Changing the avatar- but notice the hypocrisy

I am totally amazed at the rabid hostility to a animated gif that has drawn so many secretive cry-babies to rally and protest. That avatar is PG or at most PG-13, but because it is ME that is posting it, I am flogged and crucified.

This is becoming a place of MOB RULE, it really is. If the silent and hidden voices of members lurking in shadows can complain long enough and often enough and make threats about leaving the community...this is Star Chamber like activity.

I will change the avatar, but the hypocrisy of certain decisions reeks like a Uruk birthing chamber.

Below here, These pictures have all been posted on this ezboard group in one form or fashion, and are still currently active. I find them utterly worthless and tasteless. My avatar is provocative yes, but is absolutley NOT pornographic. There isn't a law in the US or any other country, save radical muslim ones where this is even a issue.

This is nothing but a blatant witch hunt and its grasping at anything to get me banned.

Here are the pics that are much more offensive and much more pornographic than mine that are currently live on this board, I have copied them and I am hosting them, but they are here in various sub forums:





Sorry Bodie, but also: Bodies Nude Pic Avatar and Direct linking to a large Nude image of his backside.






This so friggin hypocritical. Look at this stuff that is allowed, but apparently mine is so much more worse than these.

Look at this Live thread for more Pornographic images:
Sideshow Freaks Porn thread

HypoCrites

I don't think any of the above images posted are appropriate for this forum.

They should all be removed.

That's his point, they were posted here at one time or another and no one cared before.....

I don't really mind either way and think this has turned into something bigger than it ever should have.

calm down Smaug. Man, no need to get all riled up over this. Yes, I posted one of those pics and probably shouldn't have to be honest. We all have to remember that kids do come here and we need to remember they might see something they shouldn't even if its only suggestive.

I agree with Gruson.

But I do miss those three hot chicks dancing Smaug.

They were nice

Smaug, why do you think provocative is appropriate either?
Is that was this forum is about?
Mob mentality? It is called self policing. That is not a bad thing at all. I have been on many message boards that have had varying degrees of self policing, all with varying levels of success. You got policed, deal with it.
Honestly there is a great difference between Bodie's pic (which is small enough that you aren't sure what you see) and what you had posted.
But you are right fair is fair, if yours are to be removed, his in all fairness should be too.

Feeling targeted? Well when someone constantly acts in a way that is abrasive/contrary to a group or an idividual they get targetted. The question becomes, is it a legitimate complaint or just people complaining to try and get you in trouble.
I saw it as a very valid complaint. You know you come across as abrassive and seem to embrace it. I find it very off putting and not a good way to introduce people to the boards or keep anyone feeling that this is a friendly and welcome place.
You immediately treat people who have a different opionion than yours as stupid or attempt to reduce a complaint as trivial. It is all a matter of subjectivity.

Dave has an obligation to listen to and investigate complaints from the members of this community that he started and will act in the manner that he sees fit.

Wow! Smaug you won't be happy about the pic SamAKALiz posted in this topic:
p078.ezboard.com/fsideshowfreaksfrm20.showMessageRange?topicID=309.topic&start=41&stop=49
:jaw
Talk about inappropriate! And Dave even posted right after and didn't do anything about censoring it!

I think your right Smaug, I feel you are being singled out.

Screamingmetal,

yes I did see that one as well, there are many others that I have not linked to, including an animated .gif of a stripper on a pole dance, No nudity, but she is barely clothed and she is dancing...

Posted by B Electronic -


not to mention the large woman in the pool swimming with a large exposed butt crack and a whisp of gas erupting from her... like a whale spout...

or the naked baby with many fat rolls...Kiddy porn

or the image of the skinny french girl with the G-string hanging out exposed...

or this one by Samakaliz



This one posted by g0zum


And this one again by Samakaliz:



Its a blatant case of double standards, and an capricious and vindictive attempt to punish me for nothing done wrong,

other than upset the hypersensitivities of a VOCAL few.

Some more:

Hot Link to Porn Site with Nudity and Sexual activity:
https://p078.ezboard.com/fsideshowfreaksfrm20.showMessage?topicID=54.topic
<<<Dave Posted in this thread and allowed it>>>

I am sure Dave will be glad you pointed those out.
This only goes to show the types of things that get started and out of control when someone decides that posting stupid pictures all the time instead of appropriate responses.

I am all for fun and posting appropriate pics can be entertaining if kept under control.
But then someone goes all nutso with it and starts doing it all the time, then it doesn't get curtailed and others learn that it is ok to do the same thing until it becomes inappropriate and things like this happen.
Like the saying goes "It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye"

The difference I see is this.

If a thread is offensive to the masses, it quickly slips down the
chain until it falls of the end of the board at page 20.

With an avatar that is in question, it is always there, with every
post, and will constantly be in everyones face.

Do with that what you will..........

JS

not to mention the large woman in the pool swimming with a large exposed butt crack and a whisp of gas erupting from her... like a whale spout...

Click to expand...

I have to see this, where is it posted?

I'm not sure what to say... Am curious to know why my last female pic was removed, when so many others haven't been.

Do I need to put my pants back on?..



