Inappropriate Photos / Subjects (Moderators, please read)

[Darkness]

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
Darkness: the parents can block URLs and let others available. So if we keep the babe threads civil they can let this URl be available. CFC should be porn-free - and this means defining porn as strictly as necessary for a wide majority.

There's computers around everywhere! Kids can just use another computer and still get to the "blocked" URL's....

I agree: keep the babe thread civil and porn free. I just think the picture ain't porn (only the link is). This doesn't mean I have a problem with a stricter enforcement of the definitions in the babe thread. I don't mind. I was just stating my opinion about the picture.

 

[gr8ful wes]

I appreciate the intent of your message, Jertrain. I hardly ever venture to the babe thread, but don't mind the odd peep. But I agree that they should not provide links to porn sites. I applaud you for being concerned and looking out for the intrest of our younger friends here.

by the way, what do you think about womens underwear?

 

[Panda]

For a moment I thought I missed some indecency. Thank God that was not the case.

Jertrain, you sad, close-minded person, can you spell 'oversensitive bigot'?

Originally posted by The Troquelet
Yes, but some of the posters don't even bother to convert the files to attachments, but post url-images.

I thought this was to save Thunderfall's server's space? Please do corret me if my assumption was incorrect.

Originally posted by The Troquelet
From porn websites. That means some 9-year old can just right click on the image and get to a directory of ALL photos in the directory most of which are NOT appropriate for CFC.

Not all pics come from XXX. I don't think I personally ever linked one.

Personally I also think that if a kid clicks through all the pics and tries out the addresses he deserves to see all the nipples he can find.

But from the way you sound... Has there been a law suit in the US over such an issue?

 

[Supernaut]

Originally posted by Darkness


If parents don't want their children to see this kind of pictures they should keep them of the internet. I do realize that ain't possible but it's also not possible for parents to allow their children to surf the net without coming across these kinds of pictures....

The trouble is, they can stop them - or at least try to - by using Netnanny and other programmes which are intended to filter out undesirable stuff. Ok, so they work pretty badly, but we do not want CFC to get a reputation for having 'bad' content, which leads to it being put on the banned list. Nor do we want little Johnny's parents (or big Johnny's boss!) looking at their History list and seeing that pages on porn sites have been accessed - they won't know that he didn't realise it was a link.

Yes, you can find this content, and worse, on 90% of the net - so why do we need it here as well?

 

[Hamlet]

For starters, can somebody please tell me exactly when this became a "family site"? Considering the amount of swearing and innuendo, I don't think anyone could call off-topic, at the very least, a 'family' enviroment.

As far as I was ever concerned, all the rules were in place so to simply stop the forum descneding into a really crappy, spammy place where nothing serious could be realistically discussed. I was never aware that this site promoted itself as a 'friend of families' sort of place.

If you do mess about with the photo issue on grounds of possible exposure to children, then you will also have to impose a swear filter as well, otherwise it would be blatent hypocrisy, and god knows what else besides - that will be a decision Thunderfall will have to make.

Secondly, I saw nothing wrong with the pictures involved. I have to say though, that the URL thing is bit poor, really. If it can be blocked on individual computers, though, I don't see the problem.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

If it is within the rules as interpreted by those whose role it is, then it is fine.
If you don't want to see female meat, like me, then don't look at the thread.
If you don't want to read gratuitous paens to battleships, read not my replies. USS Iowa!

 

[cromagnon]

@Hamlet: There IS a swear filter. Watch:
****, ****, ****. <--- Very bad words

I fall squarely along side Panda's opinion. 'nuff said.

 

[Hamlet]

Originally posted by cromagnon
@Hamlet: There IS a swear filter. Watch:
****, ****, ****. <--- Very bad words

I fall squarely along side Panda's opinion. 'nuff said.

Good lord, we actually have a swear filter? Considering the amount of 'bad' words that are excluded from it, I'm rather amazed. It seems rather pointless when you consider what hasn't been put into the filter.

