Inappropriate content

[Deolrin]

Ah. Yeah, I thought you just said "making out". But still, those two men are not naked, at least not as far as we know.

 

[InfernalTater]

Having shirt off does not count as "naked" at least not for men in my country. It's called being "shirtless".

So what you're saying is that if the genitalia aren't shown, that it is assumed they are clothed?

Fine, we'll assume they have pants on below the waist. Still, two shirtless people making out is clearly sexual. You can argue all you want about how "it's not sexual, it's sensual", but answer me this: Would you do it with someone you were unattracted to, for the "sensual" experience? No? You only make out with people you're sexually attracted to? Well, that surely must be a coincidence.

 

[Shar Dundred]

Can't we just kill this thread already?

If I had a picture of two people fingering eachother, but didn't show genetalia, or their hands, I'd be asked to take it down because it's sexual content. Two people naked, engaging eachother should just be considered sexual content for simplicities' sake. If you have a picture of you and your girl/boyfriend sharing a kiss in public, that's fine, go ahead.

This is fucking ridiculous that you people are still obsessing over it. You're being petty and obnoxious, and doing exactly what that fuck with the avatar in question wants.

That.

 

[Shadow Fury]

What the... this is still going on after I unsubscribed? I thought you reached a compromise from the poll. The avatars can be allowed only if users are able to block them if they wish. What's the reason of continuing with the debate? Just finish it.

 

[Celaquil]

You don't, however, see two naked people making out in public.

The lacking logic in your argument here is that you can under no circumstances know that they are naked, unless you've seen the original image, but that is meaningless to this avatar. Considering the full picture isn't shown.

Whatever you imagine, however, is your own business.

The image portrays, what can be seen, two topless men making out, sure a little on the sensual side, but by no means in any way offensively. I wouldn't look twice at them strolling through a public park on a warm summers day.

 

[hiphop4eva]

I'm 12 and my parents dont want me to see people kissing each other because in Islam kissing or holding hands or hugging to an opposite gender is allowed only after they marry each other. So I dont want to see Magthediron or whatevers avatar cause that is just bullshit.

 

[fladdermasken]

YOUR RIGHTS END WHERE MY FEELS BEGIN!

http://capsguard.lol

 

[Remixer]

in Islam kissing or holding hands or hugging to an opposite gender is allowed only after they marry each other.

Yea well that is completely invalid here since they are both same gender. So what is your point?


Also we can't set the rules by the most strict religions/cultures. Otherwise everything would be forbidden.

Also, this might be offensive but I have to say it anyway.

If we would ban/hide these pictures it would make it "good" for the people who do not want to see them for various reasons. On the other hand, if we hide them people who want to display them and possibly express themselves/their sexuality might get offended or feel silenced - it would make sexuality a tabu.

Sexuality is part of human nature and there is no reason to make it a tabu. If there is some reason that prevents you from accepting/allowing such images it does not mean every one else has this same reason. As already said in this very same thread there is already a way to block those pictures by yourself, Hive does not need to make a new system for that.

Personally I see no reason to ban that image, I can see such things in everyday life.

@Shadow Fury
The poll is inaccurate very few people who does not have any issues with the picture has found their way here, or are bothered to vote. People who have issues with that pictures (I think) have more chances to find their way here.

Edit:
@hiphop4eva
What is the point of that last sentence? "So I dont want to see Magthediron or whatevers avatar cause that is just bullshit."

The reason you think it's bullshit is because your parent's do not want you to see such things because the religion? Seriously?
You can't make a statement because some one else thinks so instead, make your own. "Be a voice. Not an echo."
If I would make statements (claim something to be bullshit) based on what my parents or some one else thinks I'd think that Islam, Middle-East, Russian, USA, Americans, Russians, sexual minorities, gaming, soap operas, reality tv etc. etc. are bullshit.

However, I make my own statements as I am independent human being. I have rights for my own opinions.

 

[MasterHaosis]

Remixer, that is not completely true. I also know few people who are against such pictures, they would vote for 2. or 3. option, but said that they wont vote because they are sure that poll wont change anything, therefore it is useless to vote.

What the... this is still going on after I unsubscribed?

