Apologies if this is the wrong place, but I'm finding extreme difficulty making a forum post today.  The forum keeps giving me the error "Sorry, You fill contains bad information, Can not submit".

Any idea what's going on?  Obviously it allowed me to make *this* post, but my other one (that I actually care about, where I'm trying to ask for help) keeps giving me the error.

Has anyone else encountered this?   I have no idea why it won't let me post (or why it allowed this post, but not the other).

Maybe your post contains swear words?

Dirty Bird Posted at 2018-2-4 08:58
Assuming your post wasn't laden with profanity,  sometimes the filter misinterprets a word in your post.  Once I was trying to create a post with some numbers (can't recall exactly what it was?) & I got the same error.

It was a perfectly simple post, just a simple request for advice about a couple of points involving video editing.  No profanity (that's not my style), unless you count the word "heck", which seems ... mild, to me. No numbers, either (well, other than the number 14, which shows up in a couple of places).  I assume that neither of those things is the problem here, since it's allowing me to make this response.

The problem is that I honestly have not the slightest clue what the software could possibly be objecting to.  It's just a simple post with ordinary English words in it, asking a couple of simple technical questions.  I mean, could they at least give me some indication what's wrong?  I'm totally at sea, here, and have no idea what to do.

...Ah.  There we go.  Now I understand.  It was objecting to a very common English euphemism, that is exactly as mild as the word "heck", which happens also to be the name of the noted Victorian author of "A Christmas Carol".  

And now that I realize that *that* is the word it was objecting to, I can deduce why it was happening.  Mr. Charles ____ens name happens to contain four characters which some overzealous regex matcher has decided is a rude word even if it's embedded in another completely innocent word.  How utterly stupid.

Well, now I know.  Thanks!  :-)

haha wow this forum can sure be a díck

Twirlip Posted at 2018-2-4 21:03
...Ah.  There we go.  Now I understand.  It was objecting to a very common English euphemism, that is exactly as mild as the word "heck", which happens also to be the name of the noted Victorian author of "A Christmas Carol".  

And now that I realize that *that* is the word it was objecting to, I can deduce why it was happening.  Mr. Charles ____ens name happens to contain four characters which some overzealous regex matcher has decided is a rude word even if it's embedded in another completely innocent word.  How utterly stupid.

LOL

They never imagined someone would quote Charles D*ckens in a Mavic forum

MiniPalourde Posted at 2018-2-4 21:55
LOL

They never imagined someone would quote Charles D*ckens in a Mavic forum

Well, I wasn't quoting him, I was simply using his surname as a mild epithet, as in "what the ___".  The irony here is that what it was censoring me for was, in fact, more mild than if I had said, for example, "what the hell", which the forum does allow.

I'm not dinging anyone for the fact that the filter exists.  I've been a moderator myself in other internet forums, I'm familiar with the problems of trying to run a forum where you don't want people to be using foul language, and generally the party who's running the forum software isn't the company that wrote the forum software, meaning that whatever quirks and limitations the software may have built into it can be difficult to work around.

My main gripe here was that the error message I got when it rejected my post was completely unhelpful.  It didn't say "here's what you said that's not okay."  It didn't even tell me that there was what it considered to be objectionable content.  For all I knew, it was some technical glitch where it thought I was using an invalid Unicode character or some problem with formatting tags or something like that.  I couldn't even tell if it was a problem with the content at all, or whether it might be some temporary operational issue, e.g. "try back again later and it may work".

So, my two cents.  First, it's silly that the particular word I was trying to use was disallowed in the first place.  Second, even if it is, the forum really ought to just allow the post and redact what it doesn't like (e.g. replace with a row of asterisks, or something).  Third, even if it can't do that, the error message should say what the actual problem is (e.g. "your post isn't allowed because it fails our profanity filter").  The current state of affairs is the worst possible way they could implement this.

It's very simple:  If the software is going to block people for "doing something wrong", it needs to TELL THEM what it thinks they're doing wrong so they can have a clue as to how to fix it.

At least now that I know what's going on, I'll have a better idea of what to look for in the future.

Twirlip Posted at 2018-2-5 05:53
Well, I wasn't quoting him, I was simply using his surname as a mild epithet, as in "what the ___".  The irony here is that what it was censoring me for was, in fact, more mild than if I had said, for example, "what the hell", which the forum does allow.

I'm not dinging anyone for the fact that the filter exists.  I've been a moderator myself in other internet forums, I'm familiar with the problems of trying to run a forum where you don't want people to be using foul language, and generally the party who's running the forum software isn't the company that wrote the forum software, meaning that whatever quirks and limitations the software may have built into it can be difficult to work around.

Yep, totally agree. Figuring out which word is considered "wrong" can be really annoying sometimes.