 

[floppa21]

Since I am the perverted disgraceful scourge to society that posted said pic, I say a few words. I post from work. So, I used google and posted what pics I could of Summer Altice. Yes the picture is from Playboy but no nudity as in nipples and such. I cut and paste the url as I always have done to post any picture. I have no idea that the website is pornographic in nature or not. I personally did not right click and do whatever to explore said website. Actally never even crossed my mind. I cut and paste the one picture. If that is a problem to admin/staff of CFC, I apologize and will not post anymore pics as being at work, I am not downloading and converting and zipping and all that BS. Cut & paste is nice and easy thanks.

And again, if it bothers you so much, what the hell are you looking in it for in the first place? The ultimate decision is up to TF. What he says goes. I will follow the rules he sets.

 

[gr8ful wes]

Well, I hate to see someone take a beating for trying to do what he feels is right. I'm jumping in his corner, for what its worth. I will confess to not knowing much about the babe thread though(I guess I get enough at home)

 

[Zcylen]

if you dont like it then dont enter that forum, let AoA or any moderator to use their criteria. after all, they're the moderators and they can do the best for the forum and the users.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

I'm sure this little rumpus will increase the popularity of the babe thread


A thread that does no one harm and is the methadone of some porn-hardened civfanatics


What were you going into the "Babe Thread" for Jeratain, you naughty boy and then to be shocked by the discovery of a nude lady who was covering up the best way she could


As for the linking of URL from sites that could be deemed pornographic...I've not done that yet, but at the same time accessing such sites is so EASY that it isn't making it easier for minors to access this material in any way. The controls on the internet against minors getting access to pornography are pathetic and I'm sure most teenagers who so desire to get hold of it, do so without much difficulty. Isn't that right Hakon



As to why Americans in particular think that violence is more acceptable in films etc than sex is beyond me


P.S AS TO THE RULES this thread should be in "Site Feedback"

 

[TrailblazingScot]

Edit: ah-ha, I can't really say that.


Instead I'll say: gosh Floppa and then Panda the thread got indeed hotter in the pictures below the one that is being shot at by Mr J! Why did he pick on one of the less exciting pictures I don't know.

 

[Darkness]

Originally posted by kittenOFchaos
As to why Americans in particular think that violence is more acceptable in films etc than sex is beyond me

To me as well , the other way around seems far more logical to me...

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

KoK: well said.

still, there's enough porn forums - I'd say keep it out of here. The pic in question is borderline, and floopa: no critizism of you for 'posting porn'; I'm sure u didn't want to do that, you just weren't carefull enough (and I have to admit I also wouldn't have thought of right-clicking).


and folks, let's face it, many Civ3 players are underage!

 

[Panda]

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
and folks, let's face it, many Civ3 players are underage!

The children! The children! Think of the children!

Are you practicing for signing up with the CSU?

 

[cromagnon]

Underage for what, Killer? I would be tremendously surprised/disappointed (in the kid) if CFC were his/her first exposure to the beauty of others.

Most kids are only curious about naked bodies before they reach puberty. Now the vast majority of the boys here are post-pubescent, so again, these pictures are nothing new to them. What are we protecting the children from? Masturbation? Come on, we need to stop treating sexuality like a taboo. This isn't the Middle Ages, after all.

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

First of all, it's not for YOU Jeratain to question content by starting a complaint thread, that is a REAL violation of the rules, unlike your "complaint".

Next, Lefty and I check the thread, as long as nipples or genatalia aern't displayed, it's NOT pornographic, cover up MEANS exactly that, the offending areas are covered.

Third, comparing the picture you object to with photos of mutilated people is odd, to say the least.

Forth, we cannot check the URL of every photo, to see where it came from, because it would take HOURS.
You have to quote or edit the post to see each, we don't have "magic" controls where we can just point and click.
If the photo meets the usual guideline, there is NO need to check anyway.

Fifth, the next time such a public complaint thread appears, the starter will disappear. If you see an offensive photo, you report post, then, AND ONLY if Lefty or I agree, it will be dealt with.
There is NOTHING wrong with the example presented.

Sixth, if the human form is so offensive, don't look at it.
As long as nipples and genitalia aern't shown, it's OK with us, this is applied evenly.

DO NOT REPEAT THIS BEHAVIOR.