NSFW pictures

[GreenGoo]

<snip>
Why does it need to be here? Someone? Anyone? Bueller?

From earlier in this very same thread:

As far as the NSFW policy or standards, I think it is less of "why do we need it here" than "why can't we have it here"

I think a more usual question about speech is not why should it be allowed, but why shouldn't it?

Need has nothing to do with it. Nothing on OO is "needed". It's a non-starter.

[Chaosraven]

indeed

As I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling jelly donut about most sports, I don't enter those threads most of the time.
For a gaming forum, do those "need" to be here?

Info about (topic not related to gaming) falls the same way.

[Chaosraven]

If there's enough "interest" in something, people enter those threads (see the Views Column), respond if they wish ( Replies, natch), and if there isn't enough life in the topic, guess what?

It falls down the page until it disappears into the NonPage1 arena of Searching for Arise Fodder.

So if a thread stays for a bit, there's interest of some sort.

If not, it handles itself.

[Chaosraven]

But once again, what we need to figure out here is where the line is.

What needs to be Spoilered/Linked/SimplyVerboten?

Does the nipslip or furburger or tallywhacker cross that line?

[GreenGoo]

I don't think that's it. I could take or leave the thread myself, but I am sure his reasoning is no different than those that start a game screen shot thrwad

Except it's sexually motivated, and despite everyone having sexual urges, we don't all react to them the same way in every context. There is more in daehawk's posts than the typical "she's sexy" "she's got pointy elbows". There is a definite porn line that daehawk's pictures flirt with, and not everyone is comfortable with that. There's provocative and then there's...more than provocative.

I happen to agree with hepcat on this one (in a less angry, less judgmental way), but would like to see OO decide what to do based on talking it out, not picking on daehawk and then emotional pleas and then butthurt.

[MHS]

And I think that's what will be done, although there will inevitably be some butt-hurtedness on someone's part. Hopefully we'll get them drunk first.

[Blackhawk]

'Need' is a really tricky word to use on a forum used to make smalltalk about hobbies. There is very little here that is 'needed' or that can't be found elsewhere.

I have no issue with NSFW, including nudity. Sex is a big part of human nature, something most of us are drawn to, and looking at members of the attracted sex and discussing it isn't any different (to me) than sharing recipes, talking about our families, or sharing any other part of our lives.

That said, yeah - I don't see why we keep needing new threads for it when threads already exist. If, say, a major political figure poses nude, I see no reason not to have a 'Hillary nude! (NSFW)' thread, but if you just want to post yet another picture of an ass, hit the NSFW thread. There are plenty of other threads serving a similar purpose that are reused ad-infinitum.

[ibdoomed]

Sharing sexy pics is just like sharing any other information, like musical talents. No one can know everything and being introduced to something new in a genre that interests you, is enlightening.

[GreenGoo]

But once again, what we need to figure out here is where the line is.

What needs to be Spoilered/Linked/SimplyVerboten?

Does the nipslip or furburger or tallywhacker cross that line?

I think it has been clear for years that female nipples are out, which implied below the waist as well. The problem that can arise, but hasn't prior to today, is what happens when someone skirts the rule, complying with the wording of the rule but violating the spirit.

I think Smoove mentioned it in the original thread. People can get pretty creative when photoshopping/mspainting porn into something else (but still obviously porn under the surface).

[GreenGoo]

Sharing sexy pics is just like sharing any other information, like musical talents. No one can know everything and being introduced to something new in a genre that interests you, is enlightening.

This may not be the proper venue for it though. Surely you understand that your viewpoint is not everyone's viewpoint? If I'm a nudist I may feel it's everyone else who has a problem, not me, but that still doesn't make it appropriate to go into the office (depending on the office of course) with no clothes on.

It's not that hard. The hard part is finding a line that is acceptable to most people, when the group is not homogeneous on the subject.

[MHS]

I think consistent violations of the spirit of a rule would eventually result in being banned. There have certainly been people banned from here who didn't necessarily directly violate rules but skirted around them frequently and consistently. So, it's just going to be a matter of waiting until the mods come up with what the rule actually is, because no one can remember it exactly, and so it's a great time to get people's input.

