On Sat, 2009-05-30 at 10:21 +0100, Mike Cardwell wrote: > Have you considered replacing swear words with ****'s instead of
> rejecting messages that contain them?
Beware, beware, beware the "Scunthorpe problem" [0]
Profanity filtering is a terribly complicated thing to get right, and
generic word filtering is even worse when you consider English county
names, the fact that you can buy chicken breasts, and that to "parse"
this message you find a "bad word" in the very act!
Anyone with active sweary filters probably won't get this :)
Graeme
[0] if you fancy a chuckle, look up the Wikipedia entry for it...
