Posted by: Anonymous [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 02, 2004 01:59AM
I love this site, and I love sharing it with others. But I think the photos should be listed according to a rating system. I can not let my son look at some of these pictures, and it seems most people plain don't care. I feel the site pictures should be rated by category G Everyone M mature only I think mature photos should be password protected, and only viewed by adults. Child porn should be banned! And whoever posts it should also! We need a free speech site, but we need to keep it for all to enjoy.
Posted by: geezer [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 02, 2004 02:18AM
Do what I do. 1. Put your kids to bed. What the hell are you doing on the comp when you have a kid to tend to? *Good parenting skills, BTW.* 2. Skip over any thumbnail you may not want to see up close. It may not interest you, but you aren't the only visitor to this site. Finally, 3., you said it yourself, and I quote, it seems most people plain don't care. They don't. Especially when it comes to your personal opinion. THANK YOU, THANK YOU....I'LL BE HERE ALL WEEK.
Posted by: pulse [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 02, 2004 05:33AM
I'm not directly AGAINST your idea, but there are a couple of important things to note.

It says fairly clearly on the main page that you should be over 21 and have an open mind to view the site. Under no circumstances should you be letting kids browse this site, even if there was some kind of ratings classification for the pictures. Even if the pictures are rated, there will be image comments and ideas that are not suitable for children, and it seems to me entirely beyond the point of a free speech site to enforce a ratings classification system.

I also have no idea how such a password system would work. How could it be managed, and how could we possibly know that the password is not being given to a minor without some sort of credit card verification system? Even then it's not assured. I also don't know how we could manage the ratings system. Who would rate the images? Half of the point of this site is that new images can be added and viewed immediately, with what you suggest they would each need to be moderated and classified before being put on display. That's not the idea of the site, and would require far more time than we are able to dedicate.

Ultimately, this is not a children's site, and all images should be treated as "M" - always. I have absolutely no desire to promote this site to, or as suitable for children. I would also hope that if any child porn is ever found here, it would be reported to us. As far as I'm aware there is none on here (there better not be!), and any users doing such things are immediately banned without question.
This site is a hobby, run by a couple of enthusiasts. We do not make a single cent off running it and we simply don't have the resources to do what you are proposing. Such a verification system would likely cost thousands of dollars to setup and have huge ongoing usage fees, along with hundreds of hours to maintain and moderate all comments, images and all past ones. We simply don't have it.
Posted by: Anonymous [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 02, 2004 12:28PM
As I see it, as adults we should not do anything we would not share with our children. Lock door policy only leads to mistrust. How can we as a society come to a mutual agreement that all people are created equal and should therefore be treated as such. As I have noticed from one of the readers above, an opinion means nothing and putting your kids to bed is nice, but should not be used as an excuse to view a porn site. I say to each his own, if you choose to view it fine, but I feel as above a password lockout would be nice. I know some may call it censorship, I call it responsibility to our children. Simply saying no one under the age of 21 should view it, is like saying to your child, don't play that video game, because of the violence. Our society has become so mixed up it may never be right again. A simple suggestion, a simple password, is that so wrong? I agree with the above.
Posted by: DarkKlown [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 02, 2004 01:08PM
Ok so we put a password on the site for 'porn' images. How is this password only given to adults?

- Credit cards can be accessed by minors. (the purpose of the site is to be free anyway)
- Questions like 'what is the capital of ?' can be looked up without hassle (yes i used to play leisure suite larry)
- Embedding the password in the html, or requiring registration to the site is not the purpose of this site. (yes you can register but that was at request by users to protect nicks from being abused)

What other suggestions do people have? Simply saying 'make it password protected' isn't helpful. Try and think about the big picture. If someone can come up with a idea that works we will review and aslong as it follows the principles of the site we will do our best to implement it.

Also is this a site wide password? or a per image password? who would set this password? who would flag a image as being 'porn'? What classifies an image as pornography? If you read the frount page we ask users NOT to upload anything they wouldn't show their mothers.

