NSFW group

[JadedPulse]

Oh for f**ks sake.

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

That's all I see from you, Moose. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

[rickymooston]

However, having a forum appropriate for them would, I'm sorry to say possibly mean your picture, which I agree should be considered beautiful by society, as one not appropriate here.

If that image is not appropriate for here....I think THAT is disgusting.  It is a beautiful picture. 

Jay, please re-read my post and stop quote mining me.
THEM <--- 14 year olds
WOULD <--- We use this in a conditional clause; i.e., for something, that isn't true (14 year olds being the target).
SHOULD BE <--- My agreement that the picture is beautiful.

Again, you keep emphasizing what we AGREE on. If you want to argue with somebody, understand where you DISAGREE

[JustMyron]

I don't think all human beings are beautiful, that the human body is an example of perfection or the greatest beauty on the planet (for me, the winner is sunsets), or that we all look good naked  

I've just spent half an hour trying to find the seinfeld clip where it is conclusively demonstrated that there's such a thing as bad naked, but I was not successful  

Anyhow, whether or not the pics of half-naked or fully naked people are pleasing to the eye is beside the point. A quest to make everyone comfortable with sexuality or the unclothed human form just isn't going to work, in my opinion. A balance must be struck. I think the one we strike now is a fairly good one, although to be honest I hadn't thought of the fact that search results and post histories would show NSFW pics before it was brought up here. When the boobs thread started up, I was like "Um... er... reallly? Do we need a boobs thread, and what kind of precedent does letting it stay vs. dumping it set? Um... our rules say all those should be linked rather than posted, but...   the thread is labeled, so I guess that's OK...", not thinking of other ways the posts might be inadvertently accessed. I now regard that as a mistake.

Meanwhile, the mods have discussed it, and the consensus for now appears to be (although don't quote me on this as they may discuss it some more and change their minds) that we'll just live with that, accept the labeling of threads as NSFW, and people will have to restrain themselves from searching unless they're prepared to see the occasional semisexual pic. But in future, in the new version of the forum software, there's a tag called "spoiler", which hides its contents unless the viewer clicks on the "show" button. I think having NSFW pics inside of spoiler tags so that they don't automatically show up in search results unless the person wants to see and clicks, is a better compromise than our software will currently allow.

Jay, you think people who don't want to see nudity are exhibiting an attitude towards the human form that is disgusting and sad. Others think that nudity should be reserved for private spaces, and splashing it everywhere is disgusting and sad. Impasse. Compromise: Some people have to consent to a bit of censorship, and some people have to put up with some things that make them vaguely uncomfortable, and we do the best that our software allows to keep these two groups from clashing.

[rickymooston]

EDIT: To pre-emptively comply with what E6 likely says.

This post, click on the link above can be paraphrased to mean the following in my opinion. "I didn't actually read what you said and neither did Jay. Therefore, we are qualified to make
comments on what you said."

Specifically:
1) I replied to Jay and dealt with him "quote mining" me. (That means intentionally misrepresented what somebody said by not including their whole post in context.)
2) Her post says "bla bla ... keep talking rikcy" or some other crap.

[JadedPulse]

Thanks for changing my quote. 

[rickymooston]

Thanks for changing my quote.

Prove me wrong and in your own words summarize my argument.

I paraphrased your quote and what I said was true.

Jay misrepresented what I said

[JadedPulse]

I don't give a s**t about your argument anymore.

You paraphrased NOTHING about my initial post, you changed every single word. That's an asshole move.

[Jay]

Jay, you think people who don't want to see nudity are exhibiting an attitude towards the human form that is disgusting and sad.

I did not say that. I was referring to that specific image!!!  One image!!!!! Did you look at it?  It is a woman pregnant and a man holding her belly....covering all the *naughty* bits.

It is a thing of beauty...and IMO should be able to be a billboard on a highway!!!!!

I will think on the rest of what you said before posting further.

[Jay]

I didn't actually read what you said and neither did Jay. Therefore, we are qualified to make
comments on what you said.

I just want to inform you Ricky, that I just reported you for an E6 violation!

[rickymooston]

You paraphrased NOTHING about my initial post,

The "Bla bla bla" in your post meant you weren't even reading said post.

Jay had just misquoted me when I specifically said and my post was correcting that. I had explicitly agree the picture was beautiful but I only said that the image would not likely be deemed ok on a forum geared to include 14 year olds.

The reason you can't paraphrase what I said, is because you don't know what I said.

[rickymooston]

I just want to inform you Ricky, that I just reported you for an E6 violation!

You probably should have informed me before reporting it, in order to save the mods time

Nobody would have thought that quote was her original. It was an obvious edit but had you said, "I'm going to report this, I'd have edited my post".

I don't think you can summarize my position.
Here is Your postion:
Nudity is beautiful and banning it here is stupid censorship.

The problem is, you don't seem to have taken 5 minutes to understand what I'm arguing and you've just been repeating (with examples) your above thesis ad nauseam. 

Rule #1 of debate: if you don't know your opponents position, you can't hold a credible debate.

