I downvoted this. Here's why:

First of all, the "many Perl Monks take offence quite easily" argument is bogus. I've seen no supporting evidence for this idea, and the spirited, reasoned discussion surrounding this node makes a nice counterexample. By and large, we're a mature enough community to handle a light sprinkling of obscenity.

Second, we already have a perfectly good content control system: Nodes to consider. The two points that make consideration so much more effective than "magic behind the scenes" are:

• Consideration brings in the community. Take the recent OJ poem, for example: it gets considered, the community debates, and enough people are interested in keeping it around that it stays. "Magic behind the scenes" incorporates the judgement and opinion of whoever wrote the magic, no more.
• Consideration is adaptable. Some nodes are blatant trolls. They get deleted. Some nodes seem trollish in isolation, but are relevant to the discussion at hand. They stay. "Magic behind the scenes" cannot adapt to context or exercise the judgement of a diverse group of community-minded monks.

Finally, I find this kind of automated, knee-jerk censorship grotesquely distasteful. It's exactly the kind of bureaucratic idiocy that you despise in your last paragraph.