I also left thread long time ago (about two months ago) and still do not get why are people fighting, but I have to come back just to ask you this, since you are mentioning it:

I thought you reached a compromise from the poll. The avatars can be allowed only if users are able to block them if they wish.

Can we do this already? And how? Excuse me for my ignorance if it existed meanwhile by I somehow missed it.

 

[Remixer]

MasterHaosis, as I told (I think), since I too think there is sure people on each sides, however I think more on the positive side who did not vote, but either way, the poll is not accurate.

How to block the image

 

[Shadow Fury]

Can we do this already? And how? Excuse me for my ignorance if it existed meanwhile by I somehow missed it.

Uh I can't answer this one
I would just like to drop my last two cents.
The Hive is not a website for these pictures. If some people really care to see these things (which I find quite weird), they have tons of other websites that can display them without causing problems and debates.

Also, if people are used to see these pictures, there are also people who are NOT used to see them at all (like myself and hiphop4eva).

This makes me want to repeat what I said before I unsubscribed with a few modifications. If we remove these pictures, those who did not want them are happy and those who want them can visit other websites created to display such pictures.

Now I'd like to quote the Site Rules:

Amendment: No Pornographic, Sexual, Vulgar, Obscene or Gory Content

According to this thread, if something is sexual/vulgar/obscene is very subjective but let's see what the majority thinks. I see more people against these pictures (the poll already proves that), which means that most people think it is sexual/vulgar/obscene thus against the rules. We cannot ignore such a large part of the Hive. Power in numbers...

 

[InfernalTater]

Yea well that is completely invalid here since they are both same gender. So what is your point?


Also we can't set the rules by the most strict religions/cultures. Otherwise everything would be forbidden.

Also, this might be offensive but I have to say it anyway.

If we would ban/hide these pictures it would make it "good" for the people who do not want to see them for various reasons. On the other hand, if we hide them people who want to display them and possibly express themselves/their sexuality might get offended or feel silenced - it would make sexuality a tabu.

Sexuality is part of human nature and there is no reason to make it a tabu. If there is some reason that prevents you from accepting/allowing such images it does not mean every one else has this same reason. As already said in this very same thread there is already a way to block those pictures by yourself, Hive does not need to make a new system for that.

Personally I see no reason to ban that image, I can see such things in everyday life.

@Shadow Fury
The poll is inaccurate very few people who does not have any issues with the picture has found their way here, or are bothered to vote. People who have issues with that pictures (I think) have more chances to find their way here.

Edit:
@hiphop4eva
What is the point of that last sentence? "So I dont want to see Magthediron or whatevers avatar cause that is just bullshit."

The reason you think it's bullshit is because your parent's do not want you to see such things because the religion? Seriously?
You can't make a statement because some one else thinks so instead, make your own. "Be a voice. Not an echo."
If I would make statements (claim something to be bullshit) based on what my parents or some one else thinks I'd think that Islam, Middle-East, Russian, USA, Americans, Russians, sexual minorities, gaming, soap operas, reality tv etc. etc. are bullshit.

However, I make my own statements as I am independent human being. I have rights for my own opinions.

If expressing your sexuality had anything to do with the purpose of this site, I'd agree with you. But since sensuality and sexuality have nothing to do with this website's purpose, it'd be better to prohibit it so that people who are less promiscuous don't have to put up with it. There are plenty of places on the internet to embrace your sexual side. If you wanted to do so here on THW, you could discuss sensual topics and share sensual (but not explicit) artwork in the off-topic section, in threads where it is relevant, so that people who want to see such things can continue to enjoy them while others who do not want to see such things won't be forced to when they're just trying to download a fun map to play.

It boils down to the same as anything else that people find offensive, distasteful, or simply annoying; keep it in relevant threads, and don't spill it everywhere else; just like political discussions, world events, ponies, beer, and everything else that appeals to some while being revolting to others.

 

[Ardenian]

I see more people against these pictures (the poll already proves that), which means that most people think it is sexual/vulgar/obscene thus against the rules. We cannot ignore such a large part of the Hive. Power in numbers...

As Remixer already said, one cannot decide something of this kind just based on a few people voting for it.
If the poll showed an obvious majority of users voting for one answer, even then you could not say 'Hey, let's do what the majority wants to change'.

