Posts being deleted by mods with no explanation? The fine line between SFW and NSFW
01-05-09 | 02:34 PM
#26
DVD Talk Hero
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 39,666
Received 1,664 Likes
on
1,181 Posts
From: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell
Re: Posts being deleted by mods with no explanation? The fine line between SFW and NS
I kinda want to revisit this thread...
my post in the vicky guerrero thread...
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9174994-post35.html
Of course, I did not put the picture in the NSFW spoiler whatever it's called... but obviously a mod did. So I looked at the rules...
Unless, FHMOnline is the culprit, I still don't see the reasoning.
Then I look at the majority of posts NOT USING NSFW tags in the random picture thread.
Examples...
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9161858-post104.html
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9162330-post123.html
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9163021-post146.html
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9164485-post212.html
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9164568-post221.html
And then theres a whole slew of posts starting with...
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9169733-post292.html
With nothing but sexually suggestive titties...
So I'm asking, what's the difference?
my post in the vicky guerrero thread...
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9174994-post35.html
Of course, I did not put the picture in the NSFW spoiler whatever it's called... but obviously a mod did. So I looked at the rules...
3) No nude or explicit, sexually-suggestive pictures, no links to nude pictures, no links to sites primarily having a sexual theme (excluding XCritic.com in general, however don't link to specific threads, forums, or anything else there).
4) No male or female appreciation threads based primarily on pictures of them.
5) No pictures that a member could reasonably be called on to explain if overseen in the office by a co-worker or boss, or in the home by a spouse. We're not assuming that the member works in the Vatican nor, on the other extreme, are we assuming the member is married to a pornstar. If the picture is "iffy", link it with a NSFW notation.
4) No male or female appreciation threads based primarily on pictures of them.
5) No pictures that a member could reasonably be called on to explain if overseen in the office by a co-worker or boss, or in the home by a spouse. We're not assuming that the member works in the Vatican nor, on the other extreme, are we assuming the member is married to a pornstar. If the picture is "iffy", link it with a NSFW notation.
Then I look at the majority of posts NOT USING NSFW tags in the random picture thread.
Examples...
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9161858-post104.html
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9162330-post123.html
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9163021-post146.html
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9164485-post212.html
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9164568-post221.html
And then theres a whole slew of posts starting with...
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/9169733-post292.html
With nothing but sexually suggestive titties...
So I'm asking, what's the difference?
01-05-09 | 02:44 PM
#27
Re: Posts being deleted by mods with no explanation? The fine line between SFW and NS
It seems that the pictures you linked to were overlooked by moderators. Thank you for pointing them out.
I think we're going to have to clamp down on the babe-type threads again. It seems whenever we allow a little leeway people get the idea that they can post more and more of that kind of stuff here. Sometimes it isn't just a single picture that is offensive, but we have members who see that picture and have to top it. We've seen that behavior over and over. A NSFW tag on the picture tends to help point out that we don't want those pics popping up on somebody's monitor at home or work when it might be embarrassing.
The rules haven't changed. Things that would have gone into the Adult Forum (which doesn't exist anymore) are just going to get removed and if we see the same people doing it over and over we'll have to take further action.
I think we're going to have to clamp down on the babe-type threads again. It seems whenever we allow a little leeway people get the idea that they can post more and more of that kind of stuff here. Sometimes it isn't just a single picture that is offensive, but we have members who see that picture and have to top it. We've seen that behavior over and over. A NSFW tag on the picture tends to help point out that we don't want those pics popping up on somebody's monitor at home or work when it might be embarrassing.
The rules haven't changed. Things that would have gone into the Adult Forum (which doesn't exist anymore) are just going to get removed and if we see the same people doing it over and over we'll have to take further action.
01-05-09 | 02:47 PM
#28
DVD Talk Hero
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 39,666
Received 1,664 Likes
on
1,181 Posts
From: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell
Re: Posts being deleted by mods with no explanation? The fine line between SFW and NS
Ah, ok.. that's for the clarification. Carry on with your mod duties.. while I will be branded the party pooper. 
01-05-09 | 02:50 PM
#29
DVD Talk Legend
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 10,795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Lyon Estates
01-05-09 | 05:01 PM
#32
DVD Talk Hero
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 39,666
Received 1,664 Likes
on
1,181 Posts
From: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell
01-08-09 | 08:39 PM
#33
DVD Talk Godfather
Re: Posts being deleted by mods with no explanation? The fine line between SFW and NS
3) No nude or explicit, sexually-suggestive pictures, no links to nude pictures, no links to sites primarily having a sexual theme (excluding XCritic.com in general, however don't link to specific threads, forums, or anything else there).
4) No male or female appreciation threads based primarily on pictures of them.
5) No pictures that a member could reasonably be called on to explain if overseen in the office by a co-worker or boss, or in the home by a spouse. We're not assuming that the member works in the Vatican nor, on the other extreme, are we assuming the member is married to a pornstar. If the picture is "iffy", link it with a NSFW notation.
4) No male or female appreciation threads based primarily on pictures of them.
5) No pictures that a member could reasonably be called on to explain if overseen in the office by a co-worker or boss, or in the home by a spouse. We're not assuming that the member works in the Vatican nor, on the other extreme, are we assuming the member is married to a pornstar. If the picture is "iffy", link it with a NSFW notation.
Which brings me to a question. What's the point of having NSFW tags if we can't use them?
Lastly, the mod didn't make him/herself known but looks like I got the brunt of a long day's mod work:
Mod note: It appears we're going to have to start taking more action than merely deleting pictures that aren't appropriate for this forum.
There is no logic for determining what is NSFW on this site. None. Just accept that and you'll be a happier member.
Last edited by Michael Corvin; 01-08-09 at 08:42 PM.
01-09-09 | 03:23 AM
#34
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Posts being deleted by mods with no explanation? The fine line between SFW and NS
I agree. What good is the NSFW tag if we can't post stuff that's...NSFW?
Get rid of the tag, or get rid of the rule so we can use said tag.
= J
Get rid of the tag, or get rid of the rule so we can use said tag.
= J
01-09-09 | 08:55 AM
#35
Re: Posts being deleted by mods with no explanation? The fine line between SFW and NS
Regardless of where the line is drawn, we should get rid of the tag and require a link with NSFW warning instead. The tag still requires the images to be loaded and anyone sensitive to issues regarding NSFW images could still have problems from IT people (as their computer is downloading the NSFW images).
01-09-09 | 11:15 AM
#36
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Posts being deleted by mods with no explanation? The fine line between SFW and NS
Regardless of where the line is drawn, we should get rid of the tag and require a link with NSFW warning instead. The tag still requires the images to be loaded and anyone sensitive to issues regarding NSFW images could still have problems from IT people (as their computer is downloading the NSFW images).