[Jezzebelle]

rule #2-  dont debate with stuffed animals.... they'll never have anything good to add to the debate

[nateswift]

rule #2-  dont debate with stuffed animals.... they'll never have anything good to add to the debate

So...... that makes 3 that don't seem to have enough sense to understand a very legitmate point made by Ricky?  We are talking about what society does and the standards that are in effect, not what should be.  How many of these very personally offensive posts have actually been reported for violations of courtesy? or even insults under rule 6?

[Jezzebelle]

rule #2-  dont debate with stuffed animals.... they'll never have anything good to add to the debate

So...... that makes 3 that don't seem to have enough sense to understand a very legitmate point made by Ricky?  We are talking about what society does and the standards that are in effect, not what should be.  How many of these very personally offensive posts have actually been reported for violations of courtesy? or even insults under rule 6?

no, he made it into that to fit his argument.  we were suppose to be talking about the +/- of a NSFW group for the forum, which is 16+.  he keeps bringing in all kinds of points that have nothing to do with this...

[Jay]

rule #2-  dont debate with stuffed animals.... they'll never have anything good to add to the debate

So...... that makes 3 that don't seem to have enough sense to understand a very legitmate point made by Ricky?  We are talking about what society does and the standards that are in effect, not what should be.  How many of these very personally offensive posts have actually been reported for violations of courtesy? or even insults under rule 6?

If you want to report a post...do it. it is that simple.

As far as Ricky's point and those that don't get it.  I think you don't get it.  I just posted a whole bunch of BILLBOARDS on public display to ANYONE walking by them(in my other thread)....you tell me that they are classified as NSFW when the images are posted 50 feet tall on the side of buildings for any and all to see!!!!  No matter what their age!  No matter who they are!!!

We are on an ADULT website where we discuss adult material in almost EVERY SINGLE FREAKING POST!!!!

[JustMyron]

Jay, you think people who don't want to see nudity are exhibiting an attitude towards the human form that is disgusting and sad.

I did not say that. I was referring to that specific image!!!  One image!!!!! Did you look at it?  It is a woman pregnant and a man holding her belly....covering all the *naughty* bits.

It is a thing of beauty...and IMO should be able to be a billboard on a highway!!!!!

I will think on the rest of what you said before posting further.

Addressed this post in the other thread where this stuff is being discussed (just in case someone comes along and thinks I didn't answer this post).

[nateswift]

rule #2-  dont debate with stuffed animals.... they'll never have anything good to add to the debate

So...... that makes 3 that don't seem to have enough sense to understand a very legitmate point made by Ricky?  We are talking about what society does and the standards that are in effect, not what should be.  How many of these very personally offensive posts have actually been reported for violations of courtesy? or even insults under rule 6?

no, he made it into that to fit his argument.  we were suppose to be talking about the +/- of a NSFW group for the forum, which is 16+.  he keeps bringing in all kinds of points that have nothing to do with this...

Existing variations in societal norms have nothing to do with this?

[nateswift]

If you want to report a post...do it. it is that simple.


We are on an ADULT website where we discuss adult material in almost EVERY SINGLE FREAKING POST!!!!

My point, Jay, is that some here seem to be getting a tad overwrought.

[rickymooston]

"I just posted a whole bunch of BILLBOARDS on public display to ANYONE walking by them"

Please display them in your office for your boss to see and let me know if you have a job after?

I dare you. 

There is a difference between "pictures" and "words" by the way. If you accidentally get the wrong words in a search, you can ignore that.

We are on an ADULT website where we discuss adult material in almost EVERY SINGLE FREAKING POST!!!!

What is "adult" about discussing:
- philosophy
- the existence of "God" or the impossibility of proving said existence
- evolution
- politics etc? 

Agree, some topics are adult; e.g., the sexuality tank contains mature topics. There exists a difference between "words" and pictures

I am not trying to prevent anybody who wants content, I'm looking at allowing people who don't want content not to get caught by accident.

The problem is Jay, you are so full of your conviction about RIGHTNESS, you never bothered to take 2 minutes to find out where I agree with you and where I disagree.

[Dadzilla]

The problem is Jay, you are so full of your conviction about RIGHTNESS, you never bothered to take 2 minutes to find out where I agree with you and where I disagree.

Perhaps if you were to put it into bold print, Ricky.

[rickymooston]

Perhaps if you were to put it into bold print, Ricky.

Ha.

[Jay]

"I just posted a whole bunch of BILLBOARDS on public display to ANYONE walking by them"

Please display them in your office for your boss to see and let me know if you have a job after?

I dare you.  

There is a difference between "pictures" and "words" by the way. If you accidentally get the wrong words in a search, you can ignore that.

We are on an ADULT website where we discuss adult material in almost EVERY SINGLE FREAKING POST!!!!

What is "adult" about discussing:
- philosophy
- the existence of "God" or the impossibility of proving said existence
- evolution
- politics etc?  

Agree, some topics are adult; e.g., the sexuality tank contains mature topics. There exists a difference between "words" and pictures

I am not trying to prevent anybody who wants content, I'm looking at allowing people who don't want content not to get caught by accident.

