Who makes you Drool debate

hunter164 wrote: »

I don't think there was anything wrong with the pictures that were posted. After having just a quick glance through the thread in TLL on men who make them drool, I've seen a man in nothing but a towela and another of one in just his boxers. What was posted in the thread here was more or less on the same par.

As has been mentined by previous posters there is no corrolatin between tLL and tGC. What happens there and what happens here are not mirror images of each other.

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Seriously, either close the thread or have a "no nipples, no vag" rule.
These cringeworthy, arbitrary and prudish standards are really annoying.

I agree with this to a point. I believe there should be clearly laid down rules for posting and that as a mod I've been lax in defining them. I also agree with your use of the words arbitary and prudeish. I would use cringworthy myself but from my side of the debate as thats how I see the thread in it's entirity - cringeworthy.

homerun_homer wrote: »

I don't think there is anything wrong with posting pictures of women in lingerie that aren't NSFW or verging on pornish poses. Women all love drooling over calendars of topless fireman (to coin a tired stereotype) and the like so I don't see the harm in guys having a thread purely to just show off "what makes them drool".

There's nothing to say people won't post pictures of women at their most glam and classiest, but no one should be chastised for posting a pic of a woman in lingerie. After all, skim through any woman's magazine and you'll see plenty like it, advertising they call it. That's not deemed sick or pervy or out of line.

In terms of how big the pics should be in the thread, you should do as they do in the photography forum and list in the header that pics can't be bigger than a certain size. If they are then posters can link or attach them so they don't eat up slow internet browsers bandwith.

There's no need for the forum to be ruled with an iron fist. We are all gentlemen after all (I hope). The stricter the mods get the less traffic you'll find floating this way and you don't want to scare guys away from a guys forum. FFS there are more guys in TLL than here. That needs changing.

Yes, some people see no harm in posting a few pictures and some women oggle over mens pictures - but not everyone does. There are people in this forum who don't see thing the same way you do and their requirements in the forum as just as valid as yours. Hence to allow the picture thread to go ahead there is a need to keep it as modist as possible. Thats is part my reasoning for being the prudish nannyish moderator.
Seeing women in lingerie is commonplace as you say, TV, magazines, sides of buses and you are right, it's not sick or perverted to admire the physic of those models. But this thread is not about lingerie, it's about women. There are so many other places to see semi naked women why do we have to drag a thread here down to be just like all the others. The OP has stated that it was not the reason he started the thread in the first place. The images of women in lingerie is frankly more suited to a thread called "What makes you drool" rather then "Who makes you Drool". The pictures that I riled against have little to do with the woman herself and are all about titilation in the guise of admitration.

Agree with you on the picture re-sizing protocol.

Khannie wrote: »

Right. I have several problems with that thread and what I would consider over-moderation.

First off, that thread title needs to be changed IMO. Anywhere you see "please read mod note blah blah" there has been a catastrophic failure. Who the hell is going to go digging through a thread to read mod warnings before they can go posting in it like??? The only other place I've seen threads with titles like that has been tLL and those threads (which were once vibrant and fun) have died a horrible death since getting titles like that. Please do not do the same in tGC.

Your own post, which you quoted has several problems with it (all IMO) which I'm gonna go through now (sorry in advance, I hate disecting posts)

What?? Banning photographs altogether? Mental! You haven't stated which photographs are unacceptable or why!!!



Ludicrous! So this is ok, but this isn't? On what grounds? Some arbitrary line in the sand that hasn't been definied or sanctioned by anyone for any good reason?



Fapping material? Seriously? Come on. Nothing in that thread even approaching someting I'd be arsed fapping over.



Couldn't see any "Phwarr I'd do her" type comments.



Arbitrary and undefined. Also, Why? For whose benefit?



Eager to use your scalpel? Seriously, that one line really irritated me. I like this forum, A LOT, but that kind of thing makes me feel like a bold child who's being monitored by the teachers who are just waiting to pounce on him.

In short:

Phew. OK and I know what you mean about editing a comment line by line but like now it cuts to the core of everything.
Before I reply to your points I should point out that I did respond on the original thread with a hasty response - a rant - rather then a planned thought out and measured post. However that does not invalidate my intent.

Changing the title would make thing worse in my opinion. I see the Mod Note as a useful modding instrument. Anyone seeing the title will know that the mods are watching and trying to control the thread. Reading through the thread posters can't help but notice that it is being heavly (and intentionally) modded.

Yes, threathening to ban photos altogether was a hasty remark and one I'll retract immidatly.
As to the content of the photos and what is accecptable I reacted to an image of a woman who is deemed to be droolworthy yet if her name wasn't on the pic there is no way anyone who know who she is. Just another body in stockings. I fail to see the point in that image.
As a mod I err on the side of caution. I anticipate where the thread is going and I clamp down before it gets out of hand. I see that a good moderation practice. Proactive rather then reactive if you'll forgive the horrendous bizspeak.

The Fapping ramark was to warn future posters not to post images any more risque they those already posted. If I say the limit is 'B' posters will push the limit to 'C' so i post a warning at 'A'. If the posted road speed is 70 the actual safe roadspeed is 80 but the nannystate knowing that someone will push the bounderies telly you to drive at 70. (Sorry for belabouring the point but neither explanation indivudaly made clear what I ws trying to say) I also include the 'Phwarr' aspect of my post here. I'm sure if I were to go through the entire thread I could come up with something similar but the idea ws to get the point made again in the thread about what should be there.

I agree that my choice of picture size as 'small' was less then useless. I posted in haste as I was rushed for time. Sizing of photographs for this thread is something the mods have bveen discussing over the past weeks. Everything about this thread is under discussion amongst the mods over the past few weeks. We are thrashing out what is acceptable and what is not. I jumped the gun and posted vague instructions as the final draft of what we want to see is not yet polished. The re-sizing of and asking posters not to re-post the same image when quoting are amongst the points we are talking about. In my haste to rant I did't remember the size agreed on. As homerun_homer above suggests a system similar to the Photography forum should be adapted.

Khannie, it was not my intent to make anyone here feel like a child. It was however intended to have a moderators tone. Should I have used a Bold font instead? Though I have to saay that what I said, how I phrased it is the way I speak. I'm a wordy peson.

Khannie wrote: »

I should add, I don't really care about that thread, but I do care about the kind of precedent that's being set in it.

Appricated. This is where the overall feel of the forum will be shaped, in thread like this.

homerun_homer wrote: »

I've posted there once before today (today's post only instigated by having to debate over it) and every pic I posted is of women with plenty of clothes on. Not all guys on the thread are there to perv, fapp or post "pervy" pics. What type of pic of the person/fantasy figure they post is of their choice and they should have that freedom as long as it's not taking the p1$$, bringing with it the wrath of an over-zealous mod.

Yep, all your pics were fine and you are not perving...but as you say you are not the only person on the thread. However someone did take the piss and bring on my wrath and I moderated the thread with a warning. A rantish warning but a warning none the less.


So...
It's because of this heavy handedness that the thread has managed to stay alive so far. Given free reign some non-regular poster would start posting NSFW images and the thread would have been closed a lot earlier. I believe the prudish modding perhaps prolonged the life of the thread. So, in response to being over-zealous and prudish I say yes, I am. I'm the nanny looking over your shoulder making you uncomfortable. I'm the prude being sure you keep those nipples under cover. I'm the zealiot trying to keep the forum suitable for everyone who wants to post here - including myself. I am the moderator making decisions based on the forums standards not my own. It's what mods do.


Edit. Sorry not not proofreading or spell checking. Tired and hungry.