| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/18/2007 11:36:57 PM · #251 |
Originally posted by amathiasphoto:
Arrgh. If it offends you, then dont vote. If a playboy offends you, dont read it.
Furthermore, saying that "this is when the dark side of DPC comes out" is rediculous. Just because things arent going how you want doesnt mean that there is an ugly side to dpc |
DPC is sometimes like a rotten step-child, it kicks you in the balls every now and then, but in the end, you still love them.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2007 12:15:28 AM · #252 |
This thread looks like it is going nowhere fast. Just a couple of things. Everybody is just saying the same things over and over and over and over again. This is getting people upset more than it is helping anybody. I think that the SC has heard all the arguments they are going to hear, so lets drop it, and if they think something needs to change, they will change it.
Yes, making a change will skew voting, but so will a host of other factors, that are already in play. Yes, I would love that my filter worked in voting as well, because although I am a responsible adult, that doesn't vote at work, and is careful about what his kids see, I still just don't want to see it. However, I realize that nudity is part of the site, I knew that coming in, and I will take measures to avoid it personally as much as I can.
I don't think there is anything new to add, except that it has been driving me crazy to see people misspelling ridiculous, there is a spell check when you make your post, use it. It isn't rediculous, it is ridiculous. Sorry, I just had to throw that in.
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 00:16:23. |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 12:18:15 AM · #253 |
Originally posted by travis_cooper:
This thread looks like it is going nowhere fast. Just a couple of things. Everybody is just saying the same things over and over and over and over again. This is getting people upset more than it is helping anybody. I think that the SC has heard all the arguments they are going to hear, so lets drop it, and if they think something needs to change, they will change it.
Yes, making a change will skew voting, but so will a host of other factors, that are already in play. Yes, I would love that my filter worked in voting as well, because although I am a responsible adult, that doesn't vote at work, and is careful about what his kids see, I still just don't want to see it. However, I realize that nudity is part of the site, I knew that coming in, and I will take measures to avoid it personally as much as I can.
I don't think there is anything new to add, except that it has been driving me crazy to see people misspelling ridiculous, there is a spell check when you make your post, use it. It isn't rediculous, it is ridiculous. Sorry, I just had to throw that in. |
Shut up newbie.
.
Kidding, kidding. I'm just being redikuluss. Welcome to DPC. |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 12:23:07 AM · #254 |
Originally posted by dudephil:
Shut up newbie.
.
Kidding, kidding. I'm just being redikuluss. Welcome to DPC. |
Ouch that hurts. I think somebody already alluded to the fact that I'm new saying I shouldn't have a say because I'm not a paying member and I haven't entered any challenges. Heck, I just found this site about a week ago, give me a chance to see if I like it. And for the record I have entered a challenge, it is being voted on now, so there.
ETA: BTW I like what I have seen from the site so far. I like the opportunity to step away from what I normally shoot and think about new ways to use my camera.
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 00:25:18. |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 12:25:28 AM · #255 |
Originally posted by travis_cooper:
Originally posted by dudephil:
Shut up newbie.
.
Kidding, kidding. I'm just being redikuluss. Welcome to DPC. |
Ouch that hurts. I think somebody already alluded to the fact that I'm new saying I shouldn't have a say because I'm not a paying member and I haven't entered any challenges. Heck, I just found this site about a week ago, give me a chance to see if I like it. And for the record I have entered a challenge, it is being voted on now, so there. |
I think you may have missed the kidding, kidding part. :D |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 12:26:37 AM · #256 |
Originally posted by dudephil:
I think you may have missed the kidding, kidding part. :D |
I saw it, I just wanted to make you sweat a little, not knowing if you just made me mad or not. You didn't(just so you know). |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 12:33:57 AM · #257 |
ok phil, be nice to the newbies... let him pay his membership before we hang him :-)
|
|
|
|
10/19/2007 12:40:16 AM · #258 |
If your workplace would can you for looking at nudes, they probably will be even less thrilled that you spend hours voting on images.