[Blackhawk]

...which is exactly why there was a 'common sense' clause added to the CoC (before it was misplaced.)

[ibdoomed]

Sharing sexy pics is just like sharing any other information, like musical talents. No one can know everything and being introduced to something new in a genre that interests you, is enlightening.

This may not be the proper venue for it though. Surely you understand that your viewpoint is not everyone's viewpoint? If I'm a nudist I may feel it's everyone else who has a problem, not me, but that still doesn't make it appropriate to go into the office (depending on the office of course) with no clothes on.

It's not that hard. The hard part is finding a line that is acceptable to most people, when the group is not homogeneous on the subject.

That could be said for sports as well. When I first saw the "hot stove" thread I was excited to discuss appliances (yes, seriously, I love to cook). Imagine my disappointment to discover it's about baseball. I hate sports and I think they are detrimental to society and breed the wrong values into people.

[GreenGoo]

And I think that's what will be done, although there will inevitably be some butt-hurtedness on someone's part. Hopefully we'll get them drunk first.

Yep. Things were escalating and being argued with parody threads and ridicule. I admire your confidence, but I just wanted to put it out there as a reminder.

I have not always agreed with the direction OO has taken, but I try very hard (failing in a few notable instances) not to try to get OO to line up with me. One of the most valuable things I get out of OO is a true market of ideas. So many different opinions and experiences, some of which are so foreign to me as to be almost unfathomable, that I feel that my viewpoint broadens just by reading it.

It annoys me when someone tries to dictate to others how OO should be.

[GreenGoo]

Sharing sexy pics is just like sharing any other information, like musical talents. No one can know everything and being introduced to something new in a genre that interests you, is enlightening.

This may not be the proper venue for it though. Surely you understand that your viewpoint is not everyone's viewpoint? If I'm a nudist I may feel it's everyone else who has a problem, not me, but that still doesn't make it appropriate to go into the office (depending on the office of course) with no clothes on.

It's not that hard. The hard part is finding a line that is acceptable to most people, when the group is not homogeneous on the subject.

That could be said for sports as well. When I first saw the "hot stove" thread I was excited to discuss appliances (yes, seriously, I love to cook). Imagine my disappointment to discover it's about baseball. I hate sports and I think they are detrimental to society and breed the wrong values into people.

It could be. Even Chaosraven mentions it. But it isn't. Do you live in North America? Sex is not sports. Sex is not video games. Sex is sex. And it's "special" in this culture.

I support rebelling against cultural norms that you disagree with. I don't support pretending those norms don't exist and then acting all innocent and confused when you run counter to them.

[Holman]

The current kerfluffle isn't a case of hepcat trying to dictate what OO should be. Hepcat bolted for reasons related to the blow-up, but the blow-up itself involved many people voicing their opinion about what is and is not appropriate. I don't think Hepcat is holding his presence for ransom until we set a certain policy, but even if he is, that's not what's driving the present discussion over what policy should or shouldn't be.

[GreenGoo]

The current kerfluffle isn't a case of hepcat trying to dictate what OO should be. Hepcat bolted for reasons related to the blow-up, but the blow-up itself involved many people voicing their opinion about what is and is not appropriate. I don't think Hepcat is holding his presence for ransom until we set a certain policy, but even if he is, that's not what's driving the present discussion over what policy should or shouldn't be.

I agree. I think more of hepcat than that.

[Daehawk]

That said, yeah - I don't see why we keep needing new threads for it when threads already exist. If, say, a major political figure poses nude, I see no reason not to have a 'Hillary nude! (NSFW)' thread, but if you just want to post yet another picture of an ass, hit the NSFW thread. There are plenty of other threads serving a similar purpose that are reused ad-infinitum.

Exatly the reason I made this thread and named it what I did. I see it as having a silly pics thread, a round robin thread, and then this new thread to hold everything the other two do not. Its like a potpourri of nsfw. What doesn't fit other threads goes in this one. That was my thought when I made it. One thread for the lost ones , the different ones.