Switzerland has the same problem. There an organisation can start a referendum to vote for a certain change, like our poll.
The problem is, mostly only people that want that change are going to vote for it. Therefore they often achieve success, even tho a majority do not care or do not want the particular change.

As Remixer said:

The poll is inaccurate very few people who does not have any issues with the picture has found their way here, or are bothered to vote. People who have issues with that pictures (I think) have more chances to find their way here.

I would be very surprised if this poll is going to be an argument to change anything about Hive.

 

[Shar Dundred]

How. Is. This. Still. Not. Dead?

If you want a change, open a thread in the Site Discussion (not in OT...) with 3 options: Change rule, leave it as it is and don't care. It won't change and I personally don't mind two people kissing.
Also, it's Ralle's decision in the end and if he doesn't want to change it then that's it. This is still his website.

 

[Laiev]

Also, it's Ralle's decision in the end and if he doesn't want to change it then that's it. This is still his website.

Totally agreed with this, most of administrators (I didn't read all the thread, because of obvious reasons [15 pages? hell no]) agreed that it's fine, so I see no reason for so much ignorance and unnecessary discussions because of a gif.

As my friend said, no one cares about homosexuality when they are between two women.

That is totally stupid and childish.

 

[Celaquil]

It boils down to the same as anything else that people find offensive, distasteful, or simply annoying; keep it in relevant threads, and don't spill it everywhere else; just like political discussions, world events, ponies, beer, and everything else that appeals to some while being revolting to others.

Again, InfernalTater, your logic is lacking. We are not currently, to my knowledge,
prohibiting any avatars portraying your examples. So, by your very argument, neither
should the kissing avatar be prohibited.

I would be very surprised if this poll is going to be an argument to change anything about Hive.

It won't. Only if it was ABUNDANTLY overwhelming would we even consider looking at it,
but as it currently stands, it isn't. And the staffs current position is as I've previously
stated:

We do not foster an environment for misinformed and fanatic people who think kissing
has a bad influence on children, further more, we do not foster an environment for
children. We foster a modding community for mature and creative people, people who
shouldn't necessarily be bothered by such tiny matters as this.

And this will not change. I see now that leaving this thread open might not have been
such a good idea after all. As it apparently gives people hope that we may change our
standing in the matter, if it is argued correctly.

I'm 12 and my parents dont want me to see people kissing each other because in Islam kissing or holding hands or hugging to an opposite gender is allowed only after they marry each other. So I dont want to see Magthediron or whatevers avatar cause that is just bullshit.

In two parts:

One: As stated in my citing myself above, we do not foster an environment for children,
so if you're young, and you want to be part of this site, then you will have to tolerate some
adult content. Obviously we do not accept extremes, but this avatar is hardly that.

Two: I have told you previously personally that the hive is a religious neutral
environment. That means that we as staff do not openly favour any religions or
spirituality, or lacking thereof, above others. Meaning, we will not prohibit something
on the basis of someone's belief. Simple as that.

 

[Deolrin]

I'm 12 and my parents dont want me to see people kissing each other because in Islam kissing or holding hands or hugging to an opposite gender is allowed only after they marry each other. So I dont want to see Magthediron or whatevers avatar cause that is just bullshit.

1) Magtheridon is a Muslim from Lebannon.
2) How do you know they aren't married?

 

[Remixer]

1) Magtheridon is a Muslim from Lebannon.
2) How do you know they aren't married?

He/She is talking about opposite genders, as far as I know, the couple kissing in the avatar were both guys.

 

[Squiggy]

Hell, back when I was a teen myself, intimate intercourse was a rather rae sight before the age of say 14-17.
Nowadays I get to read randomly found forum posts with 12year olds explaining why their girlfirend is bad at sexual intercourse.
Most kids at their age have already had sex or were/are on the verge of having it.
Just watch an hour of TV and count the amount of breasts you see, in addtition to sexually suggestive conversations badly acting actors pull of during the afternoon program - and yes, it gets even worse by the evening.

Now throw in Islam religion.
Great; believing in texts written by self-proclaimed prophets about 1400 years ago.
The tradition they follow is totally obsolete (religion yadayada) and I don't see the point in paying respect to such an obsolete form of belief.
Don't get me wrong - the bible is just as bad with massacres, slavery and violence spread throughout the pages.

