Nudity restrictions

by **Dukasaur** on Sat Sep 16, 2017 8:50 pm

waauw wrote:test

Test successful. Guest mode enabled.

by **TA1LGUNN3R** on Sat Sep 16, 2017 8:58 pm

by **DirtyDishSoap** on Sat Sep 16, 2017 9:10 pm

2dimes wrote:I highly doubt Dukasaur wants to delete any pictures of ladys, naked or otherwise unless they have yucky piercings.

Am I really the only f*ck here that likes piercings on chicks?!

by **Dukasaur** on Sat Sep 16, 2017 9:17 pm

2dimes wrote:
Bernie Sanders wrote:Thanks Duk, I'm glad you are here to defend our youngsters.

I highly doubt Dukasaur wants to delete any pictures of ladys, naked or otherwise unless they have yucky piercings.

I am pretty sure he is just following directions and protecting the site's monitization.

Blame Google and some of those paying for ads, for imposing over strict anti-bare skin/naughty word policies. Though they are only acting a bit like insurance companies, whom are usually just trying to save money by finding ways to refuse to pay.

I'm protecting all of us, from many things.

1. Many people will leave a site at the first hint that it's not family friendly. We're bleeding members badly enough, we don't need to make it worse.
2. Pornographers can overwhelm a site's bandwidth very quickly. They don't have any self-restraint. Allow even a little bit of porn today, and tomorrow you'll be hard pressed to find any non-porn on the site.
3. Many people play this game at work, and many companies now have filters to prevent sites with bad tags from getting through. Get the site tagged as a porn site, and hundreds of people will lose their ability to play on here.
4. Repeat 3 for a lot of kids, whose parents use parental filters on their home internet. Again, get it tagged as porn and hundreds of kids get cut off from their games.
5. Repeat 3 and 4 for search engine placement. Get it tagged as porn, and it will be cut out of non-porn Google searches.

For all of those reasons, we have to be strict. This isn't about being a prude. This is about preserving a gaming site.

Bernie Sanders wrote:Nude sculptures from over 2000 years ago is so revolting as to be banned from CC forum?

Don't be disingenuous. The sculptures were beautiful and I enjoyed them. I sincerely regretted having to delete them. I told you so in my message yesterday, so don't pretend otherwise.

Again, it's not about being prudes. It's about keeping our gaming site as a gaming site.

mrswdk wrote:The rules say no porn, not no nudity. Apparently those two words are synonyms in the United Emirates of a-Merica though.

Even the Supreme Court has trouble defining porn. I'm not going to attempt it. The new rules having no definition of it, I go by the definition in the old rules.

Night Strike wrote:
Any images of pornographic activity or nudity - nipples, areola, genitals, anuses etc - whether intended as artistic, erotic, pornographic or otherwise are not allowed.
This includes content posted here and links to other sites. Posting NSFW - "Not Suitable For Work" - does not make it ok for posting.
If it is ambiguous, we'll ask you to remove it anyway, so "It's a guy's nipple" isn't going to fly. You're just trying to be annoying at that point.
Posting a painting from the 13th century with exposed nipples to claim that we're evil dictators when we ask you to remove it is also just being annoying, and you're probably just being a troll at that point.

Anybody who doesn't get it, read above. Then read again. Read it fifty times if that's what it takes before it sinks in.

Duk wrote:I'm protecting all of us, from many things.

1. Many people will leave a site at the first hint that it's not family friendly. We're bleeding members badly enough, we don't need to make it worse.
2. Pornographers can overwhelm a site's bandwidth very quickly. They don't have any self-restraint. Allow even a little bit of porn today, and tomorrow you'll be hard pressed to find any non-porn on the site.
3. Many people play this game at work, and many companies now have filters to prevent sites with bad tags from getting through. Get the site tagged as a porn site, and hundreds of people will lose their ability to play on here.
4. Repeat 3 for a lot of kids, whose parents use parental filters on their home internet. Again, get it tagged as porn and hundreds of kids get cut off from their games.
5. Repeat 3 and 4 for search engine placement. Get it tagged as porn, and it will be cut out of non-porn Google searches.

For all of those reasons, we have to be strict. This isn't about being a prude. This is about preserving a gaming site.

