| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/18/2007 01:08:03 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
2. That is a perception YOU have that may not be shared by all. If you do not want your children to view nudity, this responsibility rests solely with YOU and is not one which we as a collective have to assume. |
Indeed. Hence the checkbox. Which he's saying doesn't fully work.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
If you flag nudes during voting, showing an icon instead of an image so that the viewer may opt to reveal the image or not, then those who don't "like" nudes will not vote on them, and those who "love" nudes will reveal them and vote on them. End result: artificially high score on nude images. Bad idea.
R. |
I think the suggestion is, for folks with the checkbox checked, remove them entirely from the voting set. For folks without the checkbox set, leave them in. Neither voter would know the difference.
Message edited by author 2007-10-18 13:10:18. |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:08:13 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
You cannot read can you? |
I can read, as it would seem you can. It is the level of comprehension on your part that has me baffled.
Ray |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:11:01 PM · #28 |
REPLY REMOVED BY AUTHOR.
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 11:58:03.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:12:42 PM · #29 |
REPLY REMOVED BY AUTHOR.
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 11:58:20.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:12:52 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
You cannot read can you? |
I can read, as it would seem you can. It is the level of comprehension on your part that has me baffled.
Ray |
Ah, resort to insults when you don't understand the topic of discussion. It doesn't affect you. |
While I was waiting for my popcorn to finish popping I saw this and asked myself - Self, who cast the first stone?
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:13:11 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
You cannot read can you? |
I can read, as it would seem you can. It is the level of comprehension on your part that has me baffled.
Ray |
Ah, resort to insults when you don't understand the topic of discussion. It doesn't affect you. |
... and just how is my comment any more insulting than yours? I can assure you sir that I can indeed read, and in more than one language. I do hope I have clarified matters a bit for you.
Ray |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:15:34 PM · #32 |
REPLY REMOVED BY AUTHOR.
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 11:58:39.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:18:53 PM · #33 |
| If you can discuss the topic please continue. If you must insult each other and get "personal," please take a break and go read something else until you can discuss the topic at hand. |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:19:55 PM · #34 |
| Alright, alright, you guys. I'm interested in reading further discussion about the issue at hand... |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:22:17 PM · #35 |
...I am no longer here.
Ray |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:24:16 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
I think the suggestion is, for folks with the checkbox checked, remove them entirely from the voting set. For folks without the checkbox set, leave them in. Neither voter would know the difference. |
Same difference, score-wise; it would seem likely that those who check off the box NOT to view nudes will predominately be those who would be inclined to score them low.
Let me put it this way; If I shot nothing but cute-kitty shots, and could lobby for a check box exempting those who HATE looking at cute-kitty shots, don't you think my shots would end up with a higher average than if the hate-cute-kitties crowd was voting?
R.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:29:44 PM · #37 |
REPLY REMOVED BY AUTHOR.
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 11:58:59.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:30:05 PM · #38 |
I've supported this feature myself. My thoughts were that it would "protect nudes from prudes" during voting.
But, as Bear stated in the beginning of the thread, it would skew voting. I'm not sure how it would affect the results, but it would, indeed. Generally, not a good thing.
But, because of general prudishness of this site, I tend to stay away from nudes in challenges now, especially open ones. Cast not pearls before swine, as they say.
Now, just a little slightly off-topic soapbox...I've never understood the disgust/shame people have concerning nudity and the cries for censorship of it, while violence and other graphic content dominate modern media. In the paraphrased words of George Carlin, I would rather my child see two people making love than to see a person kill another. I think it's time for Americans especially to grow up.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:31:04 PM · #39 |
REPLY REMOVED BY AUTHOR.
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 11:59:18.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:31:44 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Now, just a little slightly off-topic soapbox...I've never understood the disgust/shame people have concerning nudity and the cries for censorship of it, while violence and other graphic content dominate modern media. In the paraphrased words of George Carlin, I would rather my child see two people making love than to see a person kill another. I think it's time for Americans especially to grow up. |
I'd say that is another thread, entirely. :) |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:36:35 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Let me put it this way; If I shot nothing but cute-kitty shots, and could lobby for a check box exempting those who HATE looking at cute-kitty shots, don't you think my shots would end up with a higher average than if the hate-cute-kitties crowd was voting?
R. |
I think this analogy would hold more water if there were already checkboxes for hiding cute-kitty shots like there are nudes.
I'm not for hiding nudes but I do sorta see the guys point. He is saying that he has a choice to not look at nudes in someone's portfolio and he would like to have that apply to challenge entries as well. However, your point of fairness in voting is a good one also. Touchy subject indeed.
Message edited by author 2007-10-18 13:37:47. |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:37:36 PM · #42 |
Seems to me like the big issue is one of statistics.
Ask the question the other way round then: Can you show that excluding nudes won't affect scores?
If you can, I'm pretty sure you can get support for including this feature in voting... :-)
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:37:42 PM · #43 |
REPLY REMOVED BY AUTHOR.