Inappropriate content is, let me reevaluate:
1.) graphical murder (either human or animals)
2.) domestic violence
3.) extreme sexism following the logic that men are superior to women (which is NOT the case)
4.) explicit showing of genitalia (R18 by law)
5.) a plea to terror organization
6.) racism

But a simple kiss - an expression of love - is definitely NOT inappropriate content, so come on...

And in addition to that, hiphop4eva is 12 and abiding COPPA, his parents are responsible for what he does on the hive.

 

[InfernalTater]

Again, InfernalTater, your logic is lacking. We are not currently, to my knowledge,
prohibiting any avatars portraying your examples. So, by your very argument, neither
should the kissing avatar be prohibited.

The rest of my examples were not visually offensive, but rather verbally offensive, so they had nothing to do with avatars. I chose poor examples. But such topics as those I listed are restricted to places where they are relevant. Try posting too much about those things in the resource section. See what happens. Yeah, that's already covered by "off topic", however an off-topic post on a resouce containing a pony picture or a political argument is much more likely to be deleted than an off-topic post that is less aggrevating to members who dislike it.

I'm not arguing as to whether or not this content is offensive. Personally, I don't give a shit if I see two people kissing. But a lot of people do. Why make this place uncomfortable for them just so you can post sex pics? Can't you just post them where they're more welcome and relevant?

All I was arguing was whether or not this qualifies as sexual content, which it most certainly does, which the rules claim to prohibit.

 

[Ash]

And just like that, the storm began to pass. Leaving in it's wake many a disgruntled internet warrior.

As dawn began to break, the new day washing away the sins of old, combatants everywhere dropped their keyboards and looked to one another. Recognising each other's autonomy, the users decided not to argue amongst themselves and instead revel in the freedom given to them by the internet and inherent nature of man. Not locked into or forced to behave in certain ways, people began to be happy. Tears of joy were shed once one culture reconciled with another, the thread locked and no longer accessible. In the distance, Sisyphus stood atop a mountain and observed the field below him. "All is well", he proclaimed. Beside Sisyphus, a rock shuddered and rolled away.

The gods had condemned Sisyphus to ceaselessly rolling a rock to the top of a mountain, whence the stone would fall back of its own weight. They had thought with some reason that there is no more dreadful punishment than futile and hopeless labor. Nothing is told to us about Sisyphus in the underworld. Myths are made for the imagination. As for this myth, one sees merely the whole effort of a body straining to raise the huge stone, to roll it, and push it up a slope a hundred times over; one sees the face screwed up, the cheek tight against the stone, the wholly human security of two earth-clotted hands. At the very end of his long effort, the purpose is achieved. Then Sisyphus watches the stone rush down in a few moments toward the lower world whence he will have to push it up again toward the summit. He goes back down to the plain.

It is during that return, that pause, that Sisyphus interests me. A face that toils so close to stones is already stone itself! I see that man going back down with a heavy yet measured step toward the torment of which he will never know the end. That hour like a breathing-space which returns as surely as his suffering, that is the hour of consciousness. At each of those moments when he leaves the heights and gradually sinks toward the lairs of the gods, he is superior to his fate. He is stronger than his rock.

If the descent is thus sometimes performed in sorrow, it can also take place in joy. When the images of earth cling too tightly to memory, it happens that melancholy arises in man's heart: this is the rock's victory. But crushing truths perish from being acknowledged. Thus, at the outset Sisyphus obeys fate without knowing it. But from the moment he knows, his tragedy begins. Yet at the same moment a tremendous remark rings out: "Despite so many ordeals, my advanced age and the nobility of my soul make me conclude that all is well."

"I conclude that all is well," says Sisyphus, and that remark is sacred. It echoes in the wild and limited universe of man. It teaches that all is not, has not been, exhausted. All Sisyphus' silent joy is contained therein. His fate belongs to him.

----

After this thread is locked -- hopefully soon -- don't be so content with the arguments you have made. Try to be more open with your views, and try to understand that other people are entitled to them. Just as you are not forcing your view upon others, don't have their views forced upon you. The best part of the internet is that it becomes what you make of it. Don't just bring staleness, try to learn something, constantly, always. And if you don't like it? You don't have to - just don't try to enforce your disliking onto others.

