Porn Links

[Grave]

I still don't see how it's against the rules if it is just the main page.

1. The default option is to automatically parse links.
2. As long as the porn site has an 18+ warning page, what's the problem?

When it said "links to websites related to porn" in the rules, I thought it meant to a website with no warning page, or an image, etc.

Also, when the person doesn't post it for the sake of porn, then it shouldn't be considered an offence. Two good examples of this is when Kadaj posted it on a ''What are your top 5 visited websites?'' thread, he was posting his top 5 websites. When Tmoe posted it on the Spam Forum, it was a joke.

I'm just wondering why links with warning pages are considered porn. If a person is under the age of 18, they are required by law not to enter it, and if they do, they completely understand what they are doing.

 

[Tmoe]

I concur; completely unreasonable for instances where it has the warning in the entrance, if the link was redirected, or if it was meant as a joke.

 

[Skele]

Most sites don't have the warning page, and it's still exposing porn to members.

 

[Grave]

I find it ironic how 4Chan links are posted by staff members and members alike, and no one says anything about them. 4Chan doesn't even have a warning page to direct links, and we all know /b/ is infested with gore and porn. Better yet, why not star out all the porn sites if they're not allowed? (You know, the popular ones)

Most sites don't have the warning page, and it's still exposing porn to members.

I completely agree with banning the member if it doesn't have a warning page, but if there is a warning page, then what's wrong? Don't say shit about 'exposing porn to members' because I'm absolutely sure almost everyone in the community has been 'exposed' to it before. Also, why is it allowed if the link isn't parsed? Wouldn't that still be exposing members to porn as they can copy and paste the link in the address field, and then enter the warning page?

 

[deadly serious]

Most sites don't have the warning page, and it's still exposing porn to members.

Only if they click on it, you can warn them by saying this site contains porn.

 

[Tmoe]

Most sites don't have the warning page, and it's still exposing porn to members.

As Grave said, 4chan doesn't have a entrance warning..
Darkgroove made a thread yesterday with 4chan that linked to porn and yet, nothing. While I post a link and redirect it to Youtube, I get banned. Not counting that the original link had a warning page as well.

 

[ProudCheater]

I agree with grave.

 

I'd support amending the rules to these regulations, but all offenses that occurred before the change, ie Kadaj's case, would not be reversed.

But I thought the rule had something to do with the company that hosts our server. We cannot have any porn on here and, I guess, any links to porn. Clarification would be appreciated from an admin...

 

[Grave]

But I thought the rule had something to do with the company that hosts our server. We cannot have any porn on here and, I guess, any links to porn. Clarification would be appreciated from an admin...

Usually hosting companies don't care if you post links to porn, especially just the main page, and especially if members do it. They also do not allow websites with porn on them as they usually use more bandwidth and they might get in trouble if it's not licensed, etc. You could however find hosting websites that do host porn, but we're not a porn site. This isn't really an argument on allowing members to post porn, but allowing them to post links if the website has a warning page.

 

[Sin666]

No, we aren't going to allow porn/links to porn, etc.

Everyone knows the 18+ pages don't do shit. It's the "OMG DON'T LOOK!" (or better yet, the, "haha, you can't look") phenomenon.