If you object so strongly to nudity, do you get dressed in the dark? What about in the shower? Have you seen your spouse naked? What about your kids? Do you not change diapers?
And for god's sake, when you go abroad avoid the beaches in Europe, those amoral European women don't wear tops.
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 00:40:43. |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 12:40:46 AM · #259 |
Originally posted by travis_cooper:
Originally posted by dudephil:
I think you may have missed the kidding, kidding part. :D |
I saw it, I just wanted to make you sweat a little, not knowing if you just made me mad or not. You didn't(just so you know). |
Welcome! I think you're going to survive just fine around here :) |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 12:41:07 AM · #260 |
How can you say that Nude pictures will get less votes when the Nude Galleries is the most viewed gallery? Judging by the comments made here, a lot of people do like to look at nude pictures. Can SC tell us the number of people who put up their flags up and the number who haven't?
|
|
|
|
10/19/2007 12:42:09 AM · #261 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
And for god's sake, when you go abroad avoid the beaches in Europe, those amoral European women don't wear tops. |
Damn it man would you quit saying things I like in this thread :-)
|
|
|
|
10/19/2007 12:48:28 AM · #262 |
Originally posted by Gotaka:
How can you say that Nude pictures will get less votes when the Nude Galleries is the most viewed gallery? Judging by the comments made here, a lot of people do like to look at nude pictures. Can SC tell us the number of people who put up their flags up and the number who haven't? |
The point that was being made is that if the nude images were hidden (or somehow marked to pass over) during the voting stage, then they would get less votes than the other entries.
It is important IMO that all images get the same treatment during the voting stage. Very important. That's why we have them show up in different random order for everyone, why there is no fixed order for them on the voting pages (so no picture gets the advantage of being seen first or beeing seen next to whatever other picture).
IMO, if it is that important for someone to not see a nude while voting at work, well, don't vote at work, leave it for another time. Or scan the pictures from the thumbnails first, if they're "safe", well, vote while working (if your employer has no problem with that - it would be sinful to steal time from your employer). Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:04:17 AM · #263 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by Gotaka:
How can you say that Nude pictures will get less votes when the Nude Galleries is the most viewed gallery? Judging by the comments made here, a lot of people do like to look at nude pictures. Can SC tell us the number of people who put up their flags up and the number who haven't? |
The point that was being made is that if the nude images were hidden (or somehow marked to pass over) during the voting stage, then they would get less votes than the other entries.
|
If someone doesn't like nude pictures and it pops up. They won't give it a fair rate. Most likely a 1. Would you rather have it get a 1 or no vote at all. Because a 1 will skew the results far worse than not voting on that image.
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 01:05:30. |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:04:31 AM · #264 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by smurfguy:
I think MikeJ explained the voting skew issue pretty well a few posts up. It just won't make a huge difference - if anything make adult images graded on a more fair scale.
|
Nudity, violence, snakes easting rats are all moral based arguments, and thus you can not find a universal answer. You can make compromises, but no single answer will appease all. |
Although in some ways, you are right, it is a moral issue. But in others, it's a legal issue. There are laws on the books in some states that make nudity illegal because nudity is considered porn. The art issue doesn't fly. Some of the Southern states have had court cases about this. In some countries it is also illegal and people could die or go to prision (which equates to just about the same thing in some countries). I'm pretty sure that places like these do not have people viewing DPC, but there are places in the world where nudity is not just a moral issue.
But you are also right that it's not an easy answer... well, actually it is an easy answer since there is a method already in place that just needs to be tweaked to let those that don't want to accidently view nudity, choose the time and place where they do want to view it, if at all. But as it appears from what I'm reading, the SC's are saying that it's not going to change and the only choice those that those that want the filtering added to the voting have... is to not vote at all. So the question is, how do they know that they don't want to vote in a challenge unless they look and if they look and there is nudity there, then they have run into the same situation they are trying to avoid. So the only answer is that they never vote.