[KKBlue]

I was warned about the R&P forum and posted a few things years back just to say I did it. I'm actually nervous to voice my opinion because of not being at the computer for long periods of time to defend or explain or have someone add light to my post on this topic. It's easier to lurk and nod my head and smile with agreement to many other's comments and perspectives for this one.

How about basing some rules off of:

What OO is about. Really and truly all about.

Focusing on the membership who are mainly adults. (Yes, I know the majority are men but don't these men have daughters? Which leads me to the next possible rule consideration.)

Respect for others and their workplace and home life.

--
I have become more skilled in writing and comprehension because of OO. Interactions with others, making friends, and learning about things from all over the world with people with vast knowledge or at least familiarity on many topics. I don't want to see multiple topics NSFW for a myriad of reasons (many have been brought up numerous times). I am getting creeped out. The latest is extremely questionable because there have been other areas to post pictures and the addition doesn't feel right to me. As a woman, when it doesn't feel right, there is something off and it makes me uncomfortable.

Sharing sexy pics is just like sharing any other information, like musical talents. No one can know everything and being introduced to something new in a genre that interests you, is enlightening.

Eventhough, I believe I understand the point you are attempting to make. This comment is what pushed me to post about not feeling comfortable.

Telling ya all... hitting submit on this is a tough one but I'm not happy hepcat is gone and feel if I posted a few times, maybe I could have made a difference in the outcome. So much easier to stay silent then to stand up for sure.

[RunningMn9]

I think a more usual question about speech is not why should it be allowed, but why shouldn't it?

Is that where the discussion will start if I decide to start a thread where we can all share our collection of hot beheading pictures?

I'm not using the term "need" as in compulsion. I'm using it in the same vein as "what's the point?".

As mentioned, I don't particularly care about nudity, it just that threads like Daehawk's come across as a weird mix of shouting "I LIKE GIRLS!!!" and an old man that doesn't know how to use the internet so is using this forum like a BBS in 1986.

[GreenGoo]

I think a more usual question about speech is not why should it be allowed, but why shouldn't it?

Is that where the discussion will start if I decide to start a thread where we can all share our collection of hot beheading pictures?

I'm not using the term "need" as in compulsion. I'm using it in the same vein as "what's the point?".

Of course. You're the one living in a country which prides itself on free speech. I shouldn't have to tell you this. I'm from a country that might prosecute you for hurting someone's feelings. ALL speech should start with a default "sure". If you want to make arguments for restricting specific speech on this private forum go for it. "What's the point?" isn't an argument.

Speech shouldn't need justification to exist. It should need justification to not exist. Your constitution taught me that. While your constitution is limited to government censure, the core concept is valuable in its own right.

I'm truly not trying to be a dick here, it just seems self evident that you've got this backwards. As an interesting piece of trivia, my time spent on OO is what solidified and strengthened my support of free speech in general. Some very smart people made very compelling arguments as to why speech should be by default in the "on" position.

I'm not exactly ashamed of Canada's Freedom of Expression, but I do wish we would adopt the US's stance.

edit: To clarify, this is clearly not a case of Freedom of Speech as defined in your constitution. I only mentioned it because I feel very strongly about the idea of free speech, and your 1st amendment is commendable.

[Kraken]

But again why are people playing on the web at work? Shouldn't people being paid for a job be ...working? That sounds snarky I know but theres no other way to say it.

This always amuses me, as somebody who makes about $2.50 an hour working at home and often can't spare more than a few minutes of leisure time during the workday.

Great, so in one thread, I'm both someone who posts enough NSFW pics to be specifically mentioned as "why is it ok when MHS does it", AND the one who made Hepcat leave. Wheee.

a 'Hillary nude! (NSFW)' thread,

I just threw up in my mouth a little.

[Rip]

...which is exactly why there was a 'common sense' clause added to the CoC (before it was misplaced.)

It isn't misplaced. I have hidden it in the same location that the Secret Nuclear Agreement with Iran is kept.

[Rip]

The current kerfluffle isn't a case of hepcat trying to dictate what OO should be. Hepcat bolted for reasons related to the blow-up, but the blow-up itself involved many people voicing their opinion about what is and is not appropriate. I don't think Hepcat is holding his presence for ransom until we set a certain policy, but even if he is, that's not what's driving the present discussion over what policy should or shouldn't be.

