| Guilty or Not? |
| Guilty |
|
100% |
[ 3 ] |
| Not Guilty |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 3 |
|
| Author |
Message |
oar
Super Maiq the Liar
Joined: 23 May 2007
Posts: 17919
HP: 100 MP: 10 Lives: 0
|
 Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 3:26 pm
|
 |
|
| Kaim Argonar wrote: | | Pfargtl wrote: | | Kaim Argonar wrote: | | Also, if we're talking about striking things for being disturbing, why not Popple's image in the same topic? I mean, certainly, there's plenty of people who'll find that insanely disturbing, as well. |
Popple didn't even post his image for education. |
And thus, my point is even further backed up.
Seriously, guys, this shouldn't be striked. We have "inappropriate content" rules to prevent sexual material from finding its way on a site with plenty of young people, not because we believe certain human body parts or growths are evil. |
The reason I voted Guilty is because of this:
-The topic had nothing to do with the disease, meaning there was no reason to 'educate' us on it just because of an image derail.
-Even if it is educational, it's still directly showing genitals with [img] tags.
-Again, the topic had nothing to do with elephantitis and doesn't even have an [M] tag, meaning any member who doesn't want to see a giant ballsack has no knowledge that there is a picture of...that.
-When it comes to this stuff, images that have obscene content, I'm pretty sure Francis said it has to be linked to with a warning, since the user wouldn't have any say in whether they want to see it or not like they would with a YouTube video.
Last edited by Super Maiq the Liar on Fri May 01, 2009 6:35 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fat Tuper
lovegod703
Joined: 06 May 2008
Posts: 5515
HP: 10 MP: 6 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 6:19 pm
|
|
|
I didn't see the picture. I changed my mind, it's guilty.
———————————> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ERECTIN' A DICK
Miku Hatsune
Vampire
Joined: 05 Jun 2007
Posts: 13497
HP: 5 MP: 4 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 7:17 pm
|
|
|
|
Not guilty....Educational and plus some of you should expect things like this, it's the internet, it's not like any of you haven't seen a penis before. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sync
MALAK
Joined: 01 Aug 2007
Posts: 34747
HP: 10 MP: 2 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 9:37 pm
|
|
|
| Joshua wrote: | | Not guilty....Educational and plus some of you should expect things like this, it's the internet, it's not like any of you haven't seen a penis before. |
Yes, but this is digibutter. Stuff like this has been shunned from the community ever since it started. So what, we should know when someone is going to post something like this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cid
Lord Krump
Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Posts: 7880
HP: 60 MP: 2 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 9:45 pm
|
|
|
| Sync Man wrote: | | Joshua wrote: | | Not guilty....Educational and plus some of you should expect things like this, it's the internet, it's not like any of you haven't seen a penis before. |
Yes, but this is digibutter. Stuff like this has been shunned from the community ever since it started. So what, we should know when someone is going to post something like this? |
Technically, vulgar or pornographic images are shunned from digibutter.
Educational or geographical images are not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sync
MALAK
Joined: 01 Aug 2007
Posts: 34747
HP: 10 MP: 2 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 9:48 pm
|
|
|
| Kaim Argonar wrote: | | Sync Man wrote: | | Joshua wrote: | | Not guilty....Educational and plus some of you should expect things like this, it's the internet, it's not like any of you haven't seen a penis before. |
Yes, but this is digibutter. Stuff like this has been shunned from the community ever since it started. So what, we should know when someone is going to post something like this? |
Technically, vulgar or pornographic images are shunned from digibutter.
Educational or geographical images are not. |
it's still a penis
something we dont see commonly |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cid
Lord Krump
Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Posts: 7880
HP: 60 MP: 2 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 9:57 pm
|
|
|
| Sync Man wrote: | | Kaim Argonar wrote: | | Sync Man wrote: | | Joshua wrote: | | Not guilty....Educational and plus some of you should expect things like this, it's the internet, it's not like any of you haven't seen a penis before. |
Yes, but this is digibutter. Stuff like this has been shunned from the community ever since it started. So what, we should know when someone is going to post something like this? |
Technically, vulgar or pornographic images are shunned from digibutter.
Educational or geographical images are not. |
it's still a penis
something we dont see commonly |
Guys see penises whenever they're in the shower, girls see penises when they're with their boyfriends, we all see penises when we see the most famous artistic sculptures...
Again, there's confusion regarding the difference between inappropriate, vulgar usage of nudity and nudity that is acceptable in most- if not all- scenarios. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWA
Francine
Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 8580
HP: 78 MP: 4 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 10:05 pm
|
|
|
This site could pretty much be classified as PG13. Nudity in PG13 movies are usually constricted to an ass crack, that's IT.