So how many members does this exclude from voting? 1%? 10%? 25%? More? I don't know. If they can't vote and the challenges are what they are here for, that means they might leave. So then it becomes a loose/loose/loose situation. They have lost, DPC has lost and other members have lost. That really sounds like a ill thought out solution to this problem.
Maybe really what needs to happen is that everyone that objects to nudes to start voting 1's every time they show up. If there are enough people (and if they get riled up enough by some of the comments people have made in this thread about them, they will come out of the wood work) this is going to skew the voting so bad that there might never be another nude make the top 10, let alone a ribbon. Not a fair solution, no, but it sure would be a visible response that would indicate how many don't like it the way it is. Not that it will happen in any great numbers probably. But even a few will affect the voting one way or another.
But even if it was just a moral issue, respecting other people's morals is just as important as respecting their cultural, religous and personal beliefs. And even if nothing changes, respect of others should still be given... by all sides of any issue.
Mike
|
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:13:45 AM · #265 |
Originally posted by MikeJ:
Although in some ways, you are right, it is a moral issue. But in others, it's a legal issue. There are laws on the books in some states that make nudity illegal because nudity is considered porn. The art issue doesn't fly. |
Actually, the only state that matters is the one the server is in. In this case Virginia. If the content is illegal, in Alabama, it is my responsibility and consequently I that would be punished.
So, that argument doesn't fly. View the site in China and you might end up dead. View it in Alabama and you might end up with your sister.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:16:10 AM · #266 |
Originally posted by Gotaka:
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by Gotaka:
How can you say that Nude pictures will get less votes when the Nude Galleries is the most viewed gallery? Judging by the comments made here, a lot of people do like to look at nude pictures. Can SC tell us the number of people who put up their flags up and the number who haven't? |
The point that was being made is that if the nude images were hidden (or somehow marked to pass over) during the voting stage, then they would get less votes than the other entries.
|
If someone doesn't like nude pictures and it pops up. They won't give it a fair rate. Most likely a 1. Would you rather have it get a 1 or no vote at all. Because a 1 will skew the results far worse than not voting on that image. |
He, he, no I don't think it quite happens like that. But even if it did, I think a "1", especially a "1" with a comment, would be preferable to having some category of images not even appear during voting.
It is true that nudes get more than their share of low votes, but by the same token they also get more than their share of high votes, both of the extremes for pretty much the same reasons. It sorta balances out in the end. But it is important that all images be treated the same way by those presenting them for voting, regardless of the prejudices of the voters.
[edited spelling :) ]
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 01:16:55. |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:18:58 AM · #267 |
Originally posted by ursula:
It is true that nudes get more than their share of low votes, but by the same token they also get more than their share of high votes, both of the extremes for pretty much the same reasons. It sorta balances out in the end. But it is important that all images be treated the same way by those presenting them for voting, regardless of the prejudices of the voters.
|
I think this should be repeated bunches and bunches of times.
Now ya'll I'm all for an unfair advantage in my court. But, you guys really need to listen to all the SC here that have essentially made this same statement.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:20:28 AM · #268 |
Originally posted by MikeJ:
.... And even if nothing changes, respect of others should still be given... by all sides of any issue.
Mike |
And that is another reason why I think it is so important to make all images entered to a challenge available the same way during voting: respect for the photographers entering the images. They all deserve the same respect for their images during the voting stage from those presenting the images. DPC doesn't prohibit images of nudes. There is no reason to treat nudes any different during the voting stage than let's say flowers or black/whites. |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:24:56 AM · #269 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
And for god's sake, when you go abroad avoid the beaches in Europe, those amoral European women don't wear tops. |
Damn it man would you quit saying things I like in this thread :-) |
...and in some places they just forgo the bikini completely |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:27:46 AM · #270 |
I have no intention of discussing this issue due to religious reasons, however, I do want to voice my opinion regarding the issue.
I would like to see the nude images hidden from voters, unless they click on a link. I say this because I view this site while at work as well as at home. While at work there are strict regulations concerning internet usage. Sites that are not allowed by the military are already blocked so that they can not be viewed while I am at work. Sites like this that I can view are not blocked under regulations. But viewing nude images is still not allowed.