 

[Remixer]

The rest of my examples were not visually offensive, but rather verbally offensive, so they had nothing to do with avatars. I chose poor examples. But such topics as those I listed are restricted to places where they are relevant. Try posting too much about those things in the resource section. See what happens. Yeah, that's already covered by "off topic", however an off-topic post on a resouce containing a pony picture or a political argument is much more likely to be deleted than an off-topic post that is less aggrevating to members who dislike it.

I'm not arguing as to whether or not this content is offensive. Personally, I don't give a shit if I see two people kissing. But a lot of people do. Why make this place uncomfortable for them just so you can post sex pics? Can't you just post them where they're more welcome and relevant?

All I was arguing was whether or not this qualifies as sexual content, which it most certainly does, which the rules claim to prohibit.

How is it sexual content?

Sure, kissing can be considered part of sexuality, but so is hugging, saying certain phrases, gazing into some one's eyes, (the intercourse itself)...

I am pretty sure that the rule does not say everything that has any sexual hues or is sexual in some one must be banned or not allowed. I mean, come on! Unless it is overly sexual (the intercourse/genitalia are shown, or widely considered arousing) it's okay. This picture, it is two guys sharing a sign of love/sexuality, but it does not make it overly sexual or harmful.

If the rule means everything that can be considered sexual in some way must be banned a lot of things would be banned:
1. Hugs
2. Kisses
3. Holding hands
4. Wearing certain clothes
5. Flirty looks/deeds

... and so on.

 

[Ash]

The rules are, and have always been, guidelines. Please don't take them so literally. The Hive is fairly liberal, and I imagine it will continue to remain that way.

Can anyone return this thread to it's core points and try to summarise the arguments so far? It seems to me like we've free-wheeled so far from what was being discussed 15 pages ago that people are now just arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[InfernalTater]

How is it sexual content?

Sure, kissing can be considered part of sexuality, but so is hugging, saying certain phrases, gazing into some one's eyes, (the intercourse itself)...

I am pretty sure that the rule does not say everything that has any sexual hues or is sexual in some one must be banned or not allowed. I mean, come on! Unless it is overly sexual (the intercourse/genitalia are shown, or widely considered arousing) it's okay. This picture, it is two guys sharing a sign of love/sexuality, but it does not make it overly sexual or harmful.

If the rule means everything that can be considered sexual in some way must be banned a lot of things would be banned:
1. Hugs
2. Kisses
3. Holding hands
4. Wearing certain clothes
5. Flirty looks/deeds

... and so on.

It's not sexual just because it's a kiss. It's sexual because of HOW they kissed. Just like a hug can be affectionate, or sexual (if you start groping).

They were shirtless, chest to chest, making out. That's sexual.

You can argue about whether or not it's too sexual, but to deny that it's sexual at all, is to be blind.

 

[hiphop4eva]

As already said in this very same thread there is already a way to block those pictures by yourself, Hive does not need to make a new system for that.

How?

 

[Tal'Rarity]

Seriously people? Like really? Get a grip and stop being homophobic. Science has proven that this is normal and part of our race... Even some people can't help it but they're too scared to realize it and/or say anything because of all the *uglier* people that force them to be something they're not. It's a part of life, humans are the only ones that fear this for some terribly stupid reason/excuse. It happens anywhere, stop making your IQ's plummet past rock bottom. There is nothing about that .gif that breaks the rules, if you don't like it then disable all avatars or ask Ralle to let you "insert name's avatar button to disable". Two possible options, why are some of you being so ignorant and unreasonable?

Had to put my say in, this is saddening and the people against this should realize that they're doing something horrible right now. Where's all the whine against all the other "intense" signatures and avatars? Some people have butt shaking ones yet there's no complaint to those? Grow up. =(

 

[Eagle XI]

How?

Only to echo what has been told 1452860791 times before: install AdBlock Plus addon for browser -> right click on any image you want to block->choose Block Element(or smth like that, the one with the APB symbol next to it).

 

[Squiggy]

Only to echo what has been told 1452860791 times before: install AdBlock Plus addon for browser -> right click on any image you want to block->choose Block Element(or smth like that, the one with the APB symbol next to it).

