|
|
| Author | Message |
|---|
icurok
| | #1 posted February 19, 2007 at 5:15am (EST) |
Bill, would it be possible to filter specific avatars rather than all them (in the same way that you can filter the comments or surveys of specific users).
I've had to turn off avatars completely because of Maarten's new one. |
bill  
| #2 posted February 19, 2007 at 7:15am (EST)
edited February 19, 2007 at 7:17am (EST) |
I'll just delete Maarten's avatar... it was bothering me too... it basically implies rape (a knife cuts open a woman's shirt)... |
Maarten 
| | #3 posted February 19, 2007 at 1:17pm (EST) |
Icurok, at work you should work and not use SC! 
But all you had to do was ask me to remove it. No problem.
|
RGirl
| | #4 posted February 19, 2007 at 6:56pm (EST) |
bill wrote:
> I'll just delete Maarten's avatar... it was
> bothering me too... it basically implies
> rape (a knife cuts open a woman's shirt)...
>
Yeah, I mentioned it to Maarten when I first saw it. Seemed violent. |
romkey
| | #5 posted February 19, 2007 at 7:53pm (EST) |
I'm a bit tired of all the boobs (in general). |
bill
| | #6 posted February 19, 2007 at 8:23pm (EST) |
Maybe I should just make a rule against it... it's just that I hate making rules... and enforcing rules... bleh |
cabinfever
| | #7 posted February 19, 2007 at 11:15pm (EST) |
I'm a woman and I don't have a problem with the boobs. You'd think a woman would have complained first. |
LindaH   
| | #8 posted February 19, 2007 at 11:49pm (EST) |
Bill, what is your avatar? |
bill
| | #9 posted February 20, 2007 at 8:08am (EST) |
I'm not sure... I was doing some searches for snake gods and mythology, Nehebkau came up, and I somehow found a page that had this image on it. I think it was related to Nehebkau, but I can't find the page at this point. |
bill
| | #10 posted February 20, 2007 at 8:10am (EST) |
The boobs are a problem... one of my advertisers could drop me if they saw them. So, I should enforce a no boobs policy. I just wish I didn't have to. I mean, isn't it obvious that some people find boobs offensive? Thus, isn't it common sense that you don't use boobs as your avatar? |
cabinfever
| | #11 posted February 20, 2007 at 1:26pm (EST) |
Ah yes, Bill, but wouldn't someone find a picture of a snake god offensive? It's a slippery slope. |
Maarten
| | #12 posted February 20, 2007 at 2:07pm (EST) |
I think it's very American to find boobs offensive. Think of it. You call one the most beautiful and special parts of a woman offensive. 
And this wasn't even a 'real boobs' avatar, it was a cartoon!
What about my previous 'blow job' avatar? Would you ban that too? |
LindaH
| | #13 posted February 20, 2007 at 2:50pm (EST) |
Bill's avatar is the same picture as a friend of a friend on myspace. That's why I asked about it. Weird that I noticed both at the same time.
Maarten, what's your avatar? Censorship? |
bill
| | #14 posted February 20, 2007 at 3:10pm (EST) |
Maarten wrote:
> America sucks, The Netherlands is the best!
get a new shtick, dude! |
bill
| | #15 posted February 20, 2007 at 3:21pm (EST) |
I agree it's a slippery slope and doing this sucks. But, when it comes down to it, it's business. The business that serves the ads requires that my site not contain offensive language or images. They are an American business and they have American customers. So, American standards for what is offensive is very likely what they want. To be honest, they have never given be an exact definition of what is offensive and what is not. It's one of those things that's really hard to define, so it's hard to blame them. There was one time, they got on my back for the work "fudge" appearing on the site. At the time, there was a bug that caused the swear filter not to work properly. |
Maarten
| | #16 posted February 20, 2007 at 5:38pm (EST) |
bill wrote:
> Maarten wrote:
>> America sucks, The Netherlands is the best!
>
> get a new shtick, dude!
