Bumped.
The town’s page was removed on 19 March without any apparent reason and has not been reinstated despite appeals to Facebook.
So ‘bitch’ is now a bannable word on Facebook?
Putain de bordel de merde!
But but…I thought Facebook was nothing but an endless stream of true friends who fully understand & support you and will be with you through thick and thin, unto the end of time! 
This is what happens when a public communication platform with billions of messages a day gets treated like a publisher - there is no possible way they can moderate using human intervention and judgment so they have to rely on algorithims and simple rules.
Coincidental to the above bump, today my confinement is at an end. This thread may morph into my seeking suggestions for rewording potential problem phrases and bon mots. I’ve learned my lessons with:
“Dollar store crackers” and will henceforth discuss only alternative snack foods;
I will never again typo “who” as “ho”;
I will refrain from referring to a friend, who is a savory egg tart, as a “savory egg tart.” In future I will use only “spotted dick” and “drowned baby” as food based terms of endearment;
But I may still try my luck referring to Trump as a “fucking idiot.” That’s a hill worth dying on.
Any suggestions for bot-resistant jabs?
So far I have
-mistake
-infection
-retch
- . . . ?
I know it’s out of season but I think you’ll find this amusing.
I got a warning for using the word pussy after posting screenshots of text from Agatha Christie novels where she repeatedly uses the word to refer to old women in ways that are now rather amusing - “the gold-standard, five star pussy!” The screenshots didn’t trigger it, but me actually typing the word did. I was harassing people, they said. 
Good thing Mrs Slocombe isn’t on Facebook!
In defense of Facebook (?), I sort of got away with one post that apparently didn’t trigger any algorithms.
A few days ago I posted a photo of my Pulmonaria in bloom, noting that according to the Doctrine of Signatures, the leaves’ supposed resemblance to lung tissue led to its use in medieval times for pulmonary complaints, and (jokingly) suggested that it was a good thing to have around as an alternative Covid-19 remedy.
Since Facebook has been cracking down on Covid-19 nonsense I half expected to wind up in Facebook jail, but nothing has happened, at least not yet.
Talk about your upcoming trip to the UK where you hope to visit Scunthorpe, Clitheroe, and Peniston.
I just got hit by one of these. For the past few days I’ve been doing some deep googling in attempts to find history on my (very small) local community for discussions going on in a local history group. Tonight I found a history book for my county (published in 1928) that revealed that one of the last small battles of the Civil War (which I knew had happened, but not precisely where) actually spilled over into my community.
So I wrote a piece on that, OCRed the pages and posted the text and jpegs of the (public doman) book pages, and gave links–places where you can read the book on-line, a PDF of the whole book on a geneology site, and the link to a site where I googled up a more precise, modern location for the battle. I submit–and Facebook instantly rejects the whole post because that last link “doesn’t meet community standards.” Luckily I had composed the post in a word processor or the whole thing would have been lost. (I resubmitted, but this time with the url as a jpeg.)
(This is the horribly offensive local history link that I was blocked from posting in a local history group.)
(BTW, a friend of mine recently got an automated Facebook warning for identifying a rock to be slag.)
I had my post removed for linking to a business website owned by M.Zukerburg and Yuri Milner. Later I went back to the site and all references to Milner and his pic were removed. Later another NGO site funded by Zukerberg I referred to his site where in about site how pedagogy was a principle in their education platform.
Now these we’re all sites of Zukerburgs.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wired.co.uk/article/what-is-the-paradise-papers-leak-facebook-yuri-milner-facebook-twitter-russia/amp
Zukerburg - Milner story^^
If you’ve never read the Paradise Papers it’s enlightening.
Paradise Paper direct link
My younger sister got Facebook jail last week. I think it lasts for a week or so.
She had jokingly replied to her daughter (who had posted a meme teasing her) that she was going to kill her when she got home (with a smiley face after).
You forgot Cockermouth!
I’m in jail again for the same offense. A long time friend of mine achieved something first we have been competitive about for years. I said “I am sending people to kill you 
”
Now, let’s pause for a minute. Either the algo thinks that’s a literal threat, or a joke. If I were actually intending to kill him, why would I post this explicitly in public? And would such a literal threat be something that should be reported to the cops, or just a Facebook wrist slap?
If not, then it must be a joke, right? So shouldn’t it be the kind of thing that should be up to the recipient? I mean, an instaban is an assumption that it’s a literal threat, right?
So yah I’s confused
So, you know exactly why it happened to you the first time, and yet you are confused that when you did the same thing a second time they responded the same way?
Yes. The first time, you’ll note, I declared that result was “[FB] gone mad.” I.e. irrational. This time I went into further detail justifying that opinion; that the bot reaction remains irrational.
How many times irl do people hyperbolically tell someone “I’m gonna kill you lol”! Of that imaginary number–thousands to millions depending on the area in which you are imagining it 
–what percentage of these ejaculations do you further imagine are literal threats–no, self-incriminating announcement of criminal intent!–? I feel sure there would be a lot of zeros between the decimal and the %. So it’s irrational to presume it’s more likely to be literal than, well, joshing. Especially if the recipient doesn’t choose to report it.
So, based on that one sentence, I’m guessing that you identify as female. Because it’s an idea that (in my community) is often used by females. But is not permitted to people of the male persuasion.
Arguably, FB should have recognized that you are female, and permitted the usage. Arguably, FB should have identical rules for men and women. Arguably, FB should permit male usage of the phrase. Arguably, you may know lots of men who threaten to kill you, just as a joke, and you find it humorous.
Or arguably, FB is not the only place where opinions on male/female roles are mixed and confused.
Are these in PMs, or just in postings that be seen be a lot of people?
What the literal fuck?
My husband just got a 30-day suspension for posting a Monty Python clip (the “She’s a witch burn her” bit). After review they put the post back up, but he was still suspended for 24 hours. I don’t get it. The clip is fine but he’s not?
@Melbourne I have to agree with @lissener: what the hell?
Saying “I’ll kill you” can be an expression of anger and hostility, without any actual intent to follow through on the threat. In fact, I would argue that this is probably the most common meaning behind most usages of this and similar phrases, particularly when you include online interactions, where death threats are an extremely common form of harassment. This is a major problem with social media, and while Facebook’s algorithmic approach to the issue isn’t great, I’m not sure that even a human moderator would necessarily have understood the proper context of your comment to your friend.