Who makes you Drool debate

trout

r3nu4l wrote: »

Another question. What is the argument FOR this thread? What purpose does it serve?

cowzerp wrote: »

What purpose does any of the threads serve, its just mild entertainment-any paper would have more scantily dressed ladies in them

Fair enough ... for some people it's no biggie, for other people ... rightly or wrongly ... it is something.

Khannie wrote: »

I don't see why it (or any other thread that is not in breach of the charter) should have to be justified, have an argument for it, or serve a purpose in the slightest. I find myself wondering why the mods keep asking this question.

Well ... I asked that question a few times ... when I was banging on about it, (on Saturday) the reason I kept asking is simple ...I didn't know the answer ... I still don't.

Having said that, no thread HAS to be justified, and no thread HAS to have a purpose. My views on this type of thread are well known (by now). I took a few minutes to qualify my position, and explain myself ... I was hoping someone with the opposing view would explain their viewpoint ... you know, like a debate.

The questions I asked (and they were questions, not statements) about the direction the forum is taking ... and the message (if any) this type of thread sends ... they are valid questions, and IMHO worthy of a more considered response than "that's just rubbish".

On the point about over-moderation, up until OldGoat's post, I didn't believe the thread had been heavily moderated ... since then, I can see both sides of it ... and here we are.

So ... what next? How do we move this on?

I still like the idea of a poll ... let people stick their colours to the mast ... some people think polls are also rubbish ... so ... what next?

Herbal Deity

If we're going to have a poll, the options need to be more well defined:

Suggested poll options
Yes - The Charter suppports such a thread.
Yes - SFW pictures only. No nudity. Allow comments.
Yes - SFW pictures only. No nudity. No comments.
No - The Charter does not suppport such a thread.
No - not where I want this forum to go.
No - there is a whole Internet for that
Don't care.

I don't see the point of the "The Charter [does not] support such a thread" options.
No nudity is a given, it's in Boards.ie rules, so there's no point in having that in the options.
SFW is obviously ill defined given what people find acceptable is so different, so having it there means nothing.
There's no point in 3 No options.

Make it simpler:
Yes - tag as potentially NSFW, anything within site rules allowed.
Yes - no underwear or poses which might be interpreted as suggestive.
No.
Don't care.

trout

Herbal Deity wrote: »

If we're going to have a poll, the options need to be more well defined:



I don't see the point of the "The Charter [does not] support such a thread" options.
No nudity is a given, it's in Boards.ie rules, so there's no point in having that in the options.
SFW is obviously ill defined given what people find acceptable is so different, so having it there means nothing.
There's no point in 3 No options.

Make it simpler:
Yes - tag as potentially NSFW, anything within site rules allowed.
Yes - no underwear or poses which might be interpreted as suggestive.
No.
Don't care.

I threw out the original suggestions, as just that ... suggestions, based on what I thought were the arguments for and against from the people who had responded up to that point.

Your suggestions are constructive, and make more sense. Thanks for that. Anyone else?

Khannie

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Make it simpler:
Yes - tag as potentially NSFW, anything within site rules allowed.
Yes - no underwear or poses which might be interpreted as suggestive.
No.
Don't care.

I don't like the first two. There's too much of a gap between them. The first one allows slydice and the 2nd one is too prudish. As I said, the no underwear rule is madness IMO. It would make this ok but not this while there is clearly next to nothing dividing those two pictures.

I still don't think you can reasonably infer anything this important from a poll. All I'm saying is if there *has* to be one then I don't like those two options.

Khannie

I had written this earlier, but was in two minds about posting it, this is why it may seem a bit disjointed after my last post.....

trout wrote: »

Having said that, no thread HAS to be justified, and no thread HAS to have a purpose. My views on this type of thread are well known (by now). I took a few minutes to qualify my position, and explain myself ... I was hoping someone with the opposing view would explain their viewpoint ... you know, like a debate.

That's the thing; Personally speaking I deliberately wanted to avoid a debate on its existence based on merit (of course anyone else was free to have that debate with you). I don't really care about the drool thread. I care about feeling relaxed in here. Relaxed enough to post a picture of a woman in her underwear if necessary. Relaxed enough to discuss the lump on my testicle if necessary. Those two things (for me) go hand in hand (no joke intended). So while I agree that the thread is a bit tabloid and I agree that the general aim in here is broadsheet or whatever I think the greater good is served by having a relaxed environment in here. An environment that is as free of moderation and / or oppression as possible and I would consider being told that I am not allowed to post a very tame picture to be fairly negative moderation / oppression.

