quote:

Originally posted by cloverheart:
My gut reaction to your post? If you're analysing so much about which parts are ok and which not, then this is not the kind of palace you should be checking.

I do understand this thread IS called "gratuitous hot chicks", but bear in mind this is a forum for a writer, and we come here to socialise and discuss stuff and be silly: it's not a board for girls in general. We tend to post pics of hot actresses, singers, models... I kinda think that posting pics of unknown girls in very sexual positions is crossing the line a bit...

(However, this is a *feeling*, I can't really rationalise that. I don't have a problem with the pics themselves, even if the were no squares, but I don think this is not the place for that sort of picture. )

Bold mine

Nah, exactly my feeling clover. If you have to get into the crack/anus/vulva details, maybe you could look at the rest of the thread and see what we do here instead of seeing how close to the line you can tread.
If you want to show these pics- instead of just pointing us to Playboy- my feeling is they could be in a folder and a link posted to it (yes, we'd look).
Besides, all those big black squares look really stupid. Why bother doing this?

And- while I realize it's FlameWars and NSFW, we do have some much younger guests and even members, so....no. I don't think this is the place for these.

Just my 2.5 cents worth.

While the pictures don't constitute a clear and obvious violation of the ban, I do think they run contrary to the purpose of the thread, and, honestly, are the sort of boundary-pushing pictures that could cause we moderators to consider making the rules regarding nudity yet more stringent. I would ask you nicely, Tisonem, to keep the porn-viewing on your desktop and not on our message board, only with black bits in. Thanks.

I'm with Clover and Beezee, Dweller. And for me, it's turned a fun thread into something uncomfortable. (And yup I know we're in flame wars, but still.) Any chance you could just take the pictures out, please?

I find the most interesting thing about those pictures are the black rectangles.


But back to the hot, looking at Amanda Palmer makes places inside me hurt....

quote:

Originally posted by BeeZee:

Bold mine

Nah, exactly my feeling clover. If you have to get into the crack/anus/vulva details, maybe you could look at the rest of the thread and see what we do here instead of seeing how close to the line you can tread.
If you want to show these pics- instead of just pointing us to Playboy- my feeling is they could be in a folder and a link posted to it (yes, we'd look).
Besides, all those big black squares look really stupid. Why bother doing this?

And- while I realize it's FlameWars and NSFW, we do have some much younger guests and even members, so....no. I don't think this is the place for these.

Just my 2.5 cents worth.

Emphasis mine. In the context of this thread the pics look pretty odd with the squares and all. Hardly seem worth looking at, really. Now Royko's pics ... THAT'S HAWT!

quote:

Originally posted by Hive:
I'm with Clover and Beezee, Dweller. And for me, it's turned a fun thread into something uncomfortable. (And yup I know we're in flame wars, but still.) Any chance you could just take the pictures out, please?

I, err, thought I had. *cough* Fixed now.

I understand, but, is there any way I could possibly get my pictures back? I wasn't planning on them being deleted, so I didn't save them. Anything you could do to give me the links back? Thanks.

Nope, no way to get them back, sorry.

so, not only did we have a flood of nearly porn pics, he hotlinked them, too?

I will admit to being curious and going back a page. I wish I hadn't. "Gratuitous" is one or two pictures, not a whole magazine's worth. I didn't count all of them, but it seemed like 20 pictures. And the black boxes only made it seem dirty. I'm not sorry they're gone - and it's not because I'm a prude.

I find it odd that for (I'm assuming Tisonem is male) his first posts he chose this thread.

(I've avoided this thread because I was trapped in dialup limbo and it just took far too long to load pictures - this was my first venture into this thread and I'm almost regretting it.)

quote:

I will admit to being curious and going back a page. I wish I hadn't. "Gratuitous" is one or two pictures, not a whole magazine's worth. I didn't count all of them, but it seemed like 20 pictures. And the black boxes only made it seem dirty. I'm not sorry they're gone - and it's not because I'm a prude.