Please don't test me. This isn't a contest to see who can be the bigger ahole.

by **DirtyDishSoap** on Sat Sep 16, 2017 11:40 pm

Dukasaur wrote:I'm protecting all of us, from many things.

1. Many people will leave a site at the first hint that it's not family friendly. We're bleeding members badly enough, we don't need to make it worse.

For that to happen, they'd have to see the forums. Not a lot of forum goers, and we also have the Trash Can, where some incredibly suggestive stuff is said. I think an expression of art containing a nipple is the least of our concerns.

Aside from that, we're bleeding the community regardless of actions taken. I've beaten the reasons why to death already.

Dukasaur wrote:2. Pornographers can overwhelm a site's bandwidth very quickly. They don't have any self-restraint. Allow even a little bit of porn today, and tomorrow you'll be hard pressed to find any non-porn on the site.

There's a difference between openly advertising porn and commercializing it vs whatever someone posts here that expresses art that isn't monetized in any way. Kind of argument are you trying to make here?

Dukasaur wrote:3. Many people play this game at work, and many companies now have filters to prevent sites with bad tags from getting through. Get the site tagged as a porn site, and hundreds of people will lose their ability to play on here.

What's so hard to play at home? And I'll be the first to be a hypocrite here, but why are people on this site at work? Come on...

Dukasaur wrote:4. Repeat 3 for a lot of kids, whose parents use parental filters on their home internet. Again, get it tagged as porn and hundreds of kids get cut off from their games.

Again, have you read the forums at all? Lol....

Dukasaur wrote:5. Repeat 3 and 4 for search engine placement. Get it tagged as porn, and it will be cut out of non-porn Google searches.

You're joking? That's not how these search engines operate. You usually pay to have your site pop off first in the search query for relevance. EVEN if this site were to be tagged as porn, we'd still have to pay them for our site to pop up first in the search.

I suppose if you want to look at a more evil side here, the amount of traffic CC would receive for promoting porn would be off the charts, assuming people can stream/download videos and pictures. Just saying.

Dukasaur wrote:For all of those reasons, we have to be strict. This isn't about being a prude. This is about preserving a gaming site.

All you really had to say was "Our rules. Suck it up".

by **Dukasaur** on Sun Sep 17, 2017 4:43 am

DirtyDishSoap wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:3. Many people play this game at work, and many companies now have filters to prevent sites with bad tags from getting through. Get the site tagged as a porn site, and hundreds of people will lose their ability to play on here.

What's so hard to play at home? And I'll be the first to be a hypocrite here, but why are people on this site at work? Come on...

Hey, I agree with you, but people are people.

DirtyDishSoap wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:For all of those reasons, we have to be strict. This isn't about being a prude. This is about preserving a gaming site.

All you really had to say was "Our rules. Suck it up".

Good point!

by **mrswdk** on Sun Sep 17, 2017 6:12 am

According to the logic of this thread Wikipedia, UNESCO and the Uffizi have all had their websites flagged as pornography because of their risque photos of antique statues.

by **2dimes** on Sun Sep 17, 2017 9:13 am

DirtyDishSoap wrote:
2dimes wrote:I highly doubt Dukasaur wants to delete any pictures of ladys, naked or otherwise unless they have yucky piercings.

Am I really the only f*ck here that likes piercings on chicks?!

I was suggesting that would be the only publicly known reason Duk would "want" a picture of a woman removed. I am not saying he would then act on that.

I believe like most of us, he likes to see boobs and would allow nudity and pr0n given the choice.

I don't mind piercings. If it looks like they are going for some sort of record or trying to get every one possible at once it's a bit too much but even if my wife got a few more I would not mind. She already has around twelve in her ears from before we met and I like them.

Maybe I don't like the bull style nose ring or those huge disks that make a giant hole somewhere including earlobes, and if someone I was intimate with had something that scraped me I might complain. Otherwise I'm fine with most self mutilation.

by **Bernie Sanders** on Sun Sep 17, 2017 9:53 am

Hmmmm, this is allowed and not considered porn

But showing over 2000 year old statues which are displayed in the most respected museums are considered as pornographic by Duk?

