I like looking at T&A as much as the next guy (probably even moreso, being single and all), but it's been brought to my attention that some inappropriate images have been posted in otherwise innocent threads, so it's time for a reminder (or, more accurately, a clarification of a rule). Some people visit this site from their workplace, and downloading inappropriate images could cost them their jobs (or at least land them in hot water). Just by opening a thread that contains a nearly-nudie pic. I'm not against posting of the pics, but people at work must have some sort of warning so they don't inadvertently download something nasty.
For this reason I must ask that if you feel the need to post questionable pics, start a new thread and put NSFW (Not Safe For Work) in the title. DO NOT post these pics in otherwise "safe" threads, unless you started the thread and can edit the title to reflect the content. We don't want anyone getting in trouble here...
My bad, im sorry. that was very inconsiderate of me...wont happen again...
*sigh*
I don't have a problem with *not* posting such images because I'm already used to dealing with the idiotic attitudes in society right now, where things like senseless violence are perfectly acceptable but the world will come to an end if we dare look at some exposed skin.. (even if the person in the pic isn't actually nude, as was apparently the case earlier) but I am of the school of thought that you go to work to *work*, not dick around on the Internet. If someone on here gets fired for looking at some exposed skin, it's their fault in my book.. not the fault of the guy who posted it.
How about meeting somewhere in the middle and labelling the entire Lounge as NSFW by default?
Boy, glad you're not my boss...
The thing is, most employers allow their employees to browse the internet during breaks, lunch, etc. They usually do so with the explicit rule that explicit pics are not to be downloaded. They also do so with the understanding that everything that travels through the corporate computers can and will be viewed. Now, when somebody clicks on a thread in a forum that says "How do you prepare for a trip" for example, they should not have to worry that the thread contains inappropriate material. The IT guy at the person's work doesn't know whether the person actually looked at the pic, he only knows the pic was downloaded.
I think it would be pretty shiznitty of an employer to fire somebody over something like that, but there are plenty of shiznitty employers out there. Something that would be more reasonable, though, is the employer blocking this site from their company's computers, and that wouldn't be fair. Neither would making the lounge "Adults only". This ain't consumptionjunction.com or rotten.com. Why block 99.9% of the lounge based on .1% of the content?
Aside from the "work" thing, remember that we have several under-18 members here. We also have plenty of female members that appreciate a lady's bootie in their face about as much as we would appreciate nude pics of David Hasselhoff :yuck:. While I don't consider it my duty to raise other people's children, I do realize that showing certain things to minors is illegal. I think just about everyone would agree that pornographic materials would not be appropriate anywhere on this site, so what is so unreasonable about expecting
semi-pornographic materials to at least have a warning? I'm not about to require COPPA registration to save people from typing four letters.
I'm not asking people to stop posting pics like that (hell, several of our smilies are questionable), and I'm not "punishing" or "scolding" anyone. I'm not "caving" to the whims of a few. I just happen to agree that people should have an indication of what a thread contains. I'm just asking that the pics like that be placed in their own threads, with appropriate warnings as to their contents.
Hell, people have no problem placing "56k warning" in a topic that contains plenty of pics, so what is so hard about putting "NSFW" in a topic that contains semi-nude or even graphic pics?
I think that every member of this board would agree that we do not over-moderate and that just about anything goes. Sometimes, though, rules must be enforced.
The long and the short of it: It ain't a new rule, it ain't a particularly oppressive rule, and besides, I have the keys to the place, so :raspberry
Shame302: no problem. I know you weren't trying to cause trouble, and I know lots of people liked your pic (and even right-clicked and saved. It's a weakness. I know.). Feel free to post it again in its own thread, in fact :D Just don't forget the *NSFW* :tg:
Boy, glad you're not my boss...