[offtopic]Not quite.
Install Adblock Edge instead of ABP - the devs of ABP seem to be creating a whitelist which is quite the opposite of what the addon should achieve.[/offtopic]
Oh and I also requested closure for this thread.

 

[Remixer]

MasterHaosis, as I told (I think), since I too think there is sure people on each sides, however I think more on the positive side who did not vote, but either way, the poll is not accurate.

How to block the image

Quoting my self for the first time, like I already told, this way.

You can block certain pictures using AdBlock so stop crying about how it's a national crisis that you have to suffer for seeing these "disturbing images"

If some one is keen to find a solution, he searches for it, one does not simply wait for some one else to point it out. Come on guys, it seems you did not even want to block the image, you just wanted that no one is allowed to use them as you did not search for the solution for yourself. What makes it even worse is that it has been mentioned in this thread various time before, are you just ignorant?

It has been referred/mentioned to:
Here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here. Do you really say you did not notice any of these posts? Like wow... I am out of here. I'm trying to speak to bunch of ignorant "readers" who obviously ignore the comments that has the solution. Just wow.

 

[Kyrbi0]

And just like that, the storm began to pass. Leaving in it's wake many a disgruntled internet warrior.

Man, so, dude... Where's your blog? I keep throwing money at the screen but nothing happens.

Can anyone return this thread to it's core points and try to summarise the arguments so far? It seems to me like we've free-wheeled so far from what was being discussed 15 pages ago that people are now just arguing for the sake of arguing.

It's funny how common that is in Internet arguments. Despite the utility of near-instant & perfect recall, we still founder off into side-arguments.

That being said, people like me directly facilitate such, since it can simply be too daunting to try & comb through 15 pages of animus to get to the point.

It's not sexual just because it's a kiss. It's sexual because of HOW they kissed. Just like a hug can be affectionate, or sexual (if you start groping).

They were shirtless, chest to chest, making out. That's sexual.

You can argue about whether or not it's too sexual, but to deny that it's sexual at all, is to be blind.

This.

... Where's all the whine against all the other "intense" signatures and avatars? Some people have butt shaking ones yet there's no complaint to those? Grow up. =(

Well, I can't speak for others, but I lodge complaints about those, too. Also unnecessarily distracting; also inappropriate to the site's purpose.

Quoting my self for the first time, like I already told, this way.

... who obviously ignore the comments that has the solution. Just wow.

...Thanks for the Red Wall there, buddy.

Have you considered that this may not simply be about "not seeing something"? Yes, what you describe is a solution for that; great. I might use it. But there are those lodging this complaint that do so because they want to see (what they consider to be obvious) trolling dealt with; those that want to keep others from seeing such things; those that want to encourage this site to be more (I'm sure there's a better word for this...) classy; those that have yet other reasons.

It's not all about just "not seeing it".

 

[InfernalTater]

Quoting my self for the first time, like I already told, this way.

You can block certain pictures using AdBlock so stop crying about how it's a national crisis that you have to suffer for seeing these "disturbing images"

If some one is keen to find a solution, he searches for it, one does not simply wait for some one else to point it out. Come on guys, it seems you did not even want to block the image, you just wanted that no one is allowed to use them as you did not search for the solution for yourself. What makes it even worse is that it has been mentioned in this thread various time before, are you just ignorant?

It has been referred/mentioned to:
Here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here. Do you really say you did not notice any of these posts? Like wow... I am out of here. I'm trying to speak to bunch of ignorant "readers" who obviously ignore the comments that has the solution. Just wow.

Well I think I know why you chose the side of the argument you're on. You don't think twice before being extremely obnoxious because you think your point of view is the only one that matters, as though suddenly it's okay to violate the rules because people don't agree with you, and they need to be forced to submit to your wisdom.

A full page wall of obnoxious red text is not okay. Who do you think you are, that your point of view is so much more important than everyone else's? How would you like it if everyone else acted the way you do when someone disagreed with them? Should we all spam this thread with giant color text walls just because someone doesn't share our opinion?

 

[GhostThruster]

Should we all spam this thread with giant color text walls just because someone doesn't share our opinion?

yes.

