Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Who makes you Drool debate
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Mystik Monkey wrote: »yeah yeah whatever
anyone would think you had a baby or something.............
Oh man....I'm up to 3 now and the jump in effort from 2 to 3 is shocking. SHOCKING!!!!!Mystik Monkey wrote: »come back with the q's Khannie. We need questions and ideas on how to get this sorted. I don't like things dragging on any further than is necessary, its only by asking the questions and getting the answers we can reach that point imho.
Ok...So I got a bit ranty about Old Goats post myself. I was annoyed by it for a variety of reasons. So I'm gonna get down to brass tacks now.
I think a poll would be nonsense. They're a poor tool for deciding anything semi-important on the internet because they can be easily swayed by people who really don't care in the slightest one way or the other. Passing trade, or friends or whatever. I don't think we need a poll. I think we can decide fairly handily here and now that the thread should be allowed whether people dislike it or not. Yes they have their place, but I don't think this discussion would be well served by one. There are plenty of things that I dislike that I will defend peoples right to do. Having a thread with pictures of raquel welsh in her underpants is something I would defend peoples right to do despite not really being too pushed about gawking at said lady in her underpants. Basically, I think it would be a bit of a shocker to say that we're so serious here that we can't allow anyone to post that kind of picture. I think Paul summed it up nicely with:CowzerP wrote:Down with this sort of thing mentality should have be left back in the dark ages
That was from the single most thanked post in this thread so far.
So...my question is this: (there may be more than one)
I think what I really felt was the crux of what I considered to be over-moderation was being told that there were not to be any more ladies in underclothing. Now all of the mods have said that they don't think there was any over-moderation and that implies that they believe that there should not be any ladies in underclothing in pictures in tGC. First off is that correct?
(while I appreciate that you're all individuals, I'd appreciate the "mod team" response on that one).
What irked me was that there's nothing saying or implying anywhere that this forum should not allow pictures of ladies in underclothing. Essentially it looked like a personal dislike was applied as a moderating decision. Now we've had a LOT of people come on this thread and tear that stance a new one so I wont go into it any more than that until I get an answer on whether it still stands as a moderating decision.
Now, another thing that I've found confusing about this whole affair is that we have one mod implying that there has been a lot of behind the scenes discussion about this thread and that it has been under heavy scrutiny. Specifically the thread was described as having "prudish modding" and "heavy handedness" by one mod and another mod says "I still disagree with you that the thread has been heavily moderated". Btw, MM, I wouldn't disagree with your point that there were few acts of moderation in the thread. I would say that banning underpants and calling it fapping material etc. was OTT and I suppose that's what I'm getting at as over-moderation. (Old Goat I'm not picking on you here, seriously. Please don't take it personally, it's just that your post is what has led to this discussion).
On the large images thing: I think we should just suck that up. I think the benefit of not having rules enforced outweighs the cost of viewing large images from time to time. Also, I think resizing and rehosting is not practical and potentially copyright infringing.
My own 2c on the drool thread: I don't think it quite fits, but it's here now and deleting it or having it over-moderated (i.e. no underpants) would be far far far far far worse than just leaving it be IMO.
What does it add? Who cares. What gives you the right to delete it when it's not doing anything wrong?0 -
-
My post was rantish, admitted in the post. However I still stand by my decision to issue a warning because the quality of some of the last images posted were moving in the wrong direction for the thread.The mod who wrote the post in question doesn't even think that. Did you miss some stuff maybe?
Doesn't matter what you see outside the forum, that is not the point here.I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned. But, have you seen the way some girls dress to go out in public these days???? I think some of the pictures are mild in comparision to what you see on the streets, in clubs or pubs on your average weekend night!!!
To me it's about stopping the posting of offensive images in the forum BEFORE they get to the point of offending anyone.whoa there neddy.
can we get back to basics here - who is likely to be offended and why.
Most of the pics I saw could easily be found in an issue of Cosmo ( or rather an airbrushed variety might be). Its not even in the league of the pirelli calender but at worst along the lines of the RyanAir callender.
So i feel the cutoff point ought to be that the pics would be of a type that might appear in the mainstream press/media.Suggestive maybe, arty but no porno.
Anyway who comes on boards to see porn, though a few trolls might post a few when drunk.
So the who might be offended and the why they might be offended is very important because in interpreting that you may have to decide whether or not such an objection is valid.