Tell me, where did I write that? |
Maarten
| | #17 posted February 20, 2007 at 5:39pm (EST) |
@joalis: yes. |
Maarten
| | #18 posted February 20, 2007 at 5:47pm (EST) |
Bill, a serious question:
this is a new survey in qualification: http://surveycentral.org/survey/26425.html
Shouldn't it be deleted for the same reasons you deleted my avatar?
|
cabinfever
| | #19 posted February 20, 2007 at 6:37pm (EST) |
Half the stuff on this site would have to be deleted if you got right down to it. Anything could be found offensive by someone. I didn't mind Maarten's boob avatar because I didn't see the knife thing... I thought it was someone flipping up her shirt. The assault/abuse aspect of it is offensive, but not the boobs.
That is another thing that has gone to hell in this country.... if one or just a few people find something offensive, the rest of us are supposed to bend over backwards to cater to them.... well, screw them! This is the new millennium, and tolerance is supposed to be the theme of it.... if they don't like it, don't look. |
cabinfever
| | #20 posted February 20, 2007 at 6:41pm (EST) |
Bill... is the word s-h-i-t and other swear words not automatically being changed by some filter? |
Maarten
| #21 posted February 20, 2007 at 6:47pm (EST)
edited February 20, 2007 at 6:47pm (EST) |
>That is another thing that has gone to hell in this country
Not only in your country. Over here it's exactely the same. Especially with the muslims. After Theo van Gogh was ritually murdered by a muslim the first thing that our prime minister did was visiting a mosque telling the people there the Dutch were still supporting the muslims.
NOT! |
bill
| | #22 posted February 20, 2007 at 9:14pm (EST) |
Maarten wrote:
> Bill, a serious question:
> this is a new survey in qualification: http://surveycentral.org/survey/26425.html
> Shouldn't it be deleted for the same reasons you deleted my avatar?
Ack, I hate being put in this role of the offensive police! 
...that survey is marked offensive, so that actually helps... things that are marked offensive can be blocked so that the ad service agreement isn't affected. But, avatars are everywhere, on all kind of surveys. So, a survey about kid's teddy bears, could have a adult-themed avatar next to someone's post. |
bill
| | #23 posted February 20, 2007 at 9:15pm (EST) |
cabinfever wrote:
> Bill... is the word s-h-i-t and other swear words not automatically
> being changed by some filter?
Yes, but you have to spell it right. On the Customize page, there's a setting for filtering swears. Swears are filtered by default and for guest users. |
romkey
| | #24 posted February 20, 2007 at 9:38pm (EST) |
I'm not offended by boobs... I'm just not really interested in seeing them all the time on SC. I also wouldn't be interested in seeing dicks all the time on SC either... I'm not interested in it being overly sexualized... I prefer it not be. It's easy to ignore surveys... it's impossible to ignore particular avatars. |
cabinfever
| | #25 posted February 21, 2007 at 12:21am (EST) |
bill wrote:
> cabinfever wrote:
>> Bill... is the word s-h-i-t and other
> swear words not automatically
>> being changed by some filter?
>
> Yes, but you have to spell it right. On
> the Customize page, there's a setting for
> filtering swears. Swears are filtered by
> default and for guest users.
Whoops... I checked my Customize page... and somehow the 'filter swear words' option had been changed. That was odd. Kind of funny too. |
romkey
| | #26 posted February 21, 2007 at 8:13am (EST) |
Here we go again... |
bill
| | #27 posted February 21, 2007 at 11:33am (EST) |
cabinfever wrote:
>
> Whoops... I checked my Customize page... and somehow the 'filter swear
> words' option had been changed. That was odd. Kind of funny too.
This was because of a bug that I caused while working on the site in the last week or two. The bug caused a lot of people's customizations (in particular, any of the yes/no options) to get scrambled.
