Since your here, I'll ask you. Why did you want to recommend my pic for DQ? Is a typical man sleeping in a chair, with no sexual undertones, pornographic? I was completely dumbfounded by your comment and did not get you point.
Originally posted by hbunch7187: ... It's a personal preference option. One that will make it easier for people to access this at work, or at the library...
you have the same personal preference right now - don't use the office or the library
Originally posted by ClubJuggle: ...There's a fundamental difference here. In the news story you quoted, the government denied the people the right to view certain types of art. What we are talking about is a system where the VIEWER can choose whether to view certain types of art. The Taliban's action was about central control, this is about individual freedom.
for this argument, it's not a long stretch to equate 'government' with 'DPC moderating body'
the point i was trying to make is that, no matter how small an idea begins, at some point it's no longer "good enough" for someone -- 'something else has to be done' -- ad infinitum, until all the statues are gone
Originally posted by PTLParsons: I don't give all nudes a "1", only those that are porn and not artistic - which I guess is in the eye of the beholder. The ones I gave a "1" I felt were porn because they had a titalating shock value to good morals.
Don't you mean "a titillating shock value to your morals? My morals may be different than yours, but that doesn't mean they're not good.
This thread takes as long to load as the vote page now... I'm gonna continue this in a new thread and then lock this one.... please hold off posts for a few moments....
Originally posted by jmsetzler: This thread takes as long to load as the vote page now... I'm gonna continue this in a new thread and then lock this one.... please hold off posts for a few moments....
John, splitting the thread will only create confusion and make replying nearly impossible.
Spiderman, this question is directed mostly to you but also to others who may feel likewise. I want to make sure you understand exactly what is being proposed.
We are not talking about making any type of changes to the submission guidelines or to the enforcement of those guidelines. As far as content is concerned, any submission that is acceptable now would remain acceptable.
What we are talking about is providing users who do not wish to (or cannot) see certain types of images with the ability to avoid seeing them. Users who wished to see the images will still be able to do so.
As someone who is apparently interesting in protection of right, why would you want to restrict users from being able to choose what they see, especially since it won't affect what you see?
Originally posted by spiderman: [ifor this argument, it's not a long stretch to equate 'government' with 'DPC moderating body'
the point i was trying to make is that, no matter how small an idea begins, at some point it's no longer "good enough" for someone -- 'something else has to be done' -- ad infinitum, until all the statues are gone [/i]
I agree. We're not talking about DPC doing the filtering. We're talking about the users individually controlling what comes up on their own, and only their own, screens.
Originally posted by ClubJuggle: Spiderman, this question is directed mostly to you but also to others who may feel likewise. I want to make sure you understand exactly what is being proposed.
We are not talking about making any type of changes to the submission guidelines or to the enforcement of those guidelines. As far as content is concerned, any submission that is acceptable now would remain acceptable.
What we are talking about is providing users who do not wish to (or cannot) see certain types of images with the ability to avoid seeing them. Users who wished to see the images will still be able to do so.
As someone who is apparently interesting in protection of right, why would you want to restrict users from being able to choose what they see, especially since it won't affect what you see?
-Terry
sure, i know the current intent -- i'm just trying to raise a flag for a moment, so that we know what to expect the next time around
go ahead and tweak the site to placate the people who require it --- just don't be surprised when a new group requires just a little bit more - and so on
Originally posted by PTLParsons: [If you didn't mean for it to be porn why show the pubic hair. He could have started eating at about her navel. The might have taken it out of the porn catagory
So, it's the pubic hair, is it? If she had shaved it off, it would qualify as art? Just trying to assess your criteria on what is art and what is porn.
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/24/2002 12:37:16 PM.
Originally posted by spiderman: go ahead and tweak the site to placate the people who require it --- just don't be surprised when a new group requires just a little bit more - and so on
Exactly.
I feel all pictures of children should be banned from submission. And certainly those cute picture of naked children in the bathtub or on a sheep rug. The internet is known for pedophiles lurking around and i certainly wouldn't want dpchallenge submissions being the vehicle for them to get a rise.
to me it was the inclusion of the dude suggesting a particular action with regard to the female genitalia, also shown.
up until now, we've removed any images that showed genitalia, male or female. not sure why we didn't this time - guess we're not being too consistent ; ) ..
but it's not too late to get a consistent standard and then stick to it - which is probably what's going to happen.
Originally posted by Journey: So, it's the pubic hair, is it? If she had shaved it off, it would qualify as art? Just trying to assess your criteria on what is art and what is porn.
it's sarcastic, inciteful (not insightful ; )) statements like this that take away the most credibility from the 'liberalize the site' advocates :).
tolerance has to be a two-way street, or it can't work.
both sides are both trying to 'claim' this site as theirs.
that's just not going to happen. the admins of this site tend to be pretty even-keeled people with an agenda that is pro-art and -speech, but not terribly extremist.
people are going to live with what ends up happening, or they're going to leave.
chances are not many people will leave, but even if they do, it doesn't really matter because there are plenty of people out there that aren't absolutist about what they want from a free photography contest.
just be thankful this even exists and take it for what it is and stop being so demanding. this is directed to everyone in the thread. lol.