I'm not sure where to go from here. By all means post a poll if you like, but I don't think you can infer anything from the results of it.

CDfm

I started a thread about clothed women and the posters arguing for it to be closed moved were all women

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=64809722#post64809722

So how can you have a guy forum if everytime you discuss anything about women you get ambushed.

Most men have an interest in women -Dah

I spend most of this weekend out clothes shopping with my g/f so much so that if I ever join a Native American Tribe I could be named "Shops with Girls"

I can imagine if us lot went in to tLL everytime men were mentioned we would be politely (or maybe not so politely) told to sling our hooks and to get out of dodge and stay out.

trout

CDfm ... please try to stay on the topic of this thread.

If you feel ambushed ... you were given an option to follow.

trout

Khannie wrote: »

That's the thing; Personally speaking I deliberately wanted to avoid a debate on its existence based on merit (of course anyone else was free to have that debate with you).

So you wanted to have your say ... that's all?

Khannie wrote: »

I don't really care about the drool thread. I care about feeling relaxed in here. Relaxed enough to post a picture of a woman in her underwear if necessary. Relaxed enough to discuss the lump on my testicle if necessary. Those two things (for me) go hand in hand (no joke intended). So while I agree that the thread is a bit tabloid and I agree that the general aim in here is broadsheet or whatever I think the greater good is served by having a relaxed environment in here. An environment that is as free of moderation and / or oppression as possible and I would consider being told that I am not allowed to post a very tame picture to be fairly negative moderation / oppression.

I'm not sure where to go from here. By all means post a poll if you like, but I don't think you can infer anything from the results of it.

Fair enough. Dismissing other peoples views as rubbish, that's not very relaxing to me.

I believe the moderation "tone", for want of a better word, in this forum is light-touch and hands-off. If we really had a negative/oppressive approach, that thread would be locked, and there would be no debate for people to contribute to, or ignore, as they saw fit.

In the absence of a poll ... what would you have us do next?

CDfm

trout wrote: »

CDfm ... please try to stay on the topic of this thread.

If you feel ambushed ... you were given an option to follow.

MM and I exchanged pm's on this.

I just thought it was an interesting topic and maybe its a missed opportunity. It really doesnt bother me.

When you try to get guys to discuss things that are important to them and their relationships where do you start.

Thats why i think contributing to threads like this is important as i think everyone wants to see TGC grow in a balanced way.

Pic threads are great but it would be nice to see nice ordinary stuff being discussed too. Like how many lads know how to behave on a shopping trip with a woman.

Khannie

trout wrote: »

So you wanted to have your say ... that's all?

I'm not quite sure what you mean there but I feel like you're taking a swipe at me somehow. I find a lot of your posts cryptic though so maybe I'm wrong.

I think you think this thread was started to debate the existance of the drool thread but that's not the case. It was started to discuss the post that was quoted in the first post. That's what I was talking about when I was talking about being OT.

Edit: please bear in mind that I'm knackered when reading this.

Dr Galen

@CDfm
lets not go OT here, but what your suggesting isn't a bad thread idea. I think its all about the wording. Don't forget many blokes get turned off posting in some threads by how the OP is worded.

OT

I posted the following in a discussion thread we have been having between the Mods as a suggestion for some guidelines we could use for a possible thread (if thats how we roll) Anyone care to comment, expand, delete etc

Guidelines I'd like to see are things like:

* Nothing you wouldn't show your mother/boss/been seen looking at on the library computer
* If you think a pic is a little OTT or going to push the boundaries, then it probably is
* No mingers. This is a thread for the beautiful people only
* Don't argue a Mods decision in the thread. Its against the charter and the general rules of the site. Take it to a PM conversation first of you have an issue.
* Don't ruin this thread for the majority of people who will respect it for what it is. A little bit of lightheartedness in amongst the serious conversations

trout

CDfm wrote: »

MM and I exchanged pm's on this.

I just thought it was an interesting topic and maybe its a missed opportunity. It really doesnt bother me.

When you try to get guys to discuss things that are important to them and their relationships where do you start.

Thats why i think contributing to threads like this is important as i think everyone wants to see TGC grow in a balanced way.