It was talked about here:
Disappearing cusomization? |
cabinfever
| | #28 posted February 21, 2007 at 5:03pm (EST) |
I remember it being talked about, Bill... but it hadn't affected me and you had said you'd fixed the bug, so I had forgotten about it. On top of that, this happened at the same time that you were talking about 'offensive' words and avatars, so I thought that maybe a whole-site filter had been turned on. But it's fixed now. |
RGirl
| | #29 posted February 21, 2007 at 9:13pm (EST) |
Maarten wrote:
> Bill, a serious question:
> this is a new survey in qualification: http://surveycentral.org/survey/26425.html
> Shouldn't it be deleted for the same reasons
> you deleted my avatar?
>
>
People had no choice but to run into and be offended by your avatar. My survey was marked 'offensive' so those who saw it weren't surprised by it's content. |
RGirl
| | #30 posted February 21, 2007 at 9:14pm (EST) |
cabinfever wrote:
> Half the stuff on this site would have to
> be deleted if you got right down to it.
> Anything could be found offensive by
> someone. I didn't mind Maarten's boob
> avatar because I didn't see the knife thing...
> I thought it was someone flipping up her
> shirt. The assault/abuse aspect of it is
> offensive, but not the boobs.
>
Exactly. It wasn't the boobs! |
LindaH
| | #31 posted February 21, 2007 at 11:22pm (EST) |
Pennyann's avatar looks hilarious when I'm listening to music. She's rockin out to Tom Petty! |
cabinfever
| | #32 posted February 21, 2007 at 11:29pm (EST) |
pennyann wrote:
> cabinfever wrote:
>> Half the stuff on this site would have
> to
>> be deleted if you got right down to it.
>
>> Anything could be found offensive
> by
>> someone. I didn't mind Maarten's
> boob
>> avatar because I didn't see the knife
> thing...
>> I thought it was someone flipping up her
>> shirt. The assault/abuse aspect of it
> is
>> offensive, but not the boobs.
>>
> Exactly. It wasn't the boobs!
Besides... there are enough avatars of different ilks on this site that one or two boob avatars don't bother me none. |
RGirl
| | #33 posted February 22, 2007 at 1:28am (EST) |
I like boobs.... |
cabinfever
| | #34 posted February 22, 2007 at 1:45am (EST) |
 |
southernyankee
| | #35 posted February 22, 2007 at 2:09am (EST) |
Maarten wrote:
> I think it's very American to find boobs offensive. Think of it. You
> call one the most beautiful and special parts of a woman offensive.
>
> And this wasn't even a 'real boobs' avatar, it was a cartoon!
>
> What about my previous 'blow job' avatar? Would you ban that too?
What is the Islamic opinion on women's breasts? I know that there are a lot of Muslims in the Netherlands and they on average take their religion more seriously than the US Muslims. Doesn't every nation/continent have something that makes them go hey-wire about? |
Maarten
| | #36 posted February 22, 2007 at 9:59am (EST) |
>Doesn't every nation/continent have something that makes them go hey-wire about?
Sure.
But it's one the differences between the USA and Europe I have always wondered about. Show 1 nipple in a movie and it will get an R or NC17 rating. But shooting people seem to be for all audiences. |
bill
| | #37 posted February 22, 2007 at 10:46am (EST) |
The nipple is mightier than the sword. |
cabinfever
| | #38 posted February 22, 2007 at 12:59pm (EST) |
What I haven't understood since I was a kid... why is it okay to show full frontal nudity of a woman, but not a man? I mean, penises aren't all that attractive, especially with sagging sacks hanging with them, but c'mon... where is the equality in that? It's not like vaginas are cute. |
Iseult
| | #39 posted February 22, 2007 at 2:47pm (EST) |
Maarten wrote:
> Sure.
> But it's one the differences between the USA and
> Europe I have always wondered about. Show 1 nipple
> in a movie and it will get an R or NC17 rating.
> But shooting people seem to be for all audiences.
It's getting more relaxed now. They'll show boobs in PG14. |
bill
| | #40 posted February 22, 2007 at 3:19pm (EST) |
cabinfever wrote:
> why is it okay to show full frontal nudity of a woman, but not a man?
I think it may have something to do with actually seeing the genitalia on a man, whereas, with a woman, you usually just see pubic hair. |
|
|