It certainly isn't driving staff discussions. We don't react to people coming and going in a huff. We act based on the good of the community as defined by our little sample group. Which I might add has pretty much always had someone who represents pretty much every opinion I have ever seen on here about everything. There are even some staff members that liked U2K.

[Chrisoc13]

I'm not a prolific poster here but I check the site at least once a day, sometimes many times a day and I have for years, and on GG for several years before that, with that in mind it may be anecdotal but I have felt that there are more "NSFW" threads popping up recently. In a nutshell I really feel like Sudy Nym took the words out of my mouth for how I feel. I really find myself agreeing with most everything he wrote.

OO has been my community on the internet for years, but if I am being honest some of the NSFW threads popping up over and over again make me a bit embarrassed to have OO open in front of my wife. I don't post in them or really spend time in them (apart from the silly pics thread or other NSFW ones which are really more about funny pics or videos etc) but all the same I feel like more of these have crept up and I'm not a fan of those type of threads becoming more prevalent.

I don't have any issues with anyone who starts those threads etc and enjoy conversing with them outside of those threads so this is by no means a personality conflict for me. I will still visit the site regardless of what kind of decision is made regarding NSFW material but as long as it is being discussed I thought I would throw my voice as a community member into the matter that I'm of the opinion that there is plenty of that on the internet for those who want to seek them and I don't like the idea of more of those threads popping up here. OO has been my little peaceful corner of the internet for years. A place where people act like adults and respect others without a written CoC or heavy handed moderating. I would hope it could stay that way. After glancing through the last thread to see what the hubub was about I find there are certainly some things in there I'm not a fan of, and at least one picture that is simply obvious porn. I'm not a fan of those kind of things showing up on OO as much.

On a side note it would be a sad day if we lost another regular poster like Hepcat. Not that a decision should be made based off that but it would indeed be a sad day.

[naednek]

It seems like we go through this about once a year. I just wish we can keep the titles a little less descriptive but with a NSFW tag so that people are aware on what it contains. Nothing like having my browser sitting on the EBG page with thread titles about big dongs, or what name do you give oral sex. At least so some common sense and consideration of others.

[Chaosraven]

I think I understand where daehawk is coming from on this... the Funny Pics (MAY BE NSFW) thread is really about FUNNY, not NSFW. Yes, some may hit the edge of WTF NSFW but are predominantly FUNNY.

The NSFW Round Robin was about picking a specific person, and people gathering pix of JUST that Person, then voting on them.

So if daehawk were to toss in Yoga Pants Pix in a collective into either, the people in FUNNY would say "Um, what's funny there?"
And in the RR, they would also be inappropriate to the theme of the One Per Player gatherup.

By making a simply RANDOM NSFW it was specifically intended for What It Got. Girly Pix of a Jiggly Nature.

You don't have to enter it.

But if it indeed does make people Uncomfortable (and thanks to those of you with the gumption to state that, as silence is compliance here) by voicing that, the rest of us do indeed need to take that into account.

And act accordingly.

[Alefroth]

I think I understand where daehawk is coming from on this... the Funny Pics (MAY BE NSFW) thread is really about FUNNY, not NSFW. Yes, some may hit the edge of WTF NSFW but are predominantly FUNNY.

The NSFW Round Robin was about picking a specific person, and people gathering pix of JUST that Person, then voting on them.

So if daehawk were to toss in Yoga Pants Pix in a collective into either, the people in FUNNY would say "Um, what's funny there?"
And in the RR, they would also be inappropriate to the theme of the One Per Player gatherup.

By making a simply RANDOM NSFW it was specifically intended for What It Got. Girly Pix of a Jiggly Nature.

You don't have to enter it.

But if it indeed does make people Uncomfortable (and thanks to those of you with the gumption to state that, as silence is compliance here) by voicing that, the rest of us do indeed need to take that into account.

And act accordingly.

He's made half a dozen of those in the past 6 months and they've dropped off the front page in days. It took me two minutes to find one he created for the exact same purpose. I'm not saying he can't make as many as he pleases, just that it's not new. The only reason this one got traction was because someone bothered to say another one? Even now this one is suffering the same fate.