@ash: on the anti-image side
- the content is sexual, and therefore inappropriate
- tolerating the image sets a precedence for trolling
- the image has nothing to do with the site's purpose
- god hates fags

on the terrorblade side
- the content isnt too sexual, and many images don't align with this site's purpose
- not tolerating the image sets a precedence for homophobia
- adblock can be used to block the image on an individual basis
- fag-haters gonna hate


i'm on the fence but leaning towards pro-image. i don't think the image is offensive enough to be worth censoring, but it's definitely sexual in nature and distracting. prohibition or no, it doesn't affect me since i've had settings to block all avatars & signatures turned on for a while

 

[Ash]

yes.

@ash: on the anti-image side
- the content is sexual, and therefore inappropriate
- tolerating the image sets a precedence for trolling
- the image has nothing to do with the site's purpose
- god hates fags

on the terrorblade side
- the content isnt too sexual, and many images don't align with this site's purpose
- not tolerating the image sets a precedence for homophobia
- adblock can be used to block the image on an individual basis
- fag-haters gonna hate


i'm on the fence but leaning towards pro-image. i don't think the image is offensive enough to be worth censoring, but it's definitely sexual in nature and distracting. prohibition or no, it doesn't affect me since i've had settings to block all avatars & signatures turned on for a while

Holy fuck, I know this is offtopic but this has freewheeled so far... Let's try to fill this in and return to some form of structure.

I'm with Keiji on this one: the rules say no sexual content, but the rules have always been (and I presume will continue to be) guidelines. They exist to prevent mischief, and it is up to the moderators to interpret what this mischief is. Directly due to this, the idea that trolling is somehow able to exist is thrown out of the window. Half of the images on here have no relation to the purpose of the site, and to make that argument in offtopic is just dumb.

Please can we start to think logically and address the matters at hand and not continue to beat too far around the bush.

 

[Remixer]

@people who complain about huge red text

Ever thought why I used it?

When there is over 20 posts that the solution to the problem is mentioned yet people still can't find it I figured out that these people might actually notice huge red letters. Normal text did not seem to be efficient, I figured out it's more efficient to once post huge red letters instead of constantly spamming how to fix the problem.

As you can see, this 12 year old (sorry can't recall his nickname) asked how do you block it, I posted 2 comments regarding how and he still asks how do you block it? As he thought no one told him.

The idea of the text was not to force anyone to think like I do, it's purpose was only to be more efficient to help people notice it and lead people to the posts that have the content they might be interested in (blocking the avatar).

Sorry, if I seemed offensive but I really didn't want to force anyone to do anything, but if something gets mentioned over 20 times in a thread and you still can't see it mentioned once, it tells me you are either ignoring the posts on purpose/trolling/not reading anything.

 

[Squiggy]

@people who complain about huge red text

Ever thought why I used it?

When there is over 20 posts that the solution to the problem is mentioned yet people still can't find it I figured out that these people might actually notice huge red letters. Normal text did not seem to be efficient, I figured out it's more efficient to once post huge red letters instead of constantly spamming how to fix the problem.

As you can see, this 12 year old (sorry can't recall his nickname) asked how do you block it, I posted 2 comments regarding how and he still asks how do you block it? As he thought no one told him.

The idea of the text was not to force anyone to think like I do, it's purpose was only to be more efficient to help people notice it and lead people to the posts that have the content they might be interested in (blocking the avatar).

Sorry, if I seemed offensive but I really didn't want to force anyone to do anything, but if something gets mentioned over 20 times in a thread and you still can't see it mentioned once, it tells me you are either ignoring the posts on purpose/trolling/not reading anything.

Instead of just sending him a PM...

 

[Remixer]

Instead of just sending him a PM...

He is not the only one. In any case this thread ought to be closed.

 

[fladdermasken]

In any case this thread ought to be closed.

You know what makes threads die out normally? Not continuously posting in it.

And yes I'm a device in my own meta.

 

[Heinvers]

This whole thread looks like a giant advertising billboard, the likes that you see beside highways. #peace

 

[Chen]

Well, anyone could avert his/her eyes if he don't like to look at it, but if the user really want to have that inappropriate content as their avatar/signature, we should have a function where the user will check a box if the content(avatar/signature) contains sexual things or is inappropriate, then other users could fix their settings to toggle either show unsafe content or hide them.