I'm no prude either (I have no problem with that kind of picture per say), but I agree, this just isn't the place for that kind of pic. Although I can understand the confusion given the title and the guidelines.

So we should change it to 'the non gratuitous hot chicks thread'?

After seeing those pics, I'm wondering what's behind your avatar, Waspfearer.

quote:

So we should change it to 'the non gratuitous hot chicks thread'?

I was thinking more "the gratuitous hot chicks thread - but not like that"

You're all completely preposterous. First, your topic title is quite misleading. Then, you provide no rules. And, even more, when I follow the rules provided to me - somehow I'm still in error! Now, what does that say about you? And some mention that I have posted "unknown girls." As if they think these are random sluts from the street. The pictures are clearly professional, and if you can't see such, I don't even know what's wrong with you. Another says, "very sexual positions." I'm sorry, but you're contradicting, other women posted in this topic have been in "very sexual positions." Yet, those pictures are clearly allowed. You people seem to think these are some offensive pictures? How!? Just tell me how, because, I just don't see it. Everything that could even be considered remotely nudity is censored out. What's left is a mere thing that even kids see nowadays. Yes, some of the positions are more sexual, but not by that much, and if there's nothing to see, then, quite frankly, there's nothing to see. If they're young enough to not know, they're not going to know. Besides, as I was getting to - what's left after my censoring is just like what a girl on a beach would wear, a bikini and a bra. I clearly don't see how this is any worse. In fact, I even cover more skin of the women! If you go to a beach, you can find thongs and everything. So, if you'd please, spare me your shit, and fuck off!

Edit - And, don't even give me the shit about how it's "not safe for work." The motherfucking section of the forum is called "This Area Is Not Work Safe." You're just really misleading, contradicting, and can't see, period. You guys have a long way to go...

Okay...well I know you're angry but I'll take your question at face value and answer it. (And mods, please correct me if I'm wrong.)

The difference between your pictures and the others is that your pictures are porn pictures (naked women blatantly inviting to sexual action). The other pictures are pictures of hot women in different kinds of poses. You edited out some bits with black boxes to conform to our rules and hey presto!, your porn pictures now do conform pro forma.

However.

We don't (only) have the rules against showing nipples and cunts because we object to showing nipples or cunts. We have those rules because these are usually the sign of porn pictures. We want to discourage people from posting porn pictures. Which is exactly what you did.

So, while you managed to find a loophole, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you didn't understand what makes a porn picture different from a hot picture, we'd still appreciate it if you didn't post porn anymore. With black boxes or without.

WHY we don't want that doesn't make a difference. It's the requirements of this board and if you want to continue posting here you'll have to accept them.

Also, you hotlinked. This rule is very clearly stated in the FAQs, I'm afraid.
The rules about posting nudity are also easily found in the FAQs.

If you're okay with that, then please do join us in other parts of the board. It's a fun place for a chat and you're welcome.
If, however, you find our requests too preposterous then you are welcome to find a board that appreciates your porny offerings. Or, in your own words:

quote:

So, if you'd please, spare me your shit, and fuck off!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: His Noodle Girl,

quote:

You guys have a long way to go...

to where?

Tipperary.

Gah! earworm!

but my heart's right there.

Part of the reason we don't have consistent rules for things of this nature, Tisonem, is that we haven't had to have them before. It may startle you that it's taken six years for porn to reach our corner of the 'Net, but if really has. Well, except that one time someone hot-linked an image from Something Awful, but I don't know if that was porn or an illustration from an anatomy textbook for the chemically disturbed.

At any rate, it hasn't come up, so, here, you get to hear the rough draft of the new rule: if the picture would constitute porn, by the popularly used definition of "the sort of thing you'd see in a magazine that's either kept behind the counter, on a high shelf, in plastic wrap or otherwise away from children" before you edited it, then please don't post it at all.