This is not about porn. It was never about porn. All the mods and all of the regular posters on the thread would agree to that I' sure. I feel positive that if anyone were posting porn they would have been reported and dealt with. The anger here comes from me barking even before we ever got to that level of posting.Point of information.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/faq.php?faq=bie_faq_guidelines#faq_bie_faq_guidelines_forbidden
The site rules and guidelines contains the two lines.
* Pictures or links to pictures of Porn
* Pictures or links to pictures showing nipples and/or genitalia
It differentiates between pron and pictures which have nipples and/or genitalia. Porn doesn't have to have those showing and softcore porn is still porn.
What is porn?
How many pictures are there of Lucy Lawless on the net? Of all the pictures of her online why did you select one of her showing her ass and not her face? Yeah I know, men like asses too. The thread is about WHO makes you drool. To me there was nothing of a 'Who' in this thread. It was a pic of someones stockinged legs and ass just for the sake of the legs and ass. I warned posters to rethink what they were posting. 'Reign in' was the term I used. - Then I ranted.citytillidie wrote: »I mean there is someone complaining about the Lucy Lawless picture where you can see a little butt cheek but you can all clearly see that she is wearing underwear.
The rant may have been ill timed and ill considered but I like where it's taken us. It's going to strengthen the forum - in one direction or the other.
True. Ultimately it will still come down to a moderator decision. Some people will be ill at ease with the moderators decision. Some moderators may be more lenient then others. Some moderators may be more prudish then others. IMO, in this forum, leniency when judging what is SFW is a very big mistake.deadhead13 wrote: »The difficulty is determining and defining what is SFW and what isn't. If the result of the poll as it is currently written was YES, that problem would still remain.
Chin up Khannie, the first 2 years are the worst. Then the next two years are the worst too. After that it goes downhill.
Oh man....I'm up to 3 now and the jump in effort from 2 to 3 is shocking. SHOCKING!!!!!
I posted without consultation with other mods. In that post I said the 'I' would delete the thread and ban photographs.
So...my question is this: (there may be more than one)
I think what I really felt was the crux of what I considered to be over-moderation was being told that there were not to be any more ladies in underclothing. Now all of the mods have said that they don't think there was any over-moderation and that implies that they believe that there should not be any ladies in underclothing in pictures in tGC. First off is that correct?
(while I appreciate that you're all individuals, I'd appreciate the "mod team" response on that one).
Khannie (and anyone else) if I may pose a question here. If my post were to just have been: "Some of these photographs are pushing the boundaries of what I see as acceptable here in tGC. Reign yerself in Gentlemen." would we be having this debate?
I had hoped that this would not get into a discussion of my personal likes and dislikes and rather that we stayed with my moderator likes and dislikes. What I enjoy personally is vastly at odds with my moderator stance and I assume no one is going to require me to qualify that any further.What irked me was that there's nothing saying or implying anywhere that this forum should not allow pictures of ladies in underclothing. Essentially it looked like a personal dislike was applied as a moderating decision. Now we've had a LOT of people come on this thread and tear that stance a new one so I wont go into it any more than that until I get an answer on whether it still stands as a moderating decision.
When I barked at that post I did so as a moderator and there were no personal biases involved. I dislike the thread because I feel it has no place in tGC.
We were discussing the thread-rather we were discussing starting a new picture thread with a less droolish title and having clear guidelines laid out from the outset. Were were discussing the wording of those guideline.Now, another thing that I've found confusing about this whole affair is that we have one mod implying that there has been a lot of behind the scenes discussion about this thread and that it has been under heavy scrutiny. Specifically the thread was described as having "prudish modding" and "heavy handedness" by one mod and another mod says "I still disagree with you that the thread has been heavily moderated". Btw, MM, I wouldn't disagree with your point that there were few acts of moderation in the thread. I would say that banning underpants and calling it fapping material etc. was OTT and I suppose that's what I'm getting at as over-moderation.
I scrutinized each post in the thread and when I eventually saw a post that I felt was wrong I posted a warning.
Using the term prudish was a reference to a previous post in the debate. However it was a term that I adopted and used for myself.
I understand exactly what you are saying about the difference between your idea of heavy-handedness and the number of intrusions made on the thread by moderators. Your issue is directly to do with my rant and my level of whats acceptable. (And the Mod notes in the title).