Childern shouldn't be unsupervised while surfing the internet anyway. Do you let them go walking around the city alone during peak hour? If a parent doesn't supervise a child and he/she/it REALLY wants to view images on this site, they will find a way. No matter what we do.
Posted by: Wacky [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 02, 2004 06:02PM
If you don't want your children seeing the images you fell are "porn", then here is a wild idea.

View the site on your own and if you find images that you would like to share with your children then just save the picture and show them at a later time.

As for your statement that we should not do anything we would not share with our kids. Does that meean that we should let them have a a beer since we can?

You seem to only want free speech as long as it means you don't have to do your job as a parent.

You say that a putting password on a free speech site is not censorship but resposibility to our children. That is crap. Responsibility to our children is not letting them have access to stuff we feel they should not. You can censor what your kids see all you want. Don't make the problem for the rest of the world.
Posted by: BRUTE [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 02, 2004 08:21PM
As I see it, the site is having problems with idenity theft, and a password was suggested for this purpose. I am no brain surgeon, but it may not totally be out of the question. I can tell there is oposition to the idea, and from reading the above, about photos that are being shown to your mother. Oh boy, I would not even think of showing her some of these photos. And for the beer drinker, go ahead and drink your beer in front of your child, that is ok, it is your child. Maybe you can explain why daddy got a DUI and can't pay this months house payment. I guess we can call it censorship, but maybe it's the best thing to do. The ten commandments came before free speech, and we all have a tendancy to forget those. I can agree with a password protected site, and yes our childrens use of the internet needs to be monitored, but we have to give them a little space. Remember we were kids to at one time.
Posted by: geezer [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 03, 2004 12:22AM
Dear Anonymous, Do you leave the door open on your bedroom when you are fucking your spouse? Or do you "share" that with your children? I don't put my kids to bed to view this site, but I don't view it until my children are in the bed. You also have parental controls on your comp and usually from your internet provider. I use my parental control on my computer.....I also shut AND lock my bedroom door when I fuck my husband....
Posted by: Anonymous [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 03, 2004 01:54AM
Sin is Sin, doesn't make no difference. Raise your children as you were raised. There is a difference, between "Fucking as you say" and making love. You are right about one thing, children should be put to bed before "Your dirty deed" starts, as for me I have more respect for my wife than just "Fucking"! WWJD Next time, think before you drink........
Posted by: geezer [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 03, 2004 02:28AM
First of all, Jesus wouldn't look at dirty pics on the net and then complain because his child was out and about while He was doing itor complain because someone said fuck. Second, great, I'm glad you "make love" to your wife. It still doesn't answer my question if you let your children know what's going on or hide it from them. Are you so "open" with your child that you let them know that you having sex? I mean, its obvious to adults you've had sex if you have a child, but do you shun your child away from sexual material on t.v.? Do you let them watch "R" rated movies? Do you allow them to look at obscence magazines? I put my children to bed for two reasons: One, they're tired, Two, Being a parent, I have to be responsible enough to make and enforce the rules. Finallly, I typed a bad word. Big whoopie. I thought I was talking to an adult who can handle conversing about sexual matters. Maybe a good fucking is what you need, you uptight, sexual suppressed asswipe.
Posted by: geezer [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 03, 2004 02:31AM
Hey kids, come on in, the doors open! Mom's pussy is great!! Wanna take a stab at it?
Posted by: DarkKlown [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 03, 2004 02:51AM
Brute: All the photos I've uploaded to the site I would be happy to show 'mum', I doubt alot of the other users can claim such.

To some people any picture of someone with any 'rude' bits showing could be classified as porn.

And that's the main problem with classification. To classify a picture is the views of an individual, the purpose of this site is to allow the collective to express themselves. The only real way I can think of to classify the images on this site is to add another voting section where users vote on the category a image should exist in (whatever category was selected by the majority of people would be where the image would be stored). However, personally I think that would just bog the site down too much, we've tried to make this site as streamlined as possible. If everyone had to select a option from a pulldown box, before they could give a rating to a image people would just simply stop voting. Checkout the stats of the site, 6.6million views and less than 1/2 a million votes, and atm all you have to do to vote is click a graphic.

