"Soft Porn"

Okay so, with the whole TPM banning issue, I think there's a subject that should be cleared out.

Pictures of girls or guys, that are somewhat suggestive, like in underwear, bikini, lingerie, etc. Should these be really considered to be porn itself? I mean, we all know that it really isn't porn, but as the rules say, it's for the staff to decide what could be considered as porn.

It is somewhat unclear what this sorts of pictures should be considered. As far as I know, in the USF it is allowed to post nude pictures, which could be classified more directly as 'porn'.

But now, what about simply suggestive, even playful pictures we could say, where nudity isn't really shown but the pictures are just sexy? Are these then to be simply disallowed completely throughout the entire forums asides from of course, the USF?

Or perhaps should there be a new ban rule in which posting suggestive pictures which aren't -directly porn-, anywhere asides from SF/USF, should merit a 3 day/week ban?

So I must ask, what are your thoughts on this?

 

I've got to go soon but support for now. I'll read more into this when I'm back, but I know it should be something I support... silly SF drama aside.

 

I'm on the fence on this one. I don't agree with the month-long ban, but then again, TPM was asked to stop multiple times. Pictures other than Skype chats, etc. do not belong in the RaS section - that's what the SF/USF are for.

Also, although it may not have been porn, it was still NSFW. When I'm at home I honestly could care less, but when I'm browsing that section at school or in a public facility, it's awkward as fuck seeing some half-nude chick on my screen when I click on a report.

 

TPM should have just stopped posting the pictures. Normally there shouldn't be anything wrong with those pictures, but since he was asked to stop, he deserves the ban.

 

Although it is true, the punishment doesn't -have- to be a month-long, as I pointed out (albeit in a silly way) in a thread in SF. I would put it under ignoring staff decisions, since I personally don't classify it as porn, even though mods can classify it as porn. Which has a variable punishment from 1 infraction to ???.

But be honest, do any of you staff TRULY consider that porn? Don't lie to my face =[.

Then again, this isn't an issue that would likely arise ever again... whatever... I enjoyed the pics.

TPM: Make your future reports in the SF.

 

I don't come to sythe to look at pictures of girls, fully clothed or nude.

 

Irrelevant?

 

If it is in the SF/USF then I do not personally care. If it is in a report or some market thread or something and you are asked to stop posting those picture multiple times, then I think you are deserving of the ban. Simple as that.

He had his warnings.

 

I wouldn't consider what he posted as porn, but he was warned countless times to not post that kind of material in his reports. That in itself warrants the ban than the actual pictures.

I am still on the fence about this though.

 

Did anyone actually directly tell him that he needed to stop completely? I know people suggested that he stop but that's completely meaningless.


As far as the original discussion goes I think its a little weird to leave it that open for interpretation. Imagine a mod takes offense to a thread like this http://ww2.sythe.org/spam-forum/284354-who-most-beautiful-woman-world.html Can someone really be banned because someone "considers" this pornography?

 

Glad you were honest about it =].

Gotta be honest, I know I'm picking at the little things here, which staff of forums usually don't like, but technically he was never given an official warning via infraction / warning.

My only complaint is the length of the ban. One mod already doesn't classify it as porn, so it'd be the rule that I mentioned... so the ban doesn't -have- to be one month.

Also, someone raised a good point of being in a public place and other people seeing it. I agree with that, but come on... if you're in public you should have something better to do than to browse Sythe reports =].

 

I believe that it IS porn, it is all subjective to the viewer. To one mod, it was pornographic. To another, it may not have been. However, due to it "harassing" one mod, it can be interpreted as such for the others as well.

There was no official warning, but in response to many of his scammer reports etc, it did show that a moderator had said stop posting this.

 

True, which is why I said I was picking at little things, as in technicalities. I mean, I classify all of those as modeling pics... in fact there are ones that show much more that aren't in the porn category but rather model / art category. For instance, there's a new Miley Vyrus photoshoot... -ahem-.

Anywho, my main point is one month is too long to live without TPM's constant reports =[.