Originally posted by Journey: Originally posted by spiderman: [i]go ahead and tweak the site to placate the people who require it --- just don't be surprised when a new group requires just a little bit more - and so on
Exactly.
I feel all pictures of children should be banned from submission. And certainly those cute picture of naked children in the bathtub or on a sheep rug. The internet is known for pedophiles lurking around and i certainly wouldn't want dpchallenge submissions being the vehicle for them to get a rise.
;)
[/i]
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/24/2002 1:03:55 PM.
Nudity isn't really the issue here...we all have nude bodies...lol This image DOES show an interaction between two people. What is that interaction? A sex act. It's a sex act. The depictions will only get more and more graphic if it continues. I love this site! And I like sharing it with my family. That is becoming more questionable now. I'm not so sure I can do that anymore. I don't think the image in question is terrible at all. What goes on between 2 people sexually doesn't really belong here imo. It is a private thing between 2 people. Maybe it's time for a poll on the issue. There....I put in another few cents.
We're not talking about banning anything! How many more ways can I say it?
In my mind, this site has three top priorities, which in no particular order are:
- Build a constructive, friendly and educational community - Encourage creative thinking and artistic freedom - Run a fair and worthwhile contest.
This site has continued to evolve since it started, and I could take up a full page listing the changes since the site went live. The past changes are irrelevant though except that in most cases they have been, and will continue to be driven by the users and the three priorities above. Believe me when I say that most if not all of the moderators are as concerned about artistic freedom as you are, and I think this site has done a pretty good job of maintaining artistic freedom throughout these changes, and will continue to do so in the future. There have been many cases where users have asked for changes in allowable submission content, and those changes have consistently been avoided. Sometimes this displeases users at one extreme or the other. There are plenty of other sites out there for those people, and we hope they enjoy them.
Originally posted by ClubJuggle: Originally posted by spiderman: ...the point i was trying to make is that, no matter how small an idea begins, at some point it's no longer "good enough" for someone -- 'something else has to be done' -- ad infinitum, until all the statues are gone ------------------ I agree. We're not talking about DPC doing the filtering. We're talking about the users individually controlling what comes up on their own, and only their own, screens.
i can see it already ... a 'blocked' shot wins the challenge ... a thread is born ... "Where did that shot come from? I didn't see it this week - I didn't get to vote on that entry - why wasn't I allowed to vote?"
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/24/2002 1:11:39 PM.
Originally posted by magnetic9999: to me it was the inclusion of the dude suggesting a particular action with regard to the female genitalia, also shown.
up until now, we've removed any images that showed genitalia, male or female. not sure why we didn't this time - guess we're not being too consistent ; ) ..
but it's not too late to get a consistent standard and then stick to it - which is probably what's going to happen.
I'll speak to my personal vote on DQ for this photograph anyway. The photo showed hair and not genetalia, and for that reason I voted against DQ. The photograph was highly suggestive, but in my personal opinion did not quite cross the line. That said, I wouldn't want someone to see it on my screen at work, and so being able to turn on an option to mask those kinds of pictures so that I could skip them (and then turn the mask off when I get home) would be useful to me. I'm talking about my own personal vote and not the opinion of the site or of the other moderators.
-Terry
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/24/2002 1:19:07 PM.
Originally posted by spiderman: i can see it already ... a 'blocked' shot wins the challenge ... a thread is born ... "Where did that shot come from? I didn't see it this week - I didn't get to vote on that entry - why wasn't I allowed to vote?"
If a user blocks adult shots, the shot would also be blocked for them on the front page and on the results page.
but showing the 'patch' is really the first step in showing female genitalia, since the main structures are pretty hidden away (prolly why you have topless bars that dont allow woman to show any of their genital areas incl their pubes).
it's that whole 'below the waist' thing.
showing the patch combined with showing a guy's tongue extended cunnilingus-style seemed to be past the line that pictures on here live or die by.
just to clarify, for me it's not about the 'morality' of it. i have no probs with naked bodies. i just want to be consistent so that no user is unfairly singled out more than another. Originally posted by ClubJuggle: Originally posted by magnetic9999: [i]to me it was the inclusion of the dude suggesting a particular action with regard to the female genitalia, also shown.
up until now, we've removed any images that showed genitalia, male or female. not sure why we didn't this time - guess we're not being too consistent ; ) ..
but it's not too late to get a consistent standard and then stick to it - which is probably what's going to happen.
I'll speak to my personal vote on DQ for this photograph anyway. The photo showed hair and not genetalia, and for that reason I voted against DQ. The photograph was highly suggestive, but in my personal opinion did not quite cross the line. That said, I wouldn't want someone to see it on my screen at work, and so being able to turn on an option to mask those kinds of pictures so that I could skip them (and then turn the mask off when I get home) would be useful to me.
Why would someone so dedicated to freedom of speech be so dead set against freedom of choice. Just because you have the right to say something doesn't mean you have the right to force me to listen.Say what ever you like, take and submit any photos that you want. I don't care. Giveing me the opportunity to choose whether or not to look at them more than once is not going to be the seed of a new Dark Age of Repression. The right to free speech simply does not give you the right to a captive audiance.
