Boobs in hand: can we get a consistent NSFW policy please

Gildwulf · #1 09-07-2007, 11:21 AM

Hey all,

I just wanted to see if we can get a consistent nsfw policy from the reds because as of right now we have a couple different types of policies going on. My understanding from previous discussions in the mod forum of what is kosher is:

inline stuff with boobs and vag covered up (either by blanking or hands covering or whatever): ok if thread is labelled nsfw.

links to uncensored boobs and vag shots labelled nsfw: ok

BUT links to naked possibly underage chicks photobucket accounts who can sue us: not ok???

links to any type of porn (guy on girl, guy on guy, girl on girl, whatever) or any porn inline: not ok

links to porn sites: not ok

Can we get a consistent ruling from the reds on this?

I think boobs in hands shots in bbv4l would be fine if the thread is labelled nsfw. We've had plenty of these types of 'MS00T' posts in the past. Ie any FHM or Maxim stuff would be fine IF labelled nsfw in the thread title.

gw

Mike Haven · #2 09-07-2007, 12:19 PM

Examples of each, please. Especially girl on girl with uncensored boobs and vag shots. Possibly a sailor in the background. Thanks.

citanul · #3 09-07-2007, 12:23 PM

Gild,

I thought that the rule was that nudity (either uncovered boob, or uncovered vag) is not OK inline under any circumstances (oh yeah, and uncovered penis, ldo).

Dids · #4 09-07-2007, 12:34 PM

I see no reason not to be really overbroad wrt to NSFW stuff. People can exist without pictures of hot girls on their forum, and it's just a really hard are to police.

I also think that rather than having a set policy, it's just best to use your own judgement. I post/mod a lot from work, and I know what would get me in trouble and what would (well, what would get me in trouble if my homeis in C&C didn't have my back).

I think links are a totally different issue. The NSFW stuff is just to prevent somebody from opening a thread about kittens and ending up with near-boob in their face and their boss looking over their shoulder.

4_2_it · #5 09-07-2007, 01:33 PM

Dids,

I agree with you for the time being because the forums are currently overrun with this stuff. When this stuff was a once a week occurrence I think it was fine, but now that it seems to be a 16 time a day occurrence, I favor scaling it back for a while.

Gildwulf · #6 09-07-2007, 01:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Gild,

I thought that the rule was that nudity (either uncovered boob, or uncovered vag) is not OK inline under any circumstances (oh yeah, and uncovered penis, ldo).

[/ QUOTE ]

ya that's what I said, isn't it?

citanul · #7 09-07-2007, 02:05 PM

gild,

my bad, i misread. i think you didn't cover inline nudity (possibly because it's so obvious that's not ok)? blah. i blame it on early morningness.

c

Mat Sklansky · #8 09-07-2007, 04:01 PM

We won't be making an official ruling on this issue.

[ QUOTE ]
I post/mod a lot from work, and I know what would get me in trouble

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what's most important.

El Diablo · #9 09-07-2007, 04:59 PM

Mat,

"This is what's most important."

If that's the guideline you want mods to follow, then inline Maxim/FHM style shots should probably be axed as well.

Mat Sklansky · #10 09-07-2007, 05:14 PM

Since part of my job is to have the forums open all the time, I really don't know what's nsfw. Others have always told me that what you describe is okay.

I'm thinking that we should have some sort of pop up disclaimer before entering the off topic communities warning of the possibility of nsfw images.

It doesn't mean that inline nudity would be okay, but it would probably make it easier to keep the thongs, etc.