[kisamoto]

Ahh unchecked websites in print. Two of my favourites are:

- The recent (Nov '24) mishap from Mattel printing a p*rn site on their Wicked dolls: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gz91pp5llo

- Or the numerous 'Click Here' or unreasonable long (e.g. https://example.gov.uk/some/sub/site/dGhlbi9hL3JlYWxseS9sb25...) that have appeared in UK government or NHS leaflets.

[bhaney]

> p*rn

Who are you doing this for? All the small children on HN who will be scandalized reading the word "porn" but are safe so long as the "o" is censored with an asterisk?

[addicted]

The obvious answer is that this user likely also comments on other platforms that do not allow using the word openly and instead of the mental overload of constantly deciding which site does and doesn’t allow spelling out the word they choose the safer option in every case.

Or their autocorrect has now learnt to respell it anyways.

Or, they didn’t really spend hours debating the pros and cons of using either spelling and just went with whatever felt ok at the time.

But why choose generosity when one can choose snarky ass instead.

[aziaziazi]

Why do you follow your question by a refutation of the supposed response ? They probably doing it for themselves like people saying « gosh ». If you find that ridicule fine, but no need to strawman their intentions. You chances to get an honest, non defensive response are pretty low.

[probably_wrong]

You can say "porn" on HN, more so when the linked BBC article itself is titled "Mattel 'deeply regrets' porn site misprint on Wicked dolls".

[woleium]

Did you understand what was meant? If so then you really have no basis for complaining, beyond pettiness