Ai moderation

i made a new post then it immediately said my post must be approved by moderation and censored my post.

i know it was ai because it appeared immediately, it could be some new feature built into tapatalk.

I don’t know what tapatalk is, but sometimes it will auto-moderate the (arbitrary) number of minutes/seconds I have to wait until I can post again.

I believe this forum uses tapatalk but I’m not sure.

It’s not AI, it’s just automatic moderation triggering on specific words.

Your post was held for review because you used the word ā€œnegroesā€. And in this case I think you should change it. I don’t know if you are not a native speaker or are not from the US, but in the US that’s an inflammatory way to refer to black people, and would be taken as an insult by most black Americans.

It’s also unnecessary, as your use of ā€œblackā€ in the preceding sentence demonstrates.

It uses Discourse.

1 Like

i am from US and have never heard negro as word considered offensive. It seems like a new 2025 wokes thing and i never heard of that before

I’m not sure what ā€œas a wordā€ means here. There are non-offensive uses of ā€œnegroā€, e.g. the United Negro College Fund, and apparently the US Census added it as a synonym for ā€˜Black’ in 2010, but coverage from that time shows the decision was controversial (e.g. ā€˜Negro’ Race Choice On Census Form Sparks Outrage), and it was removed in 2013 due to complaints.

Despite non-offensive uses, it is still considered a slur and generally offensive. Wikipedia includes it on its list of ethnic slurs as a synonym for ā€˜nigger’ (though there are many non-english words included in that list). Miriam-Webster has it as ā€œdated, often offensiveā€ when used to refer to black people, in particular when used by non-black people. The NY Daily News has gone as far as to expunge it from its archive, replacing it with ā€œ[African-Americans]ā€ (see e.g. this 1956 article about a Supreme Court ruling on segregation, and compare the text in the image with the text on the website).

I agree that it is less clearly offensive than some alternatives, but I don’t think it’s controversial to say that in a context like the one in which you use it, i.e. to refer to black people, it is generally considered offensive in the modern US.

Bullshit…. unless you live under a rock in the south or the Appalachians. Kudos on discovering the Internet.

2 Likes

This is woke insanity. I have never heard anyone say the word Negro is offensive, and blacks refer to themselves as Negroes all the time. Wokes will become so soft that eventually they will become the wicked witch and nothing more than a puddle. In 2026 probably the word ā€œblackā€ will be considered offensive and everyone must say that that there is only one race - human.

I feel like I am a 8 year old in day care once again getting lectured by a Karen. I thought as an adult I would have freedom instead of being told what is and isn’t offensive like some kind of Christian Daycare for 8 year olds, but not so it seems.

…are you black? no? Then shut up.

1 Like

Since I just showed you a dictionary definition and two articles that say that the word ā€˜negro’ is offensive, this is false.

Will people stop with this ā€œwokeā€ excuse one day?

What is your definition of woke, F1?

My definition of woke is AAA gaming, DEI and people offended by the word Negro and saying it is the new ā€œNā€ word. When I was in school, ā€œnegroā€ was considered the politically correct thing to say. Wokes just change words arbitrarily

Unless you’re 70, no it wasn’t. And I know you’re not 70.

The word was in my textbooks and I am far less than 70.

In your opinion do you believe wokeness is from feminization or something else?

Wokeness is a very malleable word, it means very different things in different people’s hands.

Negro isn’t the most offensive term, it’s inoffensive enough that I’m comfortable typing it out publicly as opposed to the other N word, but it’s… archaic. There was a time when it was just the way to refer to black people.

But that time has passed, for some reason or another. There are social linguistic mechanisms by which previously inoffensive words become offensive - that’s quite an interesting little cultural thing that happens, I think. Like the word retard, or spastic.

You’re not a bad person for using the word ā€œnegroā€, but you are a strange person for being unwilling to consider the possibility that language has evolved. Like, instead of getting your panties in a twist about it, you COULD be like ā€œoh, I didn’t realise this word is seen that way now, let me look it upā€ and then maybe you Google ā€œis negro an offensive term?ā€ and maybe you learn something. But instead of doing that, you’ve become offended in your own right. ā€œI’m offended that you’re offended!ā€

Just Google it and see what people say. Don’t take it personally. Learn something.

When I Google what I suggested you Google, I find clear strong evidence that it has been seen as an archaic and slightly offensive term for a long time. This article comes up:

So in 2010 it was clearly seen as offensive enough that it deserved a public apology from a government official.

Maybe you’ve been living under a rock, which again doesn’t make you a bad person, but now we’re forcefully dragging you out from under that rock. Here is the information you’ve been lacking. Learn from it.

1 Like

You say language evolved. I say its devolved.

No I don’t take it personally. You are just another one absorbed into American and woke cultural brainwashing.

I don’t even care about that thread being censored anymore, bring in the immigrants I say. Dilute America to the point where the American War Machine can no longer wage war and tyrannize other countries.

That isn’t what I said. I said that it’s ā€œan inflammatory way to refer to black people, and would be taken as an insult by most black Americans.ā€

I don’t see how you could hold that it’s not inflammatory, given the controversies around use of the term that have been provided in this thread (2010 Census and Harry Reid’s use in reference to Obama).

That most black Americans would take it as an insult is less clear, and would depend on context.

Still, given that it is inflammatory, and that some not-insubstantial portion of people regard it as a racial slur, it seems reasonable to prohibit its casual use.

What did ā€œwokeā€ mean when you were in school?

Language changes.

In this case, my guess is that the collision of geographical dialects also plays a role in your frustration. I take you at your word that when and where you grew up, it was not seen as a racial slur, and I did not intend to accuse of you of using it as a racial slur.

For me, I’ve always understood ā€˜negro’ to be unacceptable when used in contemporary speech to refer to black people. The fact that it can still be seen in historical usage didn’t detract from that, because that’s true of lots of slurs, and I’ve also always understood the past to be more racist than the present.

That difference of dialect creates problems when the speaker populations collide. Ultimately, either one group stops using a word they consider benign, or the other group stop being offended by a word they consider a racial slur.

In this case, there seems to be a social consensus against using the word, it’s fallen out of common speech, and the alternative is not some PC neologism but a synonym you yourself used to talk about the same group of people in the same paragraph, it seems like asking you not to use a word many understand to be a racial slur is the lesser of evils.

I’m not unsympathetic, I don’t like language policing either. But I think it makes sense in this case.

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.