[Chaosraven]

Hot girl pictures...nsfw Mon Oct 21, 2013 10:01 pm

Whos hotter...female edition....nsfw Tue Jul 16, 2013 7:04 pm

Topanga does Maxim - nsfw Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:30 am

Stretch mini dresses NSFW Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:06 pm

A nsfw hot pic thread Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:33 pm

[Chaosraven]

And yes,they have short life spans.

But unless my search by author for NSFW in the title is flawed, that doesn't seem overboard to me, especially with 3 of those being topic specific

[RunningMn9]

"What's the point?" isn't an argument.

I don't think you understand why I'm asking the question. My question has nothing to do with free speech.

That said, this is a private forum, there is no default "on" switch. I'm not suggesting that if no one can answer what the point is, it shouldn't be allowed. "What's the point?" isn't my argument.

[Holman]

But once again, what we need to figure out here is where the line is.

What needs to be Spoilered/Linked/SimplyVerboten?

Does the nipslip or furburger or tallywhacker cross that line?

It seems like a common-sense expectation is already in place:

1) sexy beauty is fine and gets labeled NSFW as necessary;
2) porn for porn's sake is not fine and causes us to have the kind of navel-gazing/get-outta-my-navel session we're having now.

The problem with the term "NSFW" is that it doesn't say enough. I can enter the NSFW YouTube or the NSFW Silly Pics threads knowing that there might be something risque or that the language might be inappropriate for all audiences. I'm cool with that. What I don't expect to see is nudity presented purely for erections' sake, and I don't expect to see barely cropped blowjob pics.

It's about community tone. Free speech is free speech, but you don't do sex chat in the coffee shop. There's a whole internet full of blowjobs and erections for those who want to publicize and enjoy those images, and OO doesn't seem like the right place for it.

[RunningMn9]

porn for porn's sake

This is why I was asking what the point was. Daehawk's thread(s) strike me as this sort, and I don't believe it has a place here (and I'm using "porn" loosely here because I don't think it matters whether we are talking about 916 yoga pants selfies or one closely cropped BJ pic).

In the right context, I don't think anything is or should be necessarily off-limits. But porn for the simple sake of porn? I have little interest in being a part of that community.

[Carpet_pissr]

The problem with the term "NSFW" is that it doesn't say enough. I can enter the NSFW YouTube or the NSFW Silly Pics threads knowing that there might be something risque or that the language might be inappropriate for all audiences. I'm cool with that. What I don't expect to see is nudity presented purely for erections' sake, and I don't expect to see barely cropped blowjob pics.

Maybe part of the solution here is to adjust the way potentially offensive (either to a workplace environment, or to one's personal sexual sensibilities) material is labeled in the thread title?

Suggestion: Use "NSFW" for videos, language, merely risque (IIRC some here have stated that a picture of someone in a bathing suit is definitely NSFW), and anything but nudity, or near nudity. Use a different tag for the specifically "nudie-esque" threads. Maybe steal from the MPAA and use "MA" or something?

Just a suggestion. I personally wouldn't miss anything if the second type of thread went away, but would be very sad indeed if the "Silly Pics NSFW" thread went away as that provides me with a daily dose of teh funny, curated by my OO brothers and sisters .

[Smoove_B]

The tagging is only part of it. When people hotlink to sites that have already been "flagged" by monitoring software as adult/nudity/yoga pants, OO is guilty by association. What I don't know (and no I didn't read the paper linked above) is whether or not the monitoring software has the equivalent of a "Google Image Search" where they can actual recognize porn-y images based on known offenders and/or color palettes or if they're smart enough to look for overly descriptive image names that are linked through image hosting sites.

I think the attitude of "Well, these threads just drop off the front page after a week" is true to a degree. But if (1) they keep reappearing or (2) they're now Google archived forever and we're now flagged as a non-safe site, well that's another story.

Really, in my mind it is two separate issues. (1) Does it impact the community and people that are willing to hang out here based on the "feel" and (2) Does it stop people from viewing the site from work because the site is flagged as inappropriate?