It was completely inappropriate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cid
Lord Krump
Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Posts: 7880
HP: 60 MP: 2 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 10:07 pm
|
|
|
| Francine wrote: | This site could pretty much be classified as PG13. Nudity in PG13 movies are usually constricted to an ass crack, that's IT.
It was completely inappropriate. |
Actually, the showing of male genetalia is allowed in PG-13 films as long as it isn't incredibly detailed.
The Simpsons Movie is a good recent example. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fat Tuper
lovegod703
Joined: 06 May 2008
Posts: 5515
HP: 10 MP: 6 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 10:09 pm
|
|
|
| Kaim Argonar wrote: | | Francine wrote: | This site could pretty much be classified as PG13. Nudity in PG13 movies are usually constricted to an ass crack, that's IT.
It was completely inappropriate. |
Actually, showing male genetalia is allowed in PG-13 films as long as it isn't incredibly detailed.
The Simpsons Movie is a good recent example. |
The Simpsons Movie didn't do that. They showed a coffee cup or something, instead.
Coffee Mug ≠ Penis
———————————> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cid
Lord Krump
Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Posts: 7880
HP: 60 MP: 2 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 10:10 pm
|
|
|
| Fat Tuper wrote: | | Kaim Argonar wrote: | | Francine wrote: | This site could pretty much be classified as PG13. Nudity in PG13 movies are usually constricted to an ass crack, that's IT.
It was completely inappropriate. |
Actually, showing male genetalia is allowed in PG-13 films as long as it isn't incredibly detailed.
The Simpsons Movie is a good recent example. |
The Simpsons Movie didn't do that. They showed a coffee cup or something, instead.
Coffee Mug ≠ Penis
———————————> |
No, they did show it. Go back and re-watch it; the part where he's skating past the fence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
~A color is just a color~
Frozenwinters
Joined: 30 Aug 2007
Posts: 25292
HP: 1 MP: 0 Lives: 4
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 10:11 pm
|
|
|
|
Screw it. Shit wont get done. Zelnor your-a going to the slammer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fat Tuper
lovegod703
Joined: 06 May 2008
Posts: 5515
HP: 10 MP: 6 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 10:13 pm
|
|
|
| Kaim Argonar wrote: | | Fat Tuper wrote: | | Kaim Argonar wrote: | | Francine wrote: | This site could pretty much be classified as PG13. Nudity in PG13 movies are usually constricted to an ass crack, that's IT.
It was completely inappropriate. |
Actually, showing male genetalia is allowed in PG-13 films as long as it isn't incredibly detailed.
The Simpsons Movie is a good recent example. |
The Simpsons Movie didn't do that. They showed a coffee cup or something, instead.
Coffee Mug ≠ Penis
———————————> |
No, they did show it. Go back and re-watch it; the part where he's skating past the fence. |
The horizontal bar covered it. You go back and re-watch, it's no shown.
And besides, that picture shows it in detail.
———————————> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
~A color is just a color~
Frozenwinters
Joined: 30 Aug 2007
Posts: 25292
HP: 1 MP: 0 Lives: 4
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 10:37 pm
|
|
|
Okay, because I've gotten enough bullshit in the chat against me I'll explain my position.
Of course I know that Zelnor only deserves a strike. Of course I know Zelnor is a good member who has a lot of respect. Of course he SHOULDN'T be jailed. But he is, and it's to prove a point.
He posted inappropriate content. ( Hell, PE was jailed for posting one nipple. ONE NIPPLE PEOPLE. ) However, it was under the subject of "educational", yes, something easily abused. And I feared that witty members that you guys are, would abuse this. And it happened.
So I jailed sync for educating us on erections. But was that just? I mean Zelnor educated us on the elephantiasis of a male's genitalia. That's still porn, right? Yes, I mean, it was very graphic. I figured if I jailed Sync, and only sync, there would be a biased uproar. Digibutter as we know it would crumble even more. There would be "educational porn" every corner we looked. Everywhere. I had to do something to show that this was not acceptable.
The flip side to this is that people are uproaring because Zelnor does not deserve to be in jail. This is true. He will not be jailed for long, do not flip shit.
I'll take questions from people who are not Cid or Vid. (: |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWA
Francine
Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 8580
HP: 78 MP: 4 Lives: 0
|
| Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 10:49 pm
|
|
|
I still find that "educational" is not a real excuse. On Discovery Channel they censor horse penises.
I would've done the same thing as FW and jail Zelnor. His crime is posting nudity. Sync did the same. They received the same punishment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
