Inappropriate dvd cover in reviews....
 

http://images.dvdtalk.com/covers/B000KHX7JY.jpg

I don't think this is appropriate for regular rotation. Seems a little risque. I understand that it appears to be non-porn title, but seeing that picture makes it look like it is.

Agree wholeheartedly, but Geoff always says the rule is that if Amazon sells it the cover can go in the rotation. :(

http://www.amazon.com/Love-Scenes-Ti...9713254&sr=1-1

Asked and answered...

The thing is we never get complaints about covers like this

<img src="http://images.dvdtalk.com/covers/B000MM0LH8.jpg">

The site's not safe for work... It just isn't.

As I always say, I don't like those gory covers either. Neither are work safe.

But as you say, you decided not to make the site work safe so be it.

Well, consider me officially complaining about it now. :p

It also makes me wonder. If the site is not supposed to be work-safe, why not allow linking to the adult forum?

Or have the mods edit out "not safe for work" links in Other and various forums on the site and warn people not to link to stuff that is NSFW?

You've mentioned this type of thing a lot, and I think it comes down to this. Most guys don't get boners looking at gory dvd covers.

That's the problem. People at work don't want to think of their coworkers as raging perverts popping boners under their desk.

Because the reality is that many people DO visit the site from work. So while we're not going to radically change what we do to be safe for work we're also not going to go out of our way to be NOT safe for work.

If you're the same joe I remember from adt, I would think you'd be extremely happy at the idea of many guys at work sporting boners. Otherwise, if a cover like the one heading up this thread is enough to give someone wood, a number of the others must be causing those types to require a condom at all times (ie: like Rob Scheider's "orgasm man" character from SNL). People like that probably don't need to be surfing the internet at work. ;)

The idea is that reasonable accomodations have been made for folks. Some, particularly a very vocal handful, will always want something more but most of the members that actually contribute to the website have failed to rally to the war cries about adult/NSFW content. A few have even completely marginalized themselves by publicly stating they won't do anything to support the website over this topic; making their comments unnecessary altogether. Bending over backwards to appease such types seems counter productive unless a groundswell of financially contributing members "Show G! the Money!".

To be fair Don, I've said numerous times I'd pay up to $50 a year for an ad and dvd review cover free forum experience as that would solve all the NSFW issues.

Unless that becomes and option, I'm doing nothing to support the site. But I am willing to show G the money if he puts up a pay area that is work safe.

So is now a good time to re-request that the mainstream porn review links and pictures be moved down below the HD/blu-ray reviews on the main page? To the more appropriate (and consistent) location that includes the All-Male and Adult Toy reviews?

As to the first part, G! would also need to remove any potentially offensive pictures from reviews as well or you'd be upset. Others would chime in saying certain foul language/"bad" words or other text would have to be included on the NSFW experience in order for them to fork over money. Still others would not want discussions of a political nature, specific topics, or use of key words that their company IT gurus have set up spyware for. In short, it is the same kind of slippery slope that some of you have suggested DVD Talk has applied to adult material.

One way to handle this would be to completely overhaul the website and compartmentalize each section (on a scale far surpassing what it has now); allowing paying members to skips ads, covers, pictures, and specific columns (up to and including any of them) as well as entering in key words for the website to prevent your computer from accessing. Such a move would complicate other revenue streams and I'm not sure if a working business model could be developed that would appeal to enough people to cover the costs and allow for growth. I've never asked G! for specifics on the finances of DVD Talk (and don't intend to start now) but based on what others have told me about their websites, expecting G! to radically alter his approach is unreasonable at this time. I would propose that those of you wanting to increase your voice in such an effort be willing to send some amount (like $100/year) as that would give you the credibility of a financial backer and prove your resolve. If enough people did this, it would certainly get G!'s attention more than what amount to empty promises of future payment (ala Wimpy offering to pay him next Tuesday for a hamburger today).