The problem is Jay, you are so full of your conviction about RIGHTNESS, you never bothered to take 2 minutes to find out where I agree with you and where I disagree.

I answered your thoughts in my latest post in the "thread that shouldnt be named"  I hate to do this...and mirror a post in another thread...and if it against the rules, I ask the mods for some leeway here.

NSFW THREAD(modified to denote this)

Jay, you think people who don't want to see nudity are exhibiting an attitude towards the human form that is disgusting and sad.

I did not say that. I was referring to that specific image!!!  One image!!!!! Did you look at it?  It is a woman pregnant and a man holding her belly....covering all the *naughty* bits.

It is a thing of beauty...and IMO should be able to be a billboard on a highway!!!!!

I will think on the rest of what you said before posting further.

OOPS. I glanced at it. Saw man + woman with man holding roundish shape that looked like giant breast. My bad, saw what I expected to see, not what was there. I retract, as I'd change the tone of what I said in light of this.

Thank you.  I appreciate that. You may not see the picture as beautiful as I do(I dont know if you do or not), however I don't see how anyone could rationally see that image as immoral or disgusting.  Yes....I wouldn't post it in a thread about if Jesus was a real man, but if there was a discussion on child birth here, I would not see it as inappropriate for me to post that image in the thread....directly.

And my point on the billboards stands....these billboards can be found almost anywhere.  On the side of 50 foot buildings.  On the side of highways.  In downtown cities.  In plenty of SFW magazines as advertisements.  If I had a copy of IDK...details magazine sitting in my office open to one of these pictures as an advertisement...would I be fired....no.  Now if I was sitting there leering at it all day and not getting my job done, well yes I would expect to be pulled into HR. I wouldn't even be fired for bringing in a copy of say Maxim magazine into the office.  Now again, if I was leering at them...or pulling my co-workers over and making suggestive comments about the pictures...well, something would be said in either of those cases.  But if I was sitting in our lunch room looking at Maxim magazine, I would not be fired.  If I was sitting on an airplane looking at a Maxim magazine the flight attendant would not ask me to close the magazine.

However, again, I have no problem labeling a thread as NSFW out of courtesy to other members...but none of those advertisements is technically NSFW.  maybe not appropriate for work.  You probably wouldn't want them taped to your office wall like you live in a dorm room.  And you probably wouldn't want to be sitting at your computer staring at them all day instead of working...but NSFW??? in my opinion as someone who does this for a living....I say no.  Now, the sfw porn posted in this thread...imo...I say NSFW.  HR would have to make the final call, but I think they would see it my way.  There is an implied act.  You know what you are supposed to be seeing, whether you can 'physically' see it or not.

Art?  Well that is where the discussion can get muddled but really shouldn't here...on a forum that discusses other adult material.  What is art to me is not necessarily art to you, however, the nude form has been a major subject in art for millennia.  What has changed over the years???  Simply the medium in which the nude form has been captured, whether that be marble, bronze, oil and canvas, or photography.    However, if I wanted to have an art appreciation thread on this forum, while I may feel it is prudent out of courtesy to label the thread as NSFW, I think that thread should be allowed and the art forms posted should be able to be directly posted within the thread.  Yes, directly posted. You shouldn't have to hide art.  You shouldn't have to relegate it to the back room like it is porn. This discussion has been dragged through the mud enough....but dont drag (and I am saying this to everyone) millennia of art down with it.  

[rickymooston]

Jay, I went to the thread and saw billboards which are public. Where is the response? I'm confused.

I told you, I agree those billboards are public. My (rhetorical) question was however, lol, whether you would be able to post those ads in your office for all your co-workers to see.

[Jay]

Jay, I went to the thread and saw billboards which are public. Where is the response? I'm confused.

I told you, I agree those billboards are public. My (rhetorical) question was however, lol, whether you would be able to post those ads in your office for all your co-workers to see.

do your eyes need to be checked???  Maybe bold will help

If I had a copy of IDK...details magazine sitting in my office open to one of these pictures as an advertisement...would I be fired....no.  Now if I was sitting there leering at it all day and not getting my job done, well yes I would expect to be pulled into HR. I wouldn't even be fired for bringing in a copy of say Maxim magazine into the office.  Now again, if I was leering at them...or pulling my co-workers over and making suggestive comments about the pictures...well, something would be said in either of those cases.  But if I was sitting in our lunch room looking at Maxim magazine, I would not be fired.  If I was sitting on an airplane looking at a Maxim magazine the flight attendant would not ask me to close the magazine.

[rickymooston]

thanks.

If you had simply had a url to the post that would ok too.

[Jay]

Ricky....the post IS HYPERLINKED and labeled to my NSFW thread just 4 posts above here...IN THIS THREAD!!!!

[Dadzilla]

LOL

[rickymooston]

Ricky....the post IS HYPERLINKED and labeled to my NSFW thread just 4 posts above here...IN THIS THREAD!!!!

didn;'t see it

looked but i applaude your answer