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 11:59:40.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:37:57 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
The only harm done is that unbeknownst to some users, they have had a nude image forced upon them possibly creating a problem in their lives.
The image is still skipped, cherry picking can still happen, and the only harm is done to the user, not the submission. |
It's hardly 'harm' being shown a pair of tits for god's sake.
Further, you know there is a chance that there will be nude images in every challenge yet you continue to vote on them so exactly how repulsed can you be? If this were a faith issue you would have walked away at the first instance of this to avoid further temptation.
I didn't have your kids. You did. You worry about what they see and if this site is something you don't want them looking at then don't let them look at it. If you, as an adult, don't like the content then you can choose not to look at well.
I am not meaning to blast you specifically, but this thread and the other one are absolute puritanical bullshit. It's arguable at best whether or not the 'nude flag' is even warranted since the images on this site are art and not obscene to begin with, but it was a nice compromise so why not just be happy and leave it alone.
This is a very good example about how caving in to the subtle arguments for censorship just make it that much harder to say no the next time around. I really hope the admin of the site do not cave in a second time.
Message edited by author 2007-10-18 13:38:51. |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:41:09 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by smurfguy:
I think the suggestion is, for folks with the checkbox checked, remove them entirely from the voting set. For folks without the checkbox set, leave them in. Neither voter would know the difference. |
Same difference, score-wise; it would seem likely that those who check off the box NOT to view nudes will predominately be those who would be inclined to score them low.
Let me put it this way; If I shot nothing but cute-kitty shots, and could lobby for a check box exempting those who HATE looking at cute-kitty shots, don't you think my shots would end up with a higher average than if the hate-cute-kitties crowd was voting?
R. |
You are absolutely right here - and it's this is exactly the main reason not to hide them during voting.
(and like others have said before: What is this with nudity? Why is it so "bad" to watch?. Nobody seems to care about blood or violence - or at least nobody suggest to hide those during voting or at anytime else. But the moment there is a little bare skin the shouting begins. I just don't get it.) |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:43:57 PM · #46 |
REPLY REMOVED BY AUTHOR.
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 12:00:01.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:44:26 PM · #47 |
Since we can select what photos we vote on anyway (meeting the minimum), I don't see how it would affect the voting.
I love artistic nudes...but would be in trouble viewing them at work. Even the thumbnail size is not acceptable. As it stands now, I don't vote at all at work due to the possibility of something non-appropriate by WORK standards...not MY standards...showing up. It's a shame because I DO have much time at work. I frequently have 2 hour periods of phone duty and would vote MUCH more often if I could vote there. I don't get to it very much at home.
I like the idea and I don't see anything wrong with it, or understand the conflict, but I could be missing something I suppose. If the option is going to be there at all, might as well make it most useful.
Just my .02 because I would really like to be able to vote at work. |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:44:59 PM · #48 |
Regardless of the thread title, the checkbox hides "Adult content" - I would hope this includes extreme violence or gore.
Thus far the points made are:
1. For fairness in voting, all entries must be shown to promote random voting. If you want to avoid adult content, prescreen the thumbnails.
2. If you don't want to see / your children to see certain content, it's your responsibility to block it.
#1 is a self-refuting argument, at the same time promoting fairness and cherry picking.
#2 says take responsibility, which I think everybody agrees upon, but the site does not grant that capability.
That's the argument. |
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:46:01 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
The only harm done is that unbeknownst to some users, they have had a nude image forced upon them possibly creating a problem in their lives.
The image is still skipped, cherry picking can still happen, and the only harm is done to the user, not the submission. |
It's hardly 'harm' being shown a pair of tits for god's sake.
Further, you know there is a chance that there will be nude images in every challenge yet you continue to vote on them so exactly how repulsed can you be? If this were a faith issue you would have walked away at the first instance of this to avoid further temptation.
I didn't have your kids. You did. You worry about what they see and if this site is something you don't want them looking at then don't let them look at it. If you, as an adult, don't like the content then you can choose not to look at well.
I am not meaning to blast you specifically, but this thread and the other one are absolute puritanical bullshit. It's arguable at best whether or not the 'nude flag' is even warranted since the images on this site are art and not obscene to begin with, but it was a nice compromise so why not just be happy and leave it alone.
This is a very good example about how caving in to the subtle arguments for censorship just make it that much harder to say no the next time around. I really hope the admin of the site do not cave in a second time. |
Word. And you also knew there where nudes and the ruleset behind them when you paid $25 to be a member here.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 01:48:34 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by silverscreen:
(and like others have said before: What is this with nudity? Why is it so "bad" to watch?. Nobody seems to care about blood or violence - or at least nobody suggest to hide those during voting or at anytime else. But the moment there is a little bare skin the shouting begins. I just don't get it.) |
A large part of the reason for implementing the nude flag and the replacement thumb image was driven by those that visit DPC during work hours.
A photo containing nudity is a no-no in most work cultures. Unfortunately, that same standard is not applied to violence & gore type imagery in the workplace. |
|