There are so many variables involved in running a successful operation like DVD Talk that this would be the only way I would suggest he try that approach (perhaps offering a companion website "dumbed down" for workplace surfing). This is mostly because a lot of people either do not surf from work, would not pay for content they can get for free, or don't work in places where their employer is so restrictive.

It's only consistent if you are judging the reviews in terms of their adult content; a relatively limited focal point considering the wealth of material it covers. If we went by popularity/revenue/several other factors, the line up would be significantly different (and not in a manner you'd like, judging by your request).

Is it your opinion that the Review page is organized by something other than content? That adult material doesn't logically go together?

I don't see any indication that the page is organized by popularity, revenue, or any other factors -- if it is, I'd love to hear why HD DVD is before Blu-ray in the listings.

My point is that the page is not organized solely by the rating of the content (otherwise, the manner in which you have described would be in place). If left up to me, the weekly releases section would be expanded and placed first with the theatrical titles at the end (since they aren't about DVD's). Your preferred method of organization appears to be based solely on rating/adult content and mine does not. Heck, given the nature of many mainstream reviews (particularly foreign titles), it could be argued that the gay titles should be immediately following the mainstream list (based on thematic similarities).

There were several factors involved in how the page was set up; some of which are public and others that are not. DVD content has long been the main focus of the website (hence the website name) so it makes sense to put it first just as if the name was HD DVD Talk, HD Talk, Blu-Ray Talk, Porn Talk, or Movie Talk, you'd expect to find the specific group first. Currently, there are more SD DVD reviews too, followed by mainstream porn, etc. The next time the website goes through a major overhaul, BR might be on top of HD but I don't think there should be an automatic expectation that adult content goes to the bottom any more than placing adult on top due to affiliate sales (ie: the website is not designed to be safe for work).

Nope. All I'd want is no ads, and no review covers in the forum areas. I generally don't read the reviews or visit the front page here so I don't care about that stuff.

Give me a paid forum with no ads, review covers etc. and I'd gladly shell out up to $50 a year.

It wouldn't be hard to do, would just require the subscription forum to be on it's own server, and the page designed a bit to just pull in the threads etc. and not any ads etc.

Now of course, I don't know if a subscription forum would be economically viable--but it wouldn't require the kind of sweeping changes you list.

Again just no ads or any review covers period would get me to pay in a second.

That's all cool... and I've long ago realized that this site is not safe for work.

But I do think there's an overall inconsistency in providing a separate Adult forum, not allowing links to there from other forums, making sure that all posted images in other forums are free from boobies and snatch...

... yet I have to scroll past Latina Anal Heartbreakers to get to the HD DVD reviews.

While not "work safe", the rest of this site seems to go out of it's way to make sure that adult stuff stays in adult areas. Except, for whatever reason, the main Reviews page.

If that's financial, that's fine. But it is inconsistent with the way the rest of the site is set up.

For what it's worth:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/hd.php

Screwing around on the internet is safe for work??

Welcome to America. :lol:

At my job, sure. Not paid hourly, have full internet access etc. so I can do pretty much what ever I want as long as I get my work done.

That said, I'm not on the net that much at work as far as long time periods. Just take a handful of short 5-10 minute internet breaks a day when I need to stop looking at what I was working on for a few minutes.

I too am upset with these ads whether they be at home or work.

So I went into Firefox and blocked all the images that come from "http://images.dvdtalk.com"

It doesn't block the buttons that vBulletin uses (those are stored on the ads.kleinman server).

Good find. That also doesn't block the ads so it shouldn't be against forum rules. Also blocks images in posts, which also eliminates the risk of a member posting something not work safe outside of adult. :thumbsup:

What about the review for Frasier - The Ninth Season?

The image that shows up is this-
http://images.dvdtalk.com/covers/B000MX7V5W.jpg

I must be missing something. What's the problem?

One thing that I found was that this also blocks 95% of the smilies. :(

Oh well, now I'll have to rely on reputation instead of smilies to detect sarcasm and other meanings.