I think the thread is wrong for the forum. It reflects poorly on a forum that is supposed to be somewhere men can talk about mens issues. It's suited to a forum for banter and laughs. There are a few other forums already in existence for that while tGC is the ONLY forum for men to discuss mens issues. That is why I should care, that why the thread IS doing something wrong.
What does it add? Who cares. What gives you the right to delete it when it's not doing anything wrong?
I never took it as a personal attack. No worries - plenty of thick skin here. Thanks your your reassurances though, I appreciate that.(Old Goat I'm not picking on you here, seriously. Please don't take it personally, it's just that your post is what has led to this discussion).
Same response as I gave to Khannie just above. There is already a place for the discussion of 'droolish' threads. One of the differences of opinion is in whether we should also have that type of thread in tGC.Sparky_Larks wrote: »So it is important for the entire Boards community that Men are allowed to discuss the same range of topics that women are allowed discuss and that ther is a place for that discussionI'm older than Minecraft goats.
0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
I'm gong to gvem ake this now.
This is not about 'prudishness'.* It's about what we want this forum to be and what we don't want it to be.
In my view, the 'drool' thread is more suited to the kind of discussion found in forums like Nein 11, Slydice Specials (There's a whole forum for these pictures!) and maybe BGRH. I don't see tGC as being the place for this. I have no problem with discussing relationships here, men's take on lads mags or TV shows etc but the forum was really meant to be a place where we discuss men's issues...not who we drool over.
This forum is not the 'antidote' tLL or even the equivalent of tLL, it's more than that. As men we don't talk enough, consult enough or look to one another often enough for our thoughts and opinions on the things that matter. We mostly muddle through things ourselves, especially when it comes to our physical health, mental health, sexual health and emotions. That's what this forum is for and as such, in my view, the 'drool' thread doesn't fit here.
So, it's obvious that a lot of people like the thread, fair enough but I would ask that you consider whether the thread really fits in with the forum ethos. You may decide that we need more than just 'health' issues and discussion of men's lifestyle but even if we do, do we really need that thread? I'm not going to argue with anyone here I'm just asking people to take time to consider what they want from the forum and whether that matches up with the forum intent.
*Trust me, some of the stuff I enjoy viewing would make the Marquis de Sade blush! 0 -
-
-
-
-
I'm gong to gvem ake this now.
This is not about 'prudishness'.* It's about what we want this forum to be and what we don't want it to be.
In my view, the 'drool' thread is more suited to the kind of discussion found in forums like Nein 11, Slydice Specials (There's a whole forum for these pictures!) and maybe BGRH. I don't see tGC as being the place for this. I have no problem with discussing relationships here, men's take on lads mags or TV shows etc but the forum was really meant to be a place where we discuss men's issues...not who we drool over.
This forum is not the 'antidote' tLL or even the equivalent of tLL, it's more than that. As men we don't talk enough, consult enough or look to one another often enough for our thoughts and opinions on the things that matter. We mostly muddle through things ourselves, especially when it comes to our physical health, mental health, sexual health and emotions. That's what this forum is for and as such, in my view, the 'drool' thread doesn't fit here.
So, it's obvious that a lot of people like the thread, fair enough but I would ask that you consider whether the thread really fits in with the forum ethos. You may decide that we need more than just 'health' issues and discussion of men's lifestyle but even if we do, do we really need that thread? I'm not going to argue with anyone here I'm just asking people to take time to consider what they want from the forum and whether that matches up with the forum intent.
*Trust me, some of the stuff I enjoy viewing would make the Marquis de Sade blush!
Ok I completely agree this forum has nothing to do with TLL and arguments based on what they post should be completely irrelevent.
Anyway, this talk of what we want the forum to be - when was it decided hot pictures wouldn't be a part of it? I don't see the thread as being out of bounds of the ideas put forth for the charter, so banning bikini pics seems to me as nothing but prudish.
Its just one thread, I just don't see how it defines "what we're all about" - can we not just let the posters decide by what they post once they stick to boards.ie rules?
Yes I would feel a bit put off if there were daily threads on cheryl cole's ass or so and so's tits but that's not the case here. It is one thread. Making a big fuss about a skimpy bikini is cracking a nut with a nuclear warhead.
Why not just amend the thread title to "who makes you drool? NSFW". Then if anyone posts nipples or genitalia they get banned?0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement