Babe, Hunk and Similar Threads

[Sonereal]

It doesn't take that long to show some ankle.

Spoiler :

 

[Luckymoose]

So google's policy is not to display its ads in babe or hunk threads? How many non babe or hunk threads are there are on the forum where google can display its ads?

Or is this google saying that they won't advertise in any forum that contains such threads which is totally different to its quoted policy.

When you say google interprets their policy liberally do you mean that google interprets their policy illiberally?

Google apparently sees "descriptions of sexual acts" to be against their ad policy. So by simply discussing sex in any form your thread breaks ad policy. So any thread that discusses a news story about rape or sex, etc. should also be closed.

She is literally four minutes away from violating Google's lewdness policies.

How are we sure she's not violating the sexual pose policy under that?

 

[Sonereal]

How are we sure she's not violating the sexual pose policy under that?

I guess we need to contact Google and ask if somewhat implied sexual poses are still sexual poses if we don't actually see the sexual pose.

 

[Lohrenswald]

I've seen mailorder russian brides ads on this site so I don't know what to think.

 

[jackelgull]

I would tell Google it could go eff itself, but that might be construed as "provocative".

 

[cybrxkhan]

This is... interesting. Not necessarily in a good way, I suppose, since I enjoy those threads, but a bit odd I suppose.

Regardless, out of those, "Lewd or provocative poses" can be interpreted very, very loosely I think. Heck I'm sure we probably have a few pics in the members photo thread that could be thought of that way.

Oh well, how silly. It's that good ol' barest hint of sex drives folks crazy but a bunch of bloody decapitations don't.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Or is this google saying that they won't advertise in any forum that contains such threads which is totally different to its quoted policy.

They effectively mean this, since the ads are not controlled thread by thread by our host. Any Google ad might be appearing on any page

 

[Valka D'Ur]

This happened already on TrekBBS. It resulted in a lot of screencaps from the episodes being taken down, including those used for avatars. So something that wasn't too "provocative" for kids to look at in the '60s suddenly is 50 years later.

My questions:

1. Are there new avatar guidelines people need to follow?

2. How will this affect the Arts & Entertainment forum? That forum has always allowed images of nudes as long as they were the subjects of classical paintings and sculpture.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

So far as I know, Google is a fail on explaining and giving useful guidelines on the subject.

 

[Cutlass]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=13797072&postcount=226

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

I wonder if Google bans Google Ads on Google Search result pages with nudity?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I wouldn't know about ads, but I use some degree of "safe search" and there's still a lot of risque stuff that shows up.

In my opinion, Google is a hypocrite.

 

[Hygro]

I didn't realize Google's "Don't Be Evil" moral compass is from Victorian England.

 

[Maniacal]

It has little to do with Google's morale compass and more to do with BS about companies not wanting their ads to be displayed alongside "NSFW" content.

 

[Hygro]

It has little to do with Google's morale compass and more to do with BS about companies not wanting their ads to be displayed alongside "NSFW" content.

I wonder what company would have the kind of infrastructure to filter ads depending on firm preferences....

 

[GenMarshall]

My questions:

1. Are there new avatar guidelines people need to follow?

2. How will this affect the Arts & Entertainment forum? That forum has always allowed images of nudes as long as they were the subjects of classical paintings and sculpture.

These are my concerns as well.

In my opinion, Google is a hypocrite.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

 

[The_J]

I'm amazed about the lack of understanding of the subject which some posts here show o_O.

And no, no more boobs .

 

[GenMarshall]

I'm amazed about the lack of understanding of the subject which some posts here show o_O.

I just based my experienced from the overzeliousness of watching YouTubers's experience with YouTube Content ID system that turn up false positives. Machines (I'm asuming AdSense operates using bots) aren't perfect and are only as good as the people or team who built and program them. Given Google's....stumbling with YouTube Content ID and Goolge+ integration with YouTube.....gives me a bit of cynicism about it.

And no, no more boobs .

There there, There's always Yahoo!.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I'm amazed about the lack of understanding of the subject which some posts here show o_O.

Then how about some constructive enlightenment?

 

[Borachio]

How about Fat Slags?

Permissible or not?