Two days ago I've seen another user's post which contained the bad word "d@mn" in it. I have edited the post in order to remove the bad word. I've also been doing the same thing when I've gone through posts that contained some foul language such as "fu(k" or "sh!t", including "d@mn".

But shortly afterwards a moderator had rolled it back to the version that contained the curse word.

Rollback to Revision 2

So why was this reverted? (Isn't offensive language taken very seriously here?)

1 Answer 1


We've been over some of this on the music SE and this is behavior that rubbed the community there the wrong way. Due to the nature of this site and lyrical expression in certain genres, language will not always be professional when it comes to lyrics and there may be some foul language on the site.

This does not mean any foul language goes. Exercise foul language especially targeted at people violates our CoC and will be delt with.

In this case, the edit was so minor and the improvement was so negligible it didn't really help the site one way or another. Taking out a single occurence of the word "damn" isn't really going to change the image of the site unless it was entirely clean, but as the first paragraph states that's not true.

You also have a history of doing excessive minor edits for your own benefit rather than the benefit of the community and this feels very much like one of them. As stated before this community is a clean slate for you to start on, but you should reflect on the feedback from others on previous sites as issues like these have been discussed on other SEs and while this community may have a different exact stance it's worth taking into account previous feedback.

  • 2
    @MaikaOshikkoSakuranomiya it was brought up on the meta there: music.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3198/… and music.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3199/….
    – Dom Mod
    Oct 13, 2019 at 6:18
  • 2
    I originally approved the edit, even though there's nothing wrong with the word "damn", because I felt the edited version was stylistically better. Of course the original author's wishes have precedence.
    – PiedPiper
    Oct 13, 2019 at 8:49
  • 4
    @MaikaOshikkoSakuranomiya, I appreciate your willingness to participate. I initially approved the edit even if I agree with Dom. You need to be warned that as a music fan here, you will come across words like the one you quoted. Sometimes, song lyrics can include these words, and we will not enforce the censoring of it if a user wants to talk about it. As long as it is not directly willingly offensive to someone, we can tolerate a moderate usage of this words e.g..
    – Bebs
    Oct 14, 2019 at 6:46
  • 1
    @MaikaSakuranomiya see second paragraph and these are two very different cases. Your edit was removing what you considered foul language from the flavor of a post which most would not consider foul. The comment above would be a direct attack on a user and violate the CoC and would be removed and I'm very tempted to flag it as rude and abusive.
    – Dom Mod
    Nov 7, 2019 at 15:56

You must log in to answer this question.