The thing is, most employers allow their employees to browse the internet during breaks, lunch, etc. They usually do so with the explicit rule that explicit pics are not to be downloaded. They also do so with the understanding that everything that travels through the corporate computers can and will be viewed. Now, when somebody clicks on a thread in a forum that says "How do you prepare for a trip" for example, they should not have to worry that the thread contains inappropriate material. The IT guy at the person's work doesn't know whether the person actually looked at the pic, he only knows the pic was downloaded.
I think it would be pretty shiznitty of an employer to fire somebody over something like that, but there are plenty of shiznitty employers out there. Something that would be more reasonable, though, is the employer blocking this site from their company's computers, and that wouldn't be fair. Neither would making the lounge "Adults only". This ain't consumptionjunction.com or rotten.com. Why block 99.9% of the lounge based on .1% of the content?
Aside from the "work" thing, remember that we have several under-18 members here. We also have plenty of female members that appreciate a lady's bootie in their face about as much as we would appreciate nude pics of David Hasselhoff :yuck:. While I don't consider it my duty to raise other people's children, I do realize that showing certain things to minors is illegal. I think just about everyone would agree that pornographic materials would not be appropriate anywhere on this site, so what is so unreasonable about expecting
semi-pornographic materials to at least have a warning? I'm not about to require COPPA registration to save people from typing four letters.
I'm not asking people to stop posting pics like that (hell, several of our smilies are questionable), and I'm not "punishing" or "scolding" anyone. I'm not "caving" to the whims of a few. I just happen to agree that people should have an indication of what a thread contains. I'm just asking that the pics like that be placed in their own threads, with appropriate warnings as to their contents.
Hell, people have no problem placing "56k warning" in a topic that contains plenty of pics, so what is so hard about putting "NSFW" in a topic that contains semi-nude or even graphic pics?
I think that every member of this board would agree that we do not over-moderate and that just about anything goes. Sometimes, though, rules must be enforced.
The long and the short of it: It ain't a new rule, it ain't a particularly oppressive rule, and besides, I have the keys to the place, so :raspberry
Shame302: no problem. I know you weren't trying to cause trouble, and I know lots of people liked your pic (and even right-clicked and saved. It's a weakness. I know.). Feel free to post it again in its own thread, in fact :D Just don't forget the *NSFW* :tg:
so would this be a nsfw?
LOL :tg:
I can't reply to this publicly without risking starting a war, so I'll PM ya. :p Had something else to mention privately anyway.
Did I miss something. I understand you shouldnt do this, but when/where did this happen? Im confused.
Okie dokey i read .:D
Someone posted a questionable image. Someone complained about it. The image was removed.
Image of???
You're not old enough to see it ;)
Ahhh, I see
I'm for this, I like bootie just look at my avatar.. wich will change here shortly to keep within rules... but my poor ol grandma probably dont want to see that .
Ah, I see. That bad? There is a limit, but Claude yours isnt that big or noticable. Its how tasteful its done, i think.
Ok I got it:D
I think that would be a NSFA (Not Safe For Anyone) picture. I dunno which is worse: the fact that you posted that, or the fact that you had it to post to begin with :yuck:
The sad part is, apart from the hair there usta be a guy on my street that looked just like that...
LOL, If you want I can email you a user name and password for her members section:tg: :tg: . HAHAHHA :giggle: :giggle: just kidding I found it on google images..
Okay so now we have two catagories NSFW and NSFA ;)
He couldn't handle that picture!
Lets start a porn forum
I thought about doing a babe of the day thread awhile back.. but eh, I didn't feel like explaining to my fiance what I was doing. :p
I'm not a prude by any means, but, I do have to be careful when looking at some of the posts here,because I have kids...and they are usually in the same room as I am.
I appreciate TC trying to watch out for those who really don't want to see girl flesh (or those who don't want their kids to see it). ;)
danget, i missed that picture!!
Ok, I took my "bouncy" avitar down.
SSSHHHH Shawn, they all still think I wear a real halo!!:D
(except Eric!)