*smells finger*

Actually I dont see no hypocrisy in it, sorry.
I didnt complain I thought it was kind of funny, but it reminds me of work. A couple people take a couple minutes extra for lunch one gets caught and the first thing that is said "Well their doing it too."
O well.

Let the banana dance




:vik

I am with JS. Pics can be quickly taken care of by letting a post sink fast and furious to the bottom but avs stay around everytime someone posts.

SO JS, and JLC...and others...

your point is that a image may not be pornographic or obscene if viewed only a few times, but, if that image is viewed repeatedly then it somehow transforms into pornography??? There is no accepted threshold at which an image changes from an acceptable image to an unacceptable one. There is also no distinction between different forum areas. An image that is allowed in one area based on the content of the image is then BANNED in another area???

that is very poor logic.

There is no way that the constrained and limited image of the face in motion that was used as my avatar, would EVER be judged by a rational group as pornographic, especially given the PRECEDENT of allowing other pornographically linked images.

:speech If you want the applicable US LAW, the image I posted woulf have to fail all three of the Miller v. California triple tests on obscenity.

for your reference:

the U.S. Supreme Court defined in Miller v. California in 1973. It is a three-part test, as follows:

"The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be:
(a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, Kois v. Wisconsin, supra, at 230, quoting Roth v. United States, supra, at 489;
(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and
(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

A image must fail on all those three tests to be judged obscene. And my image passes those tests, by any measurable standard.

>>>One of the primary reasons that this has become an issue is that I am the one who had this as an avatar. If someone else of, shall we say, more favorable public opinion, had this posted...it is very doubtful the uproar and behind the scenes scheming would be taking place. There is obviously an agenda behind this...<<<

Even according to the rules of this Forum as described in the FAQ, this is a PG-13 forum, and that image falls within even those MPAA guidelines.

Now, I have been told that the OT area has a bit more leeway regarding images...whats the logic in that? The same people browse the subforums and there is no control or ID check at the click of a link here. Thats a very dubious and meritless argument. If that's the case, let post the latest playmate of the month here then.

I have even recently been told that the image of the rocking face is personally more offensive to someone than even a naked picture...and that follows reasonableness how???? There is no clear and definative image beyond what is shown. the viewer is forced to imagine the remainder...and if you imagine a sex scene...or if this girl is on a mechanical bull...

it's your imagination thats being BANNED here...it your own Thought that is being banned here in this instance.

If this were ever to be argued before a judge in any land in the US, and likely a great many of the Western legal systems in Europe, those calling for a prior restraint and ban on this image would literally be laughed out of court.

My feeling about the pics posted above - if no one complains - it's safe. Call that mob rule or self policing, but in the immortal words of a famous Vulcan - "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the the one." Of course if someone posted something wildly inappropriate it would go to.

When Smaug posted his little picture in a thread it got complaints but since the thread slid off the first page I let it go. But when he made it his avatar, AFTER I'D WARNED HIM ABOUT THAT EXACT PICTURE, it's like a slap in my face.

I'm the most anti-censorship person around and we're not going to be 4-year-old safe here, but there has to be some sort of standard. And I don't care what the obscenity laws of any state or country say - if I say it's inappropriate for this board, then IT IS INAPPROPRIATE.

I've modifed the FAQ too - everyone should check it out.

There is a difference between the NEEDs and the WANTs. This is not an issue of NEEDs. And that famous Vulcan also learned that the needs of the One outweighed the needs of the many too.

This is an issue of policing Smaug and to use the image of a rocking FACE is the tool that is being used to do that.

The protesters are using CENSORSHIP to accomplish this.

If no one complains???

The measurement of "SAFE" is if no one complains????

You have got to be kidding me...

This is THE classic phrase of the Censor...and Dave, your idea of a community standard is hypocritical... You define some as having to go as "wildly inappropriate." But the images that you allow...GO BEYOND

its one standard for Smaug, and another for everyone else.

Dave, honestly, you are being used...and you don't even see it.

I never got a request from you to remove the image until 12/28. the communication you previously sent to me that I have in my inbox on 12/23 only indicates "A little much don't you think? Or should I just put in one of my puppy pics?" I never slapped you in the face, and I don't appreciate the misrepresentation in your post above.

Dave,
Am I to assume that there were complaints about my Santa/Breast pic? I thought it was cute and well done. Oops. Sorry.

Also, if I were to post a warning and a link (that someone had to click on in order to see the image) would that be okay?

sam


Smaug, I can't help feeling that you are being singled out, since I have posted stuff, too. I never felt that anyone was objecting to mine... Maybe it's the ole' double standard since I'm a woman? :\

I posted one of the pics your complaining about Smaug and you know what I shouldn't have. Why? Because in the big picture you have to think of everyone that may be watching. As far as your Avatar it didn't bother me but when I saw it the first thing that came to my mind was of someone having sex. 99.9% of anyone seeing that is gonna come to that conclusion. Therefore that av shouldn't be their nor the one you had with two chicks in thongs, nor bodie and his nake butt. These don't bother ME personally but they may bother someone else and you have to respect those that it bothers.