Pic threads are great but it would be nice to see nice ordinary stuff being discussed too. Like how many lads know how to behave on a shopping trip with a woman.

Interesting stuff, by all means start a thread and see how it flies ... ... but it won't help us move on this particular discussion in this here thread.

Reading over the thread, I'm getting the sense people are saying ... "We want a thread for hosting pictures of attractive women, the only limit on the pictures should be the boards wide nudity/porn tolerance ... anything else goes, and chat should be allowed". Is that the consensus?

If that is the case ... what about reported posts? If someone has a lower tolerance for racy pictures than someone else, are the mods to tell them "stay out of the thread"?

If someone posts a picture that crosses the line ... whatever the line might be defined as ... what sanctions are acceptable?

Khannie

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

Guidelines I'd like to see are things like:

* Nothing you wouldn't show your mother/boss/been seen looking at on the library computer
* If you think a pic is a little OTT or going to push the boundaries, then it probably is
* No mingers. This is a thread for the beautiful people only
* Don't argue a Mods decision in the thread. Its against the charter and the general rules of the site. Take it to a PM conversation first of you have an issue.
* Don't ruin this thread for the majority of people who will respect it for what it is. A little bit of lightheartedness in amongst the serious conversations

Beautiful.

trout wrote: »

Reading over the thread, I'm getting the sense people are saying ... "We want a thread for hosting pictures of attractive women, the only limit on the pictures should be the boards wide nudity/porn tolerance ... anything else goes, and chat should be allowed". Is that the consensus?

Not quite from me. I honestly don't believe it should be slydice part 2. I think MM's library computer / mother thing fits the bill. Just my 2c.

I'm leggin' it out the door here....

edit: Maybe "suitable for a billboard"?


further editing:

trout wrote: »

If someone posts a picture that crosses the line ... whatever the line might be defined as ... what sanctions are acceptable?

I think it should just be deleted. Repeated offence: The usual.

trout

Khannie wrote: »

I'm not quite sure what you mean there but I feel like you're taking a swipe at me somehow. I find a lot of your posts cryptic though so maybe I'm wrong.

I think you think this thread was started to debate the existance of the drool thread but that's not the case. It was started to discuss the post that was quoted in the first post. That's what I was talking about when I was talking about being OT.

Edit: please bear in mind that I'm knackered when reading this.

I came into this thread cold. It was titled "Who makes you drool debate" ... I tried to do just that. I didn't read OldGoat's post in the other thread until later that day ... by which time several other posters had come into this thread to discuss the debate ... the moderatioon stance of OldGoat's post may have been your focus ... but this thead has moved beyond that for several reasons and by several people.

I am far from cryptic. I'm not having a swipe at you ... but I would like you to answer my questions ... especially the one about what you would have us do next.

Khannie

trout wrote: »

especially the one about what you would have us do next.

I already answered with a "I dunno". I like MM's suggested guidelines though.

I really am running......

Dr Galen

one thing I didn't mention in that listing, that I personally, as a poster and not a Mod would like to see is

None of this "I'd roide her" and other such cheap comments. In fact maybe, keep the chat levels down and just appreciate the beauty.
If you approve of something someone else has posted, use the Thanks button.

deadhead13

I would be perfectly happy with the thread continuing/or being replaced with a new one under the guidelines outlined by MM. But I suspect there are still people who would prefer it to just go away.

Herbal Deity

trout wrote: »

If that is the case ... what about reported posts? If someone has a lower tolerance for racy pictures than someone else, are the mods to tell them "stay out of the thread"?

Yes.

I've reported posts before that nothing was done about. In this forum I was very disappointed to see the competition thread to win a night in a hotel here, which I see as nothing more than spam. I made my point and PM'd mods, but the majority opinion seems to have been against me, and in future I will just have to ignore such threads.

Someone having a lower tolerance for racy pictures than others is the same as me having a lower tolerance for spam/competition threads than others. You can't please everybody, and for some things, the only option is to tell people not to open certain threads, you have to cater for what the majority of a forum's userbase wants.

K-9

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

@CDfm
lets not go OT here, but what your suggesting isn't a bad thread idea. I think its all about the wording. Don't forget many blokes get turned off posting in some threads by how the OP is worded.

