Queer Beer banner ads (different take than the other thread)

Jip

I reckon alot of people on these boards access them via their place of employment. As many of you know, many companys run various types of net nanny and web monitoring software which is going to pick up these various ads and put a few black marks againt this site, if not ban access altogether.

Can these ads be removed or something similar to prevent this happening ?

Nevyn

if acessing boards.ie contravines the internet usage policy of your place of employment then just dont do it.

I know several people who can not access boards.ie when the Java chat applet was added to the site, thier work systems black balled the site imdedatly.
But you dont see them complaining.

There are worse things then those banners here abouts tbh.
Maybe your employers are logging all the rude words that the swear filter
doesnt hide, like bum and fart and felch.

There is nothing private in what you view on the interweb or send/post
to the interweb esp if your going through a work server and then an ISP.

Nukem

In work at the mo and iv got a suggestion. Can we have a disable banner button like Avatars/sigs/pics - the words Lesbian and queer tend to catch peoples eyes!

No prob with the banner at all but in work people pass behind me - surfing boards is fine but with the banner people doubl take take and say "what are you looking at" :rolleyes:
Undue attention

Talliesin

OMG everyone you work with thinks you're gay. Now you'll get perfume from your secret santa at Christmas. Hell, your life is ruined now. :rolleyes:

Nukem

Talliesin wrote:

OMG everyone you work with thinks you're gay. Now you'll get perfume from your secret santa at Christmas. Hell, your life is ruined now. :rolleyes:

No was goin to say everyone thinks im looking at porn:rolleyes: and i wish i had a secret santa - you available

billy the squid

oh my days!


are those the girls from tATu?

stevenmu

Jip wrote:

I reckon alot of people on these boards access them via their place of employment. As many of you know, many companys run various types of net nanny and web monitoring software which is going to pick up these various ads and put a few black marks againt this site, if not ban access altogether.

Can these ads be removed or something similar to prevent this happening ?

While it's certainly possible that monitoring software would go into an image, extract some text out of it and flag the word 'queer' (oops, now I've said it :eek: ), it's not very likely, generally these kind of things just look at text, urls and file names (qb2.gif for one I can currently see), and the ratings that some sites give themselves.

Altough Tesco were recently selling PCs with built in 'flesh' filtering software installed, of course the fact that lots of peoples holiday photos contain flesh caused some problems

damien

To quote myself from the other thread:

damien.m wrote:

Yeah I agree, just the other day one of my work colleagues who didn't use the Internet and didn't realise what a banner ad on a website was, saw me looking at the Broadband forum and low and behold there was a banner ad for eircom on it. So, him not being in anyway experienced went off and rang the IrelandOffline Snitch Hotline and reported me for being a spy in their ranks. Man, the explaining I had to do over that, lucky I only had to lose one of the small fingers.

If your work would block a queer beers ad, they'd probably block this site for the word snigger or for talking about Scunthorpe.

Talliesin

Nukem wrote:

No was goin to say everyone thinks im looking at porn

Try being an SMod. Who do you think deals with it when some moron posts 15 threads of animal porn on each forum?

mycroft

Talliesin wrote:

Try being an SMod. Who do you think deals with it when some moron posts 15 threads of animal porn on each forum?

SMod's holding the thin blue line aganist flith and pervsion for the rest of us.

Doesn't anyone else see the opportunity to sue an employer for sexual discrimation over this?

Or am I the only one this litigious and devious?

Talliesin

mycroft wrote:

SMod's holding the thin blue line aganist flith and pervsion for the rest of us.

Well, we don't want anything to frighten the horses (or in the most recent case, bulls).

damien

mycroft wrote:

Or am I the only one this ligitious and devious?

I would like to subscribe to your hard to pronounce word and devious newsletter.

newgrange

billy the squid wrote:

are those the girls from tATu?

Nay. They are from a fairly well known (to lesbians) series of posters by Tanya Chalkin.

seamus

I don't see any ads. I have members.boards.ie on my image block list.

nadir

I have a squid install at home listening on port 80 and only accepting connections from my external IP. I then establish an ssh tunnel via the work web proxy to home using putty, forwarding port 80.
Problem solved, well it's pretty handy anyway, skips all the content protection and give you full web access.

Talliesin

newgrange wrote:

Nay. They are from a fairly well known (to lesbians) series of posters by Tanya Chalkin.

She's done some beefcake too. And I think "Kiss" (as that photograph is titled) may have an audience outside of the lesbian community

madfistbt

Hi can someone take these adverts off, cos I access this website from my work on breaks and people think Im on a lesbian porn site, or a gay porn site. Or is the admin just feeling liberated with their sexuality. If so I kindly as you to express it another way, not at the expence of us fine hetrosexual beings

Sarky

Perhaps if you took out the sodding massive pic of burly rugby men from your sig, they'd be less inclined to think like that?

