shown on prime time networked TV because nobody knew what it meant.
Tell you what, next time you are checking in at a BA desk and you have a problem, see what happens if you say "Just fucking sort it out." I've seen it happen, and they are quite happy to refund your ticket there and then. Similarly, if a member of staff lost their cool, they would at least be on a written warning for that language.
Does Wikipedia want to aim for high standards, or stick with the lowest common denominator? It's not going to offend me greatly if there is bad language, but it would be better if there wasn'ta nd I don't see any reason for it to be tolerated - and even less so from administrators who represent the public image of Wikipedia.