We're doing alot of development work on the site at the moment, but that's only because we have the free time. The site needs to run unattended so anything that can't be automated, is free or user contributed just isn't an option.
Posted by: geezer [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 03, 2004 03:20AM
YEA FOR DARKKLOWN!!!tongue sticking out smiley
Posted by: pulse [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 03, 2004 05:05AM
It's a simple problem of logistics. As DarkKlown pointed out, we've got around 6.6 million image views and less than half a million votes. That means for every 15.4 image views, somebody casts a vote. How many do you think will even bother to do that if they have to select 2 options to do so? The classification system would have to go further than that though.

What about image comments? At the time of writing, there are 18,758 image comments on this site, as well as the 5,144 images and 650 forum posts. Just because a picture is rated "G" doesn't mean the comments under it are. So now, we need people to classify each comment as well as the image. That's over 24,000 things to classify RIGHT NOW. Tomorrow it'll be 24,500. And so on. It'd be hard enough to get people to vote on a classification for an image, let alone for every single image comment as well. Because the users aren't ever going to bother to classify things to that extent, the job falls back on us.

There are 3 people who run this site, and we probably spend similar amounts of time on it despite performing fairly different roles. I think every single one of us could say we've spent between 10 and 30 hours a week on it. That's on top of full time jobs. This is not our job, it's a hobby, we do not get paid for this. Currently this site costs in excess of $3000 USD a year to run, and that number is only rising. We can't put any more time or effort into the site than we already do, we do have lives, it's simply not practical.

This means we'd need to look at automated systems such as credit card verification. Such systems as I mentioned earlier run into several thousand dollars per year, and I pay enough to run the site as it is.

Are you going to spend the additional 30+ hours a week it'd require to classify everything on the site? Or donate to us a few thousand dollars to run it? For some reason, I doubt it. Quite simply, without some solid suggestions on how this might be achieved, it's not even an option we can consider.

What would Jesus do? Well, frankly that's his problem and not mine. Don't turn this into a religious debate, it just won't work.
Posted by: Anonymous [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 04, 2004 10:44AM
Geezer makes some good points.

What makes this country enjoyable and a source of so much innovation is freedom. I don't think putting out porn shit has anything to do with the first amendment whatsoever since prostitution for example is still illegal, between "consenting adults." As long as it is legal, we should have the right to view it then on the WORLD wide web from here.

The creator of this thread is just another stupid yuppie finding just something else to overcomplicate and get worked up about.
Posted by: Anonymous [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 04, 2004 10:50AM
Just because your stupid ass can't monitor them is no reason to redo the site just for you. That is an example of an affectation of manners.

Liberals always say "It's all about the children." as an excuse for their terrible endeavors, and putting us in the same category. Samuel Johnson said, the last refuge of a scondrel is Patriotism. You can substitute that word with children, for today's society.
Posted by: DarkKlown [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 08, 2004 02:46AM
A suggestion has been made to simply turn over moderation to the users of the site. This would be limited to users who have contributed to the site (by uploading/posting in the forums - for example users with more than 7000? points). These users would have a limited ability to flag messages/images as being 'offensive' and these said messages wouldn't be shown to the rest of the visitors. They can be later deleted by the administrators (revert, pulse and myself).

What do you the users think of this suggestion? Can/should we trust the regulars enough to give them this power?
Posted by: geezer [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 08, 2004 02:55AM
I think that's redundant. How many times have us women skipped over thumbnails of chicks sucking face? A lot. We should use our own judgement vs. having crybabies choosing for us.
Posted by: Anonymous [x] - (216.196.174.---)
Date: December 13, 2004 06:20AM
Rating doesn't have anything to do with it. There are nice gory pictures on here I'd show kids without thinking that I'm sure would get an R, while most of the soft-porn perfume ads wouldn't rate anything cause they don't show any "rude bits" but I feel sick looking at them myself. At least the ratings system gives the opportunity to at some stage separate the images into "highly rated by semi-intelligent lifeforms" and "highly rated by 13 year old pimple-faced boys typing with one hand".
Your Name: 
Your Email: