| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/23/2002 07:22:41 AM · #51 |
Personally, I have no problem with anything anybody wants to photograph and I haven't seen anything at this site that particularly piques my sensibilities or surprises me.
But...there is a good point made that if an image offends, bores or just agitates and its a winner then people have no choice but to have that image thrown at them all week long. Maybe an option to have the winning photo blocked with a generic DPC logo or something as part of your options could help out those folks that want such a thing.
I believe paganini is correct though..less attractive people in nude photographs do receive lower scores or do not get photographed at all....Just like less attractive people make better homeless photographs, cuter kids get photographed more, fat people get singled out as sinners or grotesque...etc, etc, etc,,,,,,,, I see all kinds of stereotypes and manipulative photography ..it should all get equal complaint time >:-D |
|
|
|
10/23/2002 07:44:22 AM · #52 |
Originally posted by hokie:
But...there is a good point made that if an image offends, bores or just agitates and its a winner then people have no choice but to have that image thrown at them all week long. Maybe an option to have the winning photo blocked with a generic DPC logo or something as part of your options could help out those folks that want such a thing.
I agree - think of those of us who work in an open plan office. Even if a winner doesn't offend me I can't speak for the rest of the people here who may see the image when I go to check my score.
How about an option to show your own entry rather than the winner?
Paul
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 07:49:45 AM · #53 |
My problem is a bit more practical. I do some of my voting at work. The internet policy here is reasonable, but it certainly doesnt extend to downloading porn. So I have a very real choice here, risk my job (and my house, lifestyle, etc), or simply dont visit DPC from work which means I wont finish voting and commenting.
And thats one issue the Administrators will have to face, potentially losing voters vs. imposing censorship.
For me, a technical solution (e.g. blocking the viewing of adult pictures via a cookie on my work machine) would be the most preferable.
Originally posted by hokie:
Personally, I have no problem with anything anybody wants to photograph and I haven't seen anything at this site that particularly piques my sensibilities or surprises me.
But...there is a good point made that if an image offends, bores or just agitates and its a winner then people have no choice but to have that image thrown at them all week long. Maybe an option to have the winning photo blocked with a generic DPC logo or something as part of your options could help out those folks that want such a thing.
I believe paganini is correct though..less attractive people in nude photographs do receive lower scores or do not get photographed at all....Just like less attractive people make better homeless photographs, cuter kids get photographed more, fat people get singled out as sinners or grotesque...etc, etc, etc,,,,,,,, I see all kinds of stereotypes and manipulative photography ..it should all get equal complaint time >:-D
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 08:03:25 AM · #54 |
Originally posted by UberFish:
My problem is a bit more practical. I do some of my voting at work. The internet policy here is reasonable, but it certainly doesnt extend to downloading porn. So I have a very real choice here, risk my job (and my house, lifestyle, etc), or simply dont visit DPC from work which means I wont finish voting and commenting
I have a similar problem.
For me, a technical solution (e.g. blocking the viewing of adult pictures via a cookie on my work machine) would be the most preferable.
Who decides on which pictures are 'adult'? The only way to do it safely is to allow each user to select which photos to suppress. But something like that is not going to be implemented overnight!
Cheers,
Tim
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/23/2002 8:01:20 AM.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 08:03:40 AM · #55 |
If it really is a question of losing members or imnposing some form of censorship, then the membership should fall because freedom of speech is way more important than how many members there are.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 08:07:08 AM · #56 |
Originally posted by Jak:
If it really is a question of losing members or imnposing some form of censorship, then the membership should fall because freedom of speech is way more important than how many members there are.
Agreed, but freedom of speech won't encourage prospective advertisers as much as numbers of members! No advertisers could eventually mean no site!
Tim
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 08:21:36 AM · #57 |
Originally posted by Jak:
If it really is a question of losing members or imnposing some form of censorship, then the membership should fall because freedom of speech is way more important than how many members there are.
So where do you draw your particular censorship line, Jak ? I'm sure
you have one.
I don't actually see anyone else bringing up censorship anyway, I see
people asking for a way to personally select which images they see. No-one was asking them to be DQed, or removed, or generally to be
censored.
Just as in the way playgirl is allowed to publish lots of naked pictures
of men, I have the right to choose to not purchase it. Choice is not
an evil that should be fought against.
I think a voluntary classification on submission would work - 'check
this box if this picture has adult content' then voters could have a
preference to see adult content or not. Things the moderators felt
were in that category could be moved over into that classification.
Not blocking anything, just giving more degrees of choice.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 08:40:05 AM · #58 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
So where do you draw your particular censorship line, Jak ? I'm sure
you have one
No, Gordon, I have no "line" because you cannot have a "little bit" of censorship. Censorship is censorship is censorship.
I do, however, support some technical method by which viewers can choose to see or not see images. The problem is, as someone pointed out above, you have to see the image before you can tell you don't want to see it!
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 09:28:27 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by Jak:
Originally posted by Gordon:
[i]So where do you draw your particular censorship line, Jak ? I'm sure
you have one
No, Gordon, I have no "line" because you cannot have a "little bit" of censorship. Censorship is censorship is censorship.
[/i]
While I can appreciate the sentiment, I find it unlikely in the extreme, as currently stated.
Do you feel there should be no restrictions whatsoever on the photographs allowed ? Any and all subject matter would be suitable for
submission ? Violent acts, bizzare and unsual (for any definition) types of pornography etc ? As long as it wasn't an illegal act you'd
be happy for it to be submitted to DPC ?
but anyway - I think a voluntary 'opt in' rating scheme would probably
work okay - people would be able to 'self censor' that catagory, which
was marked as being open to 'adult' themes.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 09:30:03 AM · #60 |
i think having the option to turn off what i don't want to see so i can continue to read the forums without grimacing/or averting my eyes as the site opens until i can scroll down to the posts, would be a good thing ...no offense meant to the takers of the girlie photos, they're excellent, it's just that i am oh-so-tired of female bodies being thrust upon my eyes every time i get on the web, or open a magazine, or turn on the tv...'course if it were male bodies, i'd feel differently -- so like i said, having the option of turning it off, having the choice not to look, would be a good thing :o)
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 09:47:00 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by paganini:
Originally posted by rapsiii3:
[i]
Who is calling for censorship? I just want to be able to block the picture of my choice from being presented to my vision every time I log on!You think that you have the right to stand in the town square and shout anything that you want. OK, fine. But what about my rights not to be presented with offense. This is the problem with freedom of speach.
First of all, learn to spell. It's S-P-E-E-C-H, not speach, so do that before you SPEAK :) And if you think there is a problem with free speech, go live in another country. I am sure Iraq would love you there. After all, i don't think the truly devout and radical muslims like nudes either.
Secondly, if you don't like the photos, you can either vote a 1 and move on, or just don't vote. I'd rather be able to look at what people are presenting than to following some anal-retentive rule because it hurts your feelings. If i have to looking furry teddy bears each week, I think you can stand to look at some nudes.
I'll make you a deal: you stop bitching about nudes and i'll stop complaining about cute cuddly photos :) OK?
[/i]
I like nudes just fine Paggie'. Didn't ask for any rules, just a choice for myself. That's is not censorship. And I don't have a problem with free speech. What I have a problem with is the idea that just because you have the right to say it, somehow requires me to have to hear it, over and over. Of course you have the right to be rude. So do I. But I'll exercise my freedom of choice here and just say thank you for correcting my spelling. It is a kind service which you may feel free to preforme anytime. In fact, you may kindly service me right now... |
|
|
|
10/23/2002 11:02:35 AM · #62 |
this isnt a totally public place, though. this is more like a club. there is membership here, and various disclaimers are likely to be introduced at the time of sign-up in the next iteration of the site.
ultimately, a decision will be made as to what option(s) suit the best interests of the site and its members.
however, it really has nothing to do with censorship. it's not because of censorship that every movie isnt filled with graphic sex. or every grocery store you go to doesnt have posters of people being dismembered.
it has a lot more to do with target audience and appropriate venue.
and as for the question "what defines if something is too adult?", the fact is that there are many ready-made scales in existence (movie ratings come to mind right off the bat) that define step by step and in great detail what is and isnt over the line. it would be easy enough to adapt one, once an appropriate 'level' is decided upon.
thanks for your input : )
Originally posted by Jak:
Originally posted by Gordon:
[i]So where do you draw your particular censorship line, Jak ? I'm sure
you have one
No, Gordon, I have no "line" because you cannot have a "little bit" of censorship. Censorship is censorship is censorship.
I do, however, support some technical method by which viewers can choose to see or not see images. The problem is, as someone pointed out above, you have to see the image before you can tell you don't want to see it!
[/i]
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 11:10:02 AM · #63 |
Just a quick (and final) reminder since it seems appropriate:
Discussion of the topic at hand is more than welcome, personal attacks are not. Please keep this in mind when posting.
-Terry
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/23/2002 11:09:26 AM.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 11:16:44 AM · #64 |
Originally posted by rapsiii3:
Sorry for the graphic description of my reaction Lisae. But you did a wonderful job of summing up my basic reaction. Gross! That is the word.
rapsiii,
I shot the photograph your refering to and although I agree one should have the right to comment or discuss whater topic we feel, I find very offensive the way you describe my photo. I undestand that is what it feels to YOU, but I think we all deserve a bit of respect.
respectfully,
LM
PS:
Site Etiquette
Constructive criticism and competition are more than welcome on the site. Blatant instances of slander, profanity, vulgarity, or other personal attacks anywhere on the site will not be tolerated. This is a website for people of all ages and skill levels to have fun and improve their photography. All we ask is that you treat others with the respect they deserve. don't t |
|
|
|
10/23/2002 01:08:56 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by UberFish:
My problem is a bit more practical. I do some of my voting at work. The internet policy here is reasonable, but it certainly doesnt extend to downloading porn. So I have a very real choice here, risk my job (and my house, lifestyle, etc), or simply dont visit DPC from work which means I wont finish voting and commenting.
The real solution is simple: education. There is NO PORN here. Nothing to be ashamed of. Nothing to hide. Nothing that would risk anyone's job.
Those of you out there who use their office to vote on the photos because of internet access problems, surely your coworkers have seen you do it in the past? Surely you don't hide doing that? Surely you had a conversation or two about photography, what camera to purchase, what computer to buy to do image editing, etc.? Surely you can talk about DPChallenge and tell people how great it is to be able to enter your photos and get comments from usres in order to learn new skills?
There are 250+ photos submitted this week. Less than 10 are considered by some to be "edgy", whatever that term means. In all due respect, I think there is a VERY LONG stretch between a porn site and DPChallenge.com . Stop hiding. Educate.
Martin
aka. DrJOnes |
|
|
|
10/23/2002 01:16:13 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by timwatts:
Originally posted by UberFish:
[i]My problem is a bit more practical. I do some of my voting at work. The internet policy here is reasonable, but it certainly doesnt extend to downloading porn. So I have a very real choice here, risk my job (and my house, lifestyle, etc), or simply dont visit DPC from work which means I wont finish voting and commenting
I have a similar problem.
For me, a technical solution (e.g. blocking the viewing of adult pictures via a cookie on my work machine) would be the most preferable.
Who decides on which pictures are 'adult'? The only way to do it safely is to allow each user to select which photos to suppress. But something like that is not going to be implemented overnight!
Cheers,
Tim[/i]
There is something "office workers" should know about when they surf online. Blocking an image will NOT solve their problem. You see, before blocking the image, you will need to view it (otherwise, how can you decide to block it, right?). One it has been viewed, the image is stored in the browser's cache. Network administrators then heck in the cache from time to time to see the habits of the surfers. So, the image yuo wanted to block to "protect yourself" has left a trace already. Sure you acn delete your cache- if the option is available. In some places, the cache can't be deleted by the user and only administrators can empty them.
Bottom line is, it is not a web site's responsability to "hide things". It is people's responsabilities to decide wither or not they can surf a site from their office, and wither or not they can discuss it if the subject comes up.
Martin
aka. DrJOnes
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 01:18:33 PM · #67 |
michelangelo
rembrandt
renoir
manet
van gogh
<very long list>
if these are examples of artists whose work we would just as soon 'block' because they portray the human figure, then ...
oh, that's right -- we're in that country where they draped the statue of justice because it had bare nipples
what was i thinking?
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 01:20:06 PM · #68 |
I can't believe I'm about to write this -- and may get flamed, but here goes...
I have to say I'd like the option to "turn off" the winning image from being displayed on the home page as well.
Here's my reasoning. I often log onto the page from work. And while I am a photographer, working in an art department, and everybody here understands that photographers often shoot nudes, that doesn't stop me from feeling a little uncomfortable with it on the screen here at work. In fact, this week's winner caused one of my co-workers to do a double-take and then joke around about what I was surfing for on the web. (Heaven forbid that any of the management should walk through at an inopportune time -- or lead a tour of some of the educators who use out product...)
In addition, I will place myself fully in the prude category. I don't mind see, voting, and commenting on most of the nudes (there have been exceptions, but those photos usually get pulled), but I don't really want to have it "forced" on me every time I decide to visit the site. ("Forced" is much too strong a word, but hopefully y'all will know what I mean.) As good as the photo may be, that doesn't mean I want to keep looking because of my own convictions.
So, there ya go. My take on the situation.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 01:23:28 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
this isnt a totally public place, though. this is more like a club. there is membership here, and various disclaimers are likely to be introduced at the time of sign-up in the next iteration of the site.
ultimately, a decision will be made as to what option(s) suit the best interests of the site and its members.
however, it really has nothing to do with censorship. it's not because of censorship that every movie isnt filled with graphic sex. or every grocery store you go to doesnt have posters of people being dismembered.
it has a lot more to do with target audience and appropriate venue.
and as for the question "what defines if something is too adult?", the fact is that there are many ready-made scales in existence (movie ratings come to mind right off the bat) that define step by step and in great detail what is and isnt over the line. it would be easy enough to adapt one, once an appropriate 'level' is decided upon.
thanks for your input : )
Sorry for the third post in a row (didn't want to spam), but I just read Magnetic9999's post. His post concludes my participation in this thread as I now beleive we're starting to go in circle. Ultimatly, it's the admin/mods decision to implement the guidelines. I look forward to see what these will be.
Until then, cheers!
Martin
aka. DrJOnes
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/23/2002 1:22:56 PM. |
|
|
|
10/23/2002 01:24:52 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by DrJOnes:
The real solution is simple: education. There is NO PORN here. Nothing to be ashamed of. Nothing to hide. Nothing that would risk anyone's job.
Those of you out there who use their office to vote on the photos because of internet access problems, surely your coworkers have seen you do it in the past? Surely you don't hide doing that? Surely you had a conversation or two about photography, what camera to purchase, what computer to buy to do image editing, etc.? Surely you can talk about DPChallenge and tell people how great it is to be able to enter your photos and get comments from usres in order to learn new skills?
There are 250+ photos submitted this week. Less than 10 are considered by some to be "edgy", whatever that term means. In all due respect, I think there is a VERY LONG stretch between a porn site and DPChallenge.com . Stop hiding. Educate.
In an ideal world, I would agree wholeheartedly with this. The problem is that we (at least those of us in the US) live in a society that is extremely sensitive to claims of harassment and "propriety" in the workplace. I would not want to see someone in the position of trying to "educate" the representative from their Human Resources department at their exit interview.
The easy answer is to say, "don't surf at work or accept the risk;" however, I would like to see this site accessible to as many users as possible. If there is a workable solution that allows some users to avoid certain content without overly infringing on the rights of others, I personally am all for it. I think the suggestion of an "Adult" category with the option to hids images assigned to that category is a good one. Any others suggestions are of course welcome.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 01:27:52 PM · #71 |
What about a new preference to "hide winning photo from front page this week," that would be automatically reset at the end of the week?
-Terry
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 01:37:15 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
What about a new preference to "hide winning photo from front page this week," that would be automatically reset at the end of the week?
-Terry
i think it's an excellent solution for a site full of folks with a myraid of outlooks and opinions :o) |
|
|
|
10/23/2002 01:40:35 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by lecook:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
[i]What about a new preference to "hide winning photo from front page this week," that would be automatically reset at the end of the week?
-Terry
i think it's an excellent solution for a site full of folks with a myraid of outlooks and opinions :o)[/i]
I think it's an excellent solution for a site full of folks who access this site from work.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 01:53:11 PM · #74 |
That sounds great Terry.
The other problem I have is when a "nekkid" pic comes up while I am voting. Now, while I believe I am fairly objective in judging these, (just for the record, I do not like looking at them), my 18, 19, and 20 yo students, who may be sitting next to me, are not. It is, for me, embarrassing. So don't access at work. Okay, no problem. That means that I will vote on 20%, maybe (dial-up at home). When I have a chance to access at work, I like to. Kind of a fix, know what I mean? :-)
Now, if nothing changes, I won't complain, but what if while the voting page was loading with the picture to be voted on, in the upper corner or something was a thumbnail of the next one with an option to pass. That way, I wouldn't have to see the "big version" until a more appropriate time presents itself.
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/23/2002 2:37:33 PM.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2002 02:11:45 PM · #75 |
<<The real solution is simple: education. There is NO PORN here. Nothing to be ashamed of. Nothing to hide. Nothing that would risk anyone's job.
Martin
aka. DrJOnes>>
I don't think management would be willing to differentiate between one nude with pubic hair showing or another. DPChallenge is okay, but porn sites aren't. That would be an HR nightmare.
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/23/2002 2:10:01 PM. |
|