So, I would like the nude images blocked until I choose to view them at home.
I will also add that I spent most of my time voting while at work. After coming across some nudes during voting I have had to stop that, and since have not voted much. |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:27:46 AM · #271 |
[/quote] He, he, no I don't think it quite happens like that. But even if it did, I think a "1", especially a "1" with a comment, would be preferable to having some category of images not even appear during voting.
It is true that nudes get more than their share of low votes, but by the same token they also get more than their share of high votes, both of the extremes for pretty much the same reasons. It sorta balances out in the end. But it is important that all images be treated the same way by those presenting them for voting, regardless of the prejudices of the voters.
[edited spelling :) ] [/quote]
With that comment, you've essentially revived what everyone seems to be opposing. Someone forcing someone else's values upon them as they are some higher moral authority or some deeply insightful governor. You state that it is important for everyone to see the images and treat them the same way. With that, have YOU not imposed your values upon others? Is that any different and how is it more right than being given an opportunity to filter what you choose to vote on? And regarding the low votes given to nudes, we at DPC know there are no such things as trolls. ;-) |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:31:06 AM · #272 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by MikeJ:
.... And even if nothing changes, respect of others should still be given... by all sides of any issue.
Mike |
And that is another reason why I think it is so important to make all images entered to a challenge available the same way during voting: respect for the photographers entering the images. They all deserve the same respect for their images during the voting stage from those presenting the images. DPC doesn't prohibit images of nudes. There is no reason to treat nudes any different during the voting stage than let's say flowers or black/whites. |
This is the thing that bothers me with those 'folks' who use the Christian argument. Respect your neighbor, right? Just because he chooses a different lifestyle, doesn't mean he's not your neighbor. You still RESPECT HIM, otherwise stop calling yourself a Christian.
Damn did I just send this thread to rant? I guess it borders on such... |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:37:10 AM · #273 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
DPC should add this disclaimer that requires a check box when you sign up for an account:
DPC is not responsible for your dumb ass if you get fired for screwing off at work when you should be working. |
Or if God strikes you dead and sends you straight to Hell for looking at a nude. |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:37:35 AM · #274 |
I think I asked once, but it is ignored: (question aimed at the opponents of nudes in the challenges)
Why isolate nude images? Is this the worst thing that can happen to you - to see a scantily clad or a naked male/female body?
I argue that there is equal or better chance of seeing something equally objectionable, yet conforming to ToS in any challenge. It just depends on the viewer whether it will be considered objectionable to others as well.
Isolating only one of dozens of objectionable categories serves no purpose other than to satisfy the loudest complainers.
Implementing a feature won't do a thing because some photogs will not readily mark their images as 'nude' unless it is a DQable offense. You will still run into these. And requiring SC to sift through all images at the rollover would mean that they would have to start being salaried, as no sane person would go through 500+ entries a week trying to determine moral value of a photo.
DPC has no liability in protecting you from getting fired, nor it has any responsibility in safeguarding your soul. If we decide to give DPC authority to protect us from getting excited, then I would like to add a few requests in the form of custom checkboxes:
brunettes
blondes
redheads
other (please specify)
males
females
other (please specify)
18-25 yrs
26-35 yrs
>35
I would then ask Langdon to quickly code something up in SQL to produce only images that satisfy my requirements, and add some NLQ to also take into account the two comment fields...
Heck, we could require users to put in something like this in their profiles:
SELECT * FROM challengeEntries WHERE (put your preferences here)
This would work great except - it would skew votes.
Leave it as is. Please. It is not broken. |
|
|
|
10/19/2007 01:44:04 AM · #275 |
You know, Ursula and I are about as far apart in styles and subject matter as two artists can get. Yet, we openly share mutual admiration of one another's work.
Sometimes, I look at her work and wish I could somehow merge it with my own.
Good art, is good art, no matter the subject matter or style. Why try to shut the doors on some art?
Message edited by author 2007-10-19 01:46:58.
|
|