[GreenGoo]

"What's the point?" isn't an argument.

I don't think you understand why I'm asking the question.

You're probably right. I've been assuming you were asking someone to justify the NSFW thread's existence.

[msteelers]

I've been reading this thread and have been trying to come up with an opinion to toss into the hat. While I certainly don't come to OO to browse through pictures of sexy woman, I'll look through the threads. It seems like nearly everyone follows the "no nudity" rule, with violations of the rule few and far between. I rarely see anything that has gone too far over the line, as the community does a good job pointing out the bad photos and they typically are removed by the time I check out a thread. I didn't see the edited blowjob picture, but I think 99% of OO members would agree that is excessive and it shouldn't be allowed.

As to the number of threads, it has always come and gone in waves. We'll go a week or two where there are a lot of threads popping up, and then weeks and weeks where they don't. Eventually they all fall off the front page. Even the Round Robin thread eventually died.

I don't think eliminating the threads entirely is called for here. One look at the number of posts and times viewed columns shows that they tend to be popular threads. Most of the members here are reasonable adults, so I think this issue can be resolved fairly easily. Consistent enforcement of the "no nudity" rule will eliminate any confusion over what is and isn't allowed. And if someone makes a ton of threads to the point of being excessive, I don't think the mods would be out of line to ask that person to stop.

My 2 cents.

[RunningMn9]

You're probably right. I've been assuming you were asking someone to justify the NSFW thread's existence.

I've been hoping that Daehawk was going to be honest enough to answer my question. I suspect his answer is "because porn/chicks", and I suspect that he doesn't actually want to say that out loud.

Smoove - unfortunately for me, the decision of our filter isn't based on the content of the site at the moment. So cleaning up the site or changing the labeling won't help me. Once the DoD determined that OO was inappropriate, the entire domain is blocked in perpetuity.

[msteelers]

The problem with the term "NSFW" is that it doesn't say enough. I can enter the NSFW YouTube or the NSFW Silly Pics threads knowing that there might be something risque or that the language might be inappropriate for all audiences. I'm cool with that. What I don't expect to see is nudity presented purely for erections' sake, and I don't expect to see barely cropped blowjob pics.

Maybe part of the solution here is to adjust the way potentially offensive (either to a workplace environment, or to one's personal sexual sensibilities) material is labeled in the thread title?

I don't know. Opening up a NSFW thread at work and being upset that there's something in there NSFW is just as silly as opening up a spoiler and being upset that it spoiled something for you. When something is spoiled, you open it up at your own risk. When something is labeled NSFW, you open it up at your own risk. Seems pretty obvious.

[GreenGoo]

It seems like a common-sense expectation is already in place:

1) sexy beauty is fine and gets labeled NSFW as necessary;
2) porn for porn's sake is not fine and causes us to have the kind of navel-gazing/get-outta-my-navel session we're having now.

I know it "seems" like common sense, but the very idea that it should be intuitively obvious but isn't is exactly why this entire incident occured. Where does the line get drawn? It's the "I can't define porn but I know it when I see it" problem. Since your country's legal system has struggled with this question for years, I'm not surprised we aren't all unified in agreement either. You might have a very clear idea of where to draw the line, but that is not necessarily where Rmn9, me, Chaosraven or in this case specifically daehawk would draw the line. And almost certainly not where hepcat drew his line (and then seemed to implode when support wasn't unanimous).

We can't just say "porn not allowed" and expect everyone to agree on what constitutes porn and what doesn't. Hell, we have a thread here called Scarlett Johansson's golden globes that is almost entirely dedicated to her tits (no nipples of course) (just writing "tits" makes me feel icky. I use it for effect). It has an enormous amount of participation and is part of an OO meme in fact.

Some of the pics daehawk posted are less revealing than some of the pics in the Golden Globes thread. Some are less revealing but more sexual. I know it when I see it is fine for self regulation (common sense). It's a lot more difficult when you're trying to get everyone to agree on it.

I'm not saying it's impossible to accomplish, I'm just trying to illustrate some of the difficulties involved. If it was as easy as your two bullet points, we wouldn't be here in the first place.