OT

I posted the following in a discussion thread we have been having between the Mods as a suggestion for some guidelines we could use for a possible thread (if thats how we roll) Anyone care to comment, expand, delete etc

No problem with that at all.

trout wrote: »

Interesting stuff, by all means start a thread and see how it flies ... ... but it won't help us move on this particular discussion in this here thread.

Reading over the thread, I'm getting the sense people are saying ... "We want a thread for hosting pictures of attractive women, the only limit on the pictures should be the boards wide nudity/porn tolerance ... anything else goes, and chat should be allowed". Is that the consensus?

If that is the case ... what about reported posts? If someone has a lower tolerance for racy pictures than someone else, are the mods to tell them "stay out of the thread"?

If someone posts a picture that crosses the line ... whatever the line might be defined as ... what sanctions are acceptable?

My reading of this thread is that most posters thought 1 or 2 pictures were a bit much for this forum. The poll options suggested probably reflect that as an option to vote.

CDfm

trout wrote: »

Interesting stuff, by all means start a thread and see how it flies ... ... but it won't help us move on this particular discussion in this here thread.

Reading over the thread, I'm getting the sense people are saying ... "We want a thread for hosting pictures of attractive women, the only limit on the pictures should be the boards wide nudity/porn tolerance ... anything else goes, and chat should be allowed". Is that the consensus?

If that is the case ... what about reported posts? If someone has a lower tolerance for racy pictures than someone else, are the mods to tell them "stay out of the thread"?

If someone posts a picture that crosses the line ... whatever the line might be defined as ... what sanctions are acceptable?

Sorry Trout and others - I posted without editing.It came across like a rant. Mea Culpa.

I dont really have an issue with the drool thread and I think its a thing that there is no answer too really. You are damned if you do and damned if you don't but it should be tasteful. the suggestions by MM are fairly sound.

The positive thing about it is that when you have a thread like that people look at it then come in to see the other topics.

tGC is great.I like it and try to be non contentious nowdays.

I probably erred on the side of flippancy with the thread but maybe tGC needs to be lighter at times.

Again, sorry if I offended anyone. Unintentional really but when I put my foot in it , i do so to Olympic Standard.

Dr Galen

just another point to make.

I posted those guidelines as a thought.We need to get started on putting this to bed. Much like Trout posted his ideas for a poll.

I didn't and don't intend them to be a static list, there may have to be additions or subtractions to them over time. If this new "improved" drool thread goes ahead, we have to be careful we don't tie ourselves as a forum down to much. Likewise I didn't intend for them to classed as stick to beat posters with either. Posters need some leeway just as Mods do.

In summary everyone is going to need to show some flexibility here. No waiting in the long grass for a fcuk up etc

Sparky_Larks

Mystik Monkey wrote:

Guidelines I'd like to see are things like:

1)Nothing you wouldn't show your mother/boss/been seen looking at on the library computer
2)If you think a pic is a little OTT or going to push the boundaries, then it probably is
3)No mingers. This is a thread for the beautiful people only
4)Don't argue a Mods decision in the thread. Its against the charter and the general rules of the site. Take it to a PM conversation first of you have an issue.
5)Don't ruin this thread for the majority of people who will respect it for what it is. A little bit of lightheartedness in amongst the serious conversations

My view on these are
1) a good rule of thumb.
2) Again a good rule but there are cases where someone doesn;t see anything offensive about something that others would, i.e. both of these links show nude images which would not be allowed to be posted on boatds but I don;t see anything offensive about them http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Venus_de_Milo_Louvre_Ma399_n4.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Michelangelos_David.jpg

The makers of Batman forever though that the second one was offensive.

In fact is that not the central problem, one persons inoffensive is another man's offensive.

3) Terrible rule. Beauty isin the eye of the beholder, I have friends who love Sigourney Weaver, Me I think she is a minger.
4) Fair Enough
5) Yes it is a light thread, and it is about who makes you drool, so a certain amount of provacative imagery is to be expected is it not. We men are visual creatures, we react to visual stimulus and the images created by Lad mags, and repoduced often in this thread, are designed to appeal to the male

OldGoat

Herbal Deity wrote: »

If we're going to have a poll, the options need to be more well defined:



I don't see the point of the "The Charter [does not] support such a thread" options.
No nudity is a given, it's in Boards.ie rules, so there's no point in having that in the options.
SFW is obviously ill defined given what people find acceptable is so different, so having it there means nothing.
There's no point in 3 No options.