Amz

Sarky wrote:

Perhaps if you took out the sodding massive pic of burly rugby men from your sig, they'd be less inclined to think like that?

It's a bit gay alright.

dahamsta

Thaed wrote:

I know several people who can not access boards.ie when the Java chat applet was added to the site, thier work systems black balled the site imdedatly.
But you dont see them complaining.

Well, you wouldn't, would you?

newgrange wrote:

Nay. They are from a fairly well known (to lesbians) series of posters by Tanya Chalkin.

And to straight males of course.

I prefer the original meself.



adam

damien

I know quite a few lesbian couples with that on their bedroom wall. I also know quite a few males with that poster. I bought it actually for two people when their birthdays came around.

Allposters.com for those reaching for the kleenex is where it can be bought.

Sarky

I don't much care for their choice in underwear...

dahamsta

Sarky wrote:

I don't much care for their choice in underwear...

I care lots for it.

madfistbt

Seeing as were all equal oppurtunitys and that today. Id like to dedicate this one to Irelands refugee community. Go on ya good things

Talliesin

At least they aren't thongs. Yuck.

seamus

Sarky wrote:

I don't much care for their choice in underwear...

Indeed. That they chose to wear underwear annoys me too.

Nukem

Home now so dont mind!
Must say that is a class pic,tasteful. Had it up on my wall when i was younger til my girlfiend asked me to take it down,she hated waking up to seeing girls kissing -fair point i reckon.

Nukem

PS:will block members.boards.ie when in work if i can

dahamsta

Talliesin wrote:

At least they aren't thongs. Yuck.

Oh god, don't mention the war. I was down in Baltimore over the weekend and there was a woman there with a thong hitched halfway up her back. And it was grey. Should have been white, but it was grey. Pukeorama!

adam

Talliesin

Ick!

Thongs are for people that want to go au naturel but are too prudish.

FFS! Either wear some knickers or don't.

gibo_ie

just wondering if you need to get a copyrite to use that pic... I have an idea for a public ad like this and this pic may get some attention..
cheers

Nukem

dahamsta wrote:

Oh god, don't mention the war. I was down in Baltimore over the weekend and there was a woman there with a thong hitched halfway up her back. And it was grey. Should have been white, but it was grey. Pukeorama!

Should went over with a scissors and cut the middle bit

Karl Hungus

I'm more worried about that banner that makes it look like some kind of Furry meet.

*Shudder*

newgrange

Sarky wrote:

I don't much care for their choice in underwear...

You won't like these then...

Fine sensible knickers.

Sleepy

I can see the OP's point tbh. I know my boss and many of my workmates would double-take at some of those banners. I've firefox installed here in work and adblocked the images so they don't present a problem for me but they could cause problems for some people. I know it's not the way the world should be, but facts are facts, we live in a country that was entirely backwards only 20 years ago and unfortunately many people still hold their twisted beliefs about religion, sexuality etc. and many of those people could be colleagues of people working on these boards and tbh, people who could be in a position to determine where the poster's career goes.

TBH, this is probably a case of the advertising being *too* good because they do jump straight out at you from the screen but I do think a little more discretion could have been called for in their design considering that this is a family site that many people access from work.

Boston

Sleepy wrote:

I can see the OP's point tbh. I know my boss and many of my workmates would double-take at some of those banners. I've firefox installed here in work and adblocked the images so they don't present a problem for me but they could cause problems for some people. I know it's not the way the world should be, but facts are facts, we live in a country that was entirely backwards only 20 years ago and unfortunately many people still hold their twisted beliefs about religion, sexuality etc. and many of those people could be colleagues of people working on these boards and tbh, people who could be in a position to determine where the poster's career goes.

TBH, this is probably a case of the advertising being *too* good because they do jump straight out at you from the screen but I do think a little more discretion could have been called for in their design considering that this is a family site that many people access from work.

I
I've never been one to pander to other peoples stupidity and ignorance. I know it exists but there it is. If I tone them down, hide their message, then it perpetuates this stupidity and ignorance. What's the bloody problem like, workmate comes over, see's add, then explain to them what it's all about. One maybe two sentences.

"It's a banner add for a piss up organised by the Gay guys on boards.i.e."
"Boards.ie is an online discussion forum, dealing with pretty much every aspect of Irish society"
"Including (insert something relevant to you job), and I'm just referencing something".

Bobs your uncle. If people are still that dense, tell them to go to boards.ie themselves and see.

