(/me begrudgingly dons his admin hat, at the risk of thereby becoming *That Guy*. TL;DR: jump to the last couple of paragraphs.) > It is still a "secure the building" problem. That's a term i'm unfamiliar with, but according to [this article about the "secure the build" problem](https://www.army.mil/article/174246/whats_your_problem): > Although this adage is, of course, a joke, it also serves as a cautionary tale about the importance of a strong and clear problem statement within successful acquisitions. To "secure the building" barely describes "what" is to be done and leaves out the other two critical elements, "why" and "how." Applying "secure the building problem" to [Scott's request](/forumpost/cf3e43fb16d07734), i can address... 1) "why": the operators of this forum wish for it to uphold a reputation of being professional, respectful, and "family-friendly" (when in doubt, following the US definition of the term, noting that it is more lax, sometimes considerably so, in many other regions). 2) "how": if the non-family-friendly language continues, your posts will be forced to go through moderation before approval, with instructions for the moderators to reject, rather than silently continue to edit, the forum-inappropriate language. (Noting that the forum does not provide an option for editing before approving, but that's a feature we can potentially address in Fossil.) The article continues with: > A problem statement, as defined by Dr. Edward F. Crawley, Ford professor of engineering in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Engineering Systems Division, must include: > > `1.` To… (enterprise or stakeholders' intent, or the "why" you are attacking the problem; what value are you trying to create?). Addressed above. > `2.` By… (the "how," using solution-neutral verbs such as create, destroy, transport, transform, compare, etc… ). Addressed above. > `3.` Using… (the "what," or statement of structure; this introduces cost). Using the administrative-level tools of this forum and the authority granted to me to apply them in pursuit of point (1). > `4.` While… (detailing other important goals or constraints). While respecting that you are an *undeniably top-notch expert* in this field with a *stupendously tremendous*[^1] amount of information to impart and are, for that reason, admitted some leeway in your "bedside manner" which would not be afforded to the proverbial mere mortals. That leeway, however, does not (or does not any longer) apply to non-family-friendly language. FWIW, i think it's fair to say that everyone[^2] here recognizes the tremendous value of your continued participation and would like it to continue unfettered. (/me removes his admin hat) ----- [^1] = "stupendously tremendous" is, in this case, an accurate characterization, not hyperbole. [^2] = Okay, there's always *someone* in every group who's going to be contrary about any position ostensibly applying to "everyone," but we'll ignore them for this purpose.