What is sexually oriented?

[Håkan Eriksson]

I recently thought it ould be good for me to read thru the forum rules one again. And now that I have done that I was one question.

First let's look at the first part of the rules:

What can't you post?
You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this forum.

Now I'm wondering about what's defined as sexually oriented.

Like the babe hreads in th off topic foum isn't classefide a it. And they SHOULD NOT. Atlest I do not think so.

But i'm wondering were the line goes.


EX. PIC: http://www.dutch-gay.com/nhairy01/images/gay339_jpg.jpg

If you look at this pic. They both has thier underwear on. So it's not sexually oriented, right? It's almost like the underwear addverties in the newspaper...

But now one of them is doing a extra thing so then it's sexually oriented after all.... isn't it?


I would like to have som better defenition of how sexuall pic you can post. That's it. I hop I'm not waisting your time to much.

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

Common sense is you guide, if it's a "babe thread", that implies women, if you want to do a "dudes" thread, your welcome too, but touching of sexual areas or the showing of organs will be going to far.

If in your mind you say "I think this is too far", then it probaly is, so use that as a guide.

 

[Pellaken]

therere are 2 pics in the babe thread, old and new. one posted by eli with a topless, but painted woman, and another posted by a moderator who will remain nameless, of a girl with a wet, and therefore seethru top on. I thought these 2 were crossing the line, but thats just my opinion.

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

Why do you insist on proking the moderators Pellakin?

If I posted something, it is acceptable, can you grasp that idea?

 

[damunzy]

I know I posted a semi see thru shirt....maybe I shouldn't....not sure. If I did and I was wrong then it was a mistake and one of the few I have made in over 4000 posts. Other people make many more mistakes in 1/2 the amount of posts. I think I can get a little leeway.

Hakan, that is deffinately sexually oriented. Oh, and Hakan has been banned for a post in OT.

 

[Pellaken]

uh... that last one wasent a post a moderators. although I admit I do it sometimes. I usually just poke my least favorite mod, and I can finally say that it aint you AoA, and thats the truth

 

[Ming]

Originally posted by PaleHorse76
Hakan, that is deffinately sexually oriented. Oh, and Hakan has been banned for a post in OT.

And what a moronic link it was. The link he provided in the babe thread in the OTF was pure porn... and if would deserve a perm ban on ANY site I have ever posted on. Too bad he wasn't perm banned before, because I understand he posted that link elsewhere on this site as well... People that do that don't deserve the right to post.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

Well if a certain pressure group had been ignored as a few of us were asking then it would not have happened.

By taking Hakon off a ban you merely gave him the chance to "have another shot" at being disruptive...


Long live the "babe" thread

 

[Ming]

I'll take it a step farther. Taking him off the ban not only gave him another shot... it told him that he could pretty much ignore the mods... and set the WRONG TONE. And what did it lead to... he posted pictures that could get you arrested in many places.
He probably thought he could get away with it... just like he did before by whining. Let's see him and his followers defend his actions this time...

 

[damunzy]

Well he won't be able to defend himself for a few days....hopefully weeks since he is now banned. I say let's forget Hakan and let him serve out his time.

 

[Ming]

Originally posted by PaleHorse76
I say let's forget Hakan and let him serve out his time.

It will be much easier to forget about Hakan then it will be to forget the pictures he posted. By posting those pictures, he insulted the members... the mods... and the owner. I hope that Bozo gets more than a few weeks... That type of action deserves a total and perm IP ban...

 

[Pellaken]

for the record, I dont know what Hakan did, and I dont care, he could have killed a man, but I'm still, and always will be opposed to a perma-ban of any kind.

 

[philippe]

He is in a very short time several times banned(ask AoA)
1)the trol thread against the bible what wasnt a discussion only a mere troll and insult
2)he posted a link to a gay porn site
3)in the humor and jokes forum he did a spam(ask palehorse)

 

[gonzo_for_civ]

"and always will be opposed to a perma-ban of any kind."

Go ask hardman if he wants your e-mail to sign you up for porn advertisments like he did to several staff members. Then come ***** about who deserves a perm ban and who doesn't.

And for the record, Hakan was posting porn links pellaken. He may not get perm banned but he'll get AT LEAST 1 month, I LOVE ONE MONTH BANS!!!!!!!!!!

DO you?

 

[Ming]

Originally posted by Pellaken
[Bhe could have killed a man, but I'm still, and always will be opposed to a perma-ban of any kind. [/B]

Yeah... a persons life is worth less than the right to post on a internet forum... right

 

[damunzy]

I remember when I felt that everything I thought matter to everyone. I later learned that there are some things you cannot change. You can attempt, but there is a line where if you complain too much everyone begins to look at everything that comes out of your mouth as drivel. You have reached the drivel stage again Pellaken. You did it as Weimar_Republic and you are doing it again. Please stop wasting everyone's time and write your complaints to TF...have him tell you they are baseless, and then live with it. This is TF's playground and his rules go. Why don't you go and make your own forum and run it by your rules. If your rules are so good people will flock there and you will not need this place.

 

[NU_]

If I'm not mistaken, and I believe I am not, isn't Håkan gay? Maybe that would explain his unhappiness with the babe thread.

And, for what it's worth, I don't believe what Håkan posted here should warrant a banning. Although, I do not know what else he has posted and his previous infractions.

 

[King of Camelot]

You DON'T believe posting a porn link warrants a banning?!

 

[AVN]

Originally posted by NU_
If I'm not mistaken, and I believe I am not, isn't Håkan gay? Maybe that would explain his unhappiness with the babe thread.

Hakan is indeed a gay and I think and that can indeed his action.
Furthermore in Europe we are quite more liberal about visiting sex-sites. For example my own provider's (a great one) site contains a sex-section.

However we are visiting an American site with clear and strict rules about this subject. And Hakan could and should have been aware of the consequences.

I'm sure he deliberately broke the rules.

 

[gonzo_for_civ]

PORN sites get NO slack. If you post a link to one you are banned. If you are a new poster you may just get the link removed and a strict warning. Hakan knew the rules.