Btw, The problem would be the exact same if I had an add saying GAY BEERS and just that.

This is the last time I'll entertaining the "But people are stupid" arguments.

DeVore

We try and protect kids from the worst excesses of the internet here but noone ever said this was a family site.

Anyway, now you can refresh a page and point at guns and restore your masculinity.

DeV.

nesf

If it's not a family site, then why the swear filter?

That's always been the reason in my head for it*.



*My head and reality are mutually exclusive most of the time though.

Boston

A family site, implies the whole family sits around and enjoys boards, like they would maybe a Tv. Kids are on the forum certainly, but I don't know if i'd call it a family site. whats wrong with kids seeing the adds anyway? So through Albums and you'll see an image of one girl sucking anothers tongue, in high detail. so what like.

nesf

LiouVille wrote:

A family site, implies the whole family sits around and enjoys boards, like they would maybe a Tv. Kids are on the forum certainly, but I don't know if i'd call it a family site. whats wrong with kids seeing the adds anyway? So through Albums and you'll see an image of one girl sucking anothers tongue, in high detail. so what like.

Some parents might object. Personally I wouldn't. But I can easily see quite a few parents objecting to such ads on a website their child uses.

I wouldn't agree with them, and I would consider them closeminded muppets, but that still wouldn't stop them. Quite a few people are still living in the 70's.

simu

nesf wrote:

Some parents might object. Personally I wouldn't. But I can easily see quite a few parents objecting to such ads on a website their child uses.

So the ads also function as a tool for getting rid of muppets? I approve!

mycroft

simu wrote:

So the ads also function as a tool for getting rid of muppets? I approve!

Woman has a point, I generally dislike every poster who's moaned about this so far.

Boston

I'd imagine Those very same parents would object to their kids reading boards.ie at all. In away that's a parents prerogative. Rationality goes out the window when it comes to peoples kids. That said, Realistically a child should not be using the net without supervision, and the youngest age group boards would cater to would be junior cert students. I know the agreement is that anyone can find boards with afew clicks, but anybody can find an image of someone with their head blown off with a few clicks also. Ultimately I don't think the banner add would be damaging to a kid, unless a child is so repressed by it's parents that the sight of a topless male or two girls kissing, leaves him/her distraught.

nesf

mycroft wrote:

Woman has a point, I generally dislike every poster who's moaned about this so far.

Disliking people takes far too much energy. Far too much energy.

Sleepy

LiouVille wrote:

Btw, The problem would be the exact same if I had an add saying GAY BEERS and just that.

Sorry, I wasn't quite clear, I can't see a problem with the words Queer Beers at all. It's the imagery used that I could see a problem with. I'd have the same problem if it was a heterosexual couple eating the face off each other or dressed in leather S&M gear. It can easily give across the wrong idea as to the type of site you're viewing in work... I just don't see the need for it.

mycroft

nesf wrote:

Disliking people takes far too much energy. Far too much energy.

Ah but the hate flows through me strongly young skywalker.

sleepy wrote:

I'd have the same problem if it was a heterosexual couple eating the face off each other or

We'll never know now will we?

dressed in leather S&M gear. It can easily give across the wrong idea as to the type of site you're viewing in work... I just don't see the need for it.

And again the blokes in S&M gear are like 3cm x 3cm (someone! quick, do the pixel maths) this could be indicitive of your love of midget S&M porn (theres an out take reel from the Wizzard of Oz Dorothy was never meant to see).

Me, I generally just minimise boards when someone comes into my suite in work. Why? BECAUSE I'M AT DAMN WORK.

pickarooney

You have a suite at work? Fansay!

mycroft

pickarooney wrote:

You have a suite at work? Fansay!

Thats what they're called.

They do have frayed carpet and lack a mini bar. And we share them. Theres a rush. Four have all the movie channels, and all the basic channels. Two have all the basic channels. Two have only the news channels. Including Fox and CNN. Shifts in those suites are the dark days.

rsynnott

It occurs to me (as it has to others) that it's only the undesirables whining about the ads. If the ads keep up, maybe they'll leave.

flowerpotfrog

the undesirables

.

Santa Claus

rsynnott wrote:

It occurs to me (as it has to others) that it's only the undesirables whining about the ads. If the ads keep up, maybe they'll leave.

But what about the folks who haven't complained and just go off and install ad blocking software thus decreasing the amount of revenue boards gets from google ads ??

rsynnott

flowerpotfrog wrote:

.

Yes?

Santa Claus wrote:

But what about the folks who haven't complained and just go off and install ad blocking software thus decreasing the amount of revenue boards gets from google ads ??

People who block ads are rarely in the same group as people who click ads in any case, in my experience.