So David Michelangelo sculptures are really bad and disgusting. Fuk, better not post any of his work, as I would be perma- banned. Safer to promote racial, religious, ethnic and cultural hate here at CC forums, heh? I'll throw some homophobe sh!t too in the mix.

I have never personally challenged a moderator on how to run his site, but banning classical work that's displayed not only at the most respected museums of the world, but in fact are being shown to children on guided tours in these museums makes your argument just a bit silly.

by **mrswdk** on Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:10 am

A Bern post that I agree with from start to finish. Time for a paaaartay!

by **2dimes** on Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:17 am

Bernie Sanders wrote:

Hmmmm, this is allowed and not considered porn

But showing over 2000 year old statues which are displayed in the most respected museums are considered as pornographic by Duk?

Have you never been employed and done your job, or are you lucky and loved everything you ever did for work?

How can you not wrap your head around the mods deleting things based on a standard that is made by someone else above them.

Even some of the mods in the past who would ban entire clans did not act on their own desires.

Regardless of how you feel about the art thing. It is strictly a zero tolerance police enacted without prejudice or emotion.

by **mrswdk** on Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:28 am

Yeah, just following orders.

by **2dimes** on Sun Sep 17, 2017 11:31 am

Bernie Sanders wrote:
You should change your name to "2 cents" as you love to throw your deep insights into these threads.

Did someone at CC buy you cyberspace knee pads to parrot the views of a certain moderator?

No, I don't think I parrot Razorvich that much.

My opinion is worth so much they should change it to $20,000,000.

by **Bernie Sanders** on Sun Sep 17, 2017 11:35 am

In Confederate currency?

by **armati** on Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:09 pm

I always find the discussion of nudity silly. I think people that dont like the human body have something strange going on.
The way I see it is most people look better with close on than off.
Therefore, people should do everyone a favour and stay dressed in public. lol

Fear of nipples just means someone is in dire need of a blow J. as far as I can tell.
They should spend some time in a place or two where its acceptable to walk around naked, they would be over their fear pretty quick.

One interesting comment, "bleeding members", maybe they could fix the dice algo.
It is possible people are getting tired of it.
Another site I play has an "equalizer" option, that reduces losing so much to the defender rolling never ending sixes.

Its still the same crappy algo but its only about half as bad.
Not as many games are destroyed.

by **waauw** on Mon Sep 18, 2017 3:45 am

Dukasaur wrote:
waauw wrote:test

Test successful. Guest mode enabled.

Oh god, I can't believe you censored my country's national symbol.

by **mrswdk** on Mon Sep 18, 2017 4:05 am

waauw wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:
waauw wrote:test

Test successful. Guest mode enabled.

Oh god, I can't believe you censored my country's national symbol.

Duk is simply exercising his freedom to discriminate. Welcome to a-Merica!

by **Bernie Sanders** on Mon Sep 18, 2017 6:01 am

waauw wrote:
Bernie Sanders wrote:I guess the little kid pissing at the fountain would be rated xxx

You requested child pornography.

MOD EDIT: Image removed

I don't think Duk washed your pee-pee off this thread well enough, let me add some cleansing soap to this deletion of your extremely pornographic statue.....

by **waauw** on Mon Sep 18, 2017 6:11 am

SJW's protesting for acceptance of all genders. I'm happy to see CC is picking up the fight for the 'genderless'.

by **tzor** on Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:19 pm

mrswdk wrote:Porn is made for the purpose of being sexually arousing. Are you so old you're starting to forget your own language?

No, that's "erotica" not "porn" ... generally speaking "porn" is sexual material.

Wikipedia defines it as "Pornography (often abbreviated porn) is the portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexual arousal. ... The term applies to the depiction of the act rather than the act itself ..."

by **Thorthoth** on Mon Sep 18, 2017 1:57 pm

Please, everybody know that terms like 'pornography', 'hate-speech', 'microaggression', necrobumping', etc., have no real meaning outside the arena of socio-politicized name calling.

by **Bernie Sanders** on Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:05 pm

by **Thorthoth** on Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:59 pm

So Duk, a stroll in broad daylight in the Piazza della Signoria in Firenze/Florence, basically the very heart of the Renaissance, would violate CC's nudity/obscenity/pornography/whatever ban?
Really??
You must be at least slightly embarrassed about being CC's censor-goon at a time like this, right?