 

This thread isn't in any way me appealing TPM's ban to be reduced. If mods think that was the appropriate length so be it, what's done is done.

What I simply want is for this subject to get cleared out once and for all, so there are no more 'grey waters' about it.

Was he actually -warned- not to do so? As far as I can see he was more like suggested not to do so. Roary said he didn't mind, but was simply reflecting badly on him (which he obviously didn't care for), and you simply asked him to stop since it was annoying to you. I obviously can't see his warnings, but if he did get an actual warning to his account regarding the issue then I guess he did pretty much look for it.

If not, I don't think it should have warranted a ban right off the bat, but that's just my opinion.

Anyways, the thing is that we need to clear out how images of that kind should be treated in the future.

 

You probably shouldn't go to the beach then, you might have a heart attack.

Hence the suggestion asking for a more specific rule, did you even read?

Do you even English?

Just because someone finds something that you're doing to be annoying doesn't necessarily mean that you need to immediately stop if its within the rules to do so.

It seems that he wasn't given an actual warning, only "suggestions" for him to stop(meaning that he can't really be banned for ignoring staff, because no one actually straight up told him he needed to stop). When he had talked about it to Roary he didn't seem to have a problem with it.

This means that he was effectively banned for one month for posting "pornography" (which is his official ban reason) which he hasn't done.

 

not at all. I believe it was porn due to the nature and orientation of the shots. i.e. down females shirts, and with the underwear raised above their pelvic so there is a gap that you cannot see down, with their hands positioned as they are.


Looks a lot like an intro scene to a porno to me. Whether you agree or not is subjective, however, to at least one mod, it appeared to be pornographic and he was warned in response to many of his posts.

Ban remains warranted IMO.

 

You're kind of disregarding the fact that the OP actually made a suggestion in this thread, you might want to check it out. Just saying.

 

Being in a public place, or having people around you, there is no reason you shouldnt use Sythe. It is sfw.

Having girls in their underwear when a staff deals with a report makes it nsfw. Do you see girls in their underwear in your workplace? Go use your beach reference and argue that with the boss, it wont go well. When you are in a public library, do you not care that you could be seen looking at women in their underwear? What is the first thing people thinks when they see your screen on it? They certainly wont think what you want them to.

You guys need to realize what is sfw and nsfw. Tpm was warned, he said he wont do it, but still did. It was being a distraction to staff, possibly could have clouded their judgement. Not only a distraction, but to a point where they would probably make sure people arent around them when they handle his report.

Porn falls into the nsfw category, girls in their underwear are also in the nsfw category. In the end they both have the same effect of turning a male on and possibly clouding their judgement, one to a further extent obviously.

 

My response had more to do with the fact that he didn't actually address the suggestion at all. No one particularly cares what he did/didn't come to sythe to see.


I think that there is a huge difference between posting legitimate pornography(totally deserving of a month+ ban) and posting a sexually provocative picture(maybe a warning, followed by a three day ban if its outside of the sf). There could be a note that nsfw pictures aren't allowed outside of the spam forum and can result in "x" I can almost guarantee something like this is bound to come up again in the future given the audience this site generally appeals too.

My point is that while it may not be safe for work, it still isn't really pornography and doesn't need to be treated as harshly.


edit: Also I haven't seen any compelling evidence that TPM was warned by anyone, there is a difference between a warning and saying "eh, you should probably stop." Even Roary said that he didn't necessarily have to stop. Also the notion that a girl in a bikini could actually cloud a staff members judgement is laughable. I really don't think the pictures had anything to do with the outcomes of those reports whatsoever.

 

Do you even know what actually is?
Oh i'm sorry, you're a clueless child whose spamming each thread he sees to get postcount;/

Posting pictures of models posing ( DURR They're modeld, what the fuck do you expect them to do?) shouldn't be classified as porn, not even softporn. In order gor it to be classified as any type of porn there has to be nudity, and just showing flat stomachs and a bra/panty doest make it porn.

Stupid ban