Make it simpler:
Yes - tag as potentially NSFW, anything within site rules allowed.
Yes - no underwear or poses which might be interpreted as suggestive.
No.
Don't care.

This is a watershed moment in the forum. It's the point were we might change from being tGC to being tLL with a nutsack. I really don't think the 'I don't care' option has any place here, nor two differing levels of whats acceptable.

"Is tGC forum to host 'Drool' type threads"
Y
N

To me is a simple yes or no with no room for fudgeing.
This is not saying that Drool pictures cannot be posted. If a thread warrents a picture then the Drool picture can be posted (within the Board.ie directives and any further forum directives that get laid down in the charter - along the lines MM has suggested).
This simplified poll just ask if we want a thread here just for the sake of posting Drool pictures. It cuts to the chase.

humberklog

OldGoat wrote: »

"Is tGC forum to host 'Drool' type threads"
Y
N

QUOTE]

That's the shot. Simple and clear.


I'd love to see a simple rule popped into the charter too. " Any post making comparisons with tLL will be snipped."

CDfm

I think the way its going is fine - the danger with a poll like this is it sort of makes you commited to the result.

The current threadis fine with me.

Ya dont want it tobe drool thread central but have a drool thread by all means.

Khannie

OldGoat wrote: »

"Is tGC forum to host 'Drool' type threads"
Y
N

To me is a simple yes or no with no room for fudgeing.

It's more nuanced than that. I really don't want a slydice type thread in here. It's like having a running thread. Why would you do it when there's a running forum? I would vote no given the two options above, but I have no problem with the current thread (as I consider it mostly tasteful, but I'd rather have no thread than a slydice one).

I'd prefer:

Yes - Anything goes within reason
Yes - Pictures suitable for a Gentlemen's club (as defined by Mystic Monkey)
No

or, if there are to be only two options, I think there should be potentially be two votes: If a yes wins the first, then there's a 2nd poll to determine how far it can go.

OldGoat

CDfm wrote: »

I think the way its going is fine - the danger with a poll like this is it sort of makes you commited to the result.

The current threadis fine with me.

Ya dont want it tobe drool thread central but have a drool thread by all means.

I have to disagree with that. If there is a thread that makes the forum look like a lads magazine then thats all the forum is going to be good for. It's not somewhere I'd be comfortable discussing some mens issues or some health issues. It will no longer be a mens health forum with a bit of banter.

Khannie wrote: »

Yes - Anything goes within reason
Yes - Pictures suitable for a Gentlemen's club (as defined by Mystic Monkey)

I don't see the difference between the two options. The Drool pictures either exist in a thread governed by the charter* or there is no thread.

*To be clarified by MM. Sorry to keep heaping the role of Judge on your lap.

CDfm

OldGoat wrote: »

I have to disagree with that. If there is a thread that makes the forum look like a lads magazine then thats all the forum is going to be good for. It's not somewhere I'd be comfortable discussing some mens issues or some health issues. It will no longer be a mens health forum with a bit of banter.

I see what you mean. I wouldn't feel that my right of free speech had been taken away from me, or that church and state, and the womens movement led by Nell McCafferty were conspiring against me if the thread disappeared.

I cant see whats the difference in having a link posted to a pic -but thats me.

Keano

CDfm wrote: »

I see what you mean. I wouldn't feel that my right of free speech had been taken away from me, or that church and state, and the womens movement led by Nell McCafferty were conspiring against me if the thread disappeared.

I cant see whats the difference in having a link posted to a pic -but thats me.

oldgoat wrote:

I have to disagree with that. If there is a thread that makes the forum look like a lads magazine then thats all the forum is going to be good for. It's not somewhere I'd be comfortable discussing some mens issues or some health issues. It will no longer be a mens health forum with a bit of banter.

One thread is not going to make the forum look like a lads mag.

Mods obviously don't want it so its got to be put to bed one way or the other as this thread will just run and run...

BTW not all "lads" mags are the same. GQ - can be classed as a "lads" mag and that mag covers a whole range of issues.

OldGoat

Keano A Legend wrote: »

BTW not all "lads" mags are the same. GQ - can be classed as a "lads" mag and that mag covers a whole range of issues.

Even GQ shows photographs that woud breach Boards.ie conditions.