 

[edo494]

never trust the user.

Mag would for sure not click on it even with his avatar, for instance

 

[MasterHaosis]

Remixer, why are you so nervous and spamming red wall? You can't stand someone else to have different opinion than you? I though we are liberal, everyone has right on opinion, not just one side.
InfernalTater suddenly does not have right to talk opposite as you think?

Yeah, ugly picture is gone. That ADBlocker seems to work, but I had to block that image two times. InfernalTater, drop thread as I did two months ago. it is useless, Keiji already said that nothing wont change so I suggest you not to waste your time here. (if you do not expect further walls of red texts)

 

[Kyrbi0]

- god hates fags

Just for the record, 'no he doesn't'.

 

[Remixer]

Remixer, why are you so nervous and spamming red wall? You can't stand someone else to have different opinion than you? I though we are liberal, everyone has right on opinion, not just one side.
InfernalTater suddenly does not have right to talk opposite as you think?

Wasn't my intention, sorry if it seemed like that.

The purpose of the red wall was to caught attention of people who don't know AdBlock can already block certain images. As said earlier there won't be any plans to implement a system inside Hive that allows users to block avatars or images so AdBlock is a good solution, still people say they want a way to block the image, so they can use AdBlock, there seemed to be people who were unaware of this solution. Now they should know it if they read through the threads.

 

[Daffa]

The only problem are for IOS users. The iPhone, iPad and iPod users since Safari don't support them addon.
Yeah, just grab another browser from the store with that addon, not sure if it works.

 

[Magtheridon96]

GOD.

HATES.

DIFFERENT THINGS.

Man, if a God exists, he is an asshole. You're free to believe in him and worship him, don't mind me. And don't be silly and take this personally.
I know Muslims who believe in God and follow his religion, but at the same time, they don't like him! Nowhere is it explicitly mentioned that you have to like God. You just have to respect him.

And damn, this is hilarious. I can't believe my avatar caused a shitstorm.

Come on, those men are attractive. Doesn't it feel satisfying to stare at them sensually kissing? No homo.

 

[Tal'Rarity]

GOD.

HATES.

DIFFERENT THINGS.

Man, if a God exists, he is an asshole. You're free to believe in him and worship him, don't mind me. And don't be silly and take this personally.
I know Muslims who believe in God and follow his religion, but at the same time, they don't like him! Nowhere is it explicitly mentioned that you have to like God. You just have to respect him.

And damn, this is hilarious. I can't believe my avatar caused a shitstorm.

Come on, those men are attractive. Doesn't it feel satisfying to stare at them sensually kissing? No homo.

He's not the asshole, humans are. Though yeah, it is saddening to see such a commotion.

 

[Shadow Fury]

This thread is immortal...

GOD.

HATES.

DIFFERENT THINGS.

Man, if a God exists, he is an asshole. You're free to believe in him and worship him, don't mind me. And don't be silly and take this personally.
I know Muslims who believe in God and follow his religion, but at the same time, they don't like him! Nowhere is it explicitly mentioned that you have to like God. You just have to respect him.

So much nonsense here... you cannot claim with so much certainty that all muslims do not like God. Are you God Himself to know what a human feels?

And damn, this is hilarious. I can't believe my avatar caused a shitstorm.

Come on, those men are attractive. Doesn't it feel satisfying to stare at them sensually kissing? No homo.

Oh well probably because people are disturbed by such pictures. You think those men are attractive but others, like myself, disagree. No, it is not satisfying for a lot of people that sensual kissing.
Please no harassing on homophobia otherwise next time you'll tell me that if the sight of a spider irks me, I am arachnophobic. First know what phobia means precisely. Some of those who are against these pictures do not necessarily have a strong dislike, fear or aversion towards gay couples yet they are simply disturbed by them. This surely doesn't justify a "phobia".
To conclude this, the solution has already been proposed 1000 times. Damn AdBlocks... may this thread rest in peace now.

 

[Magtheridon96]

you cannot claim with so much certainty that all muslims do not like God

Teehee. Where did I claim that?
I was referring to instances of muslims I know! Not all of them!

I know Muslims who believe in God and follow his religion

Here, I refer to a group of muslims I know

but at the same time, they don't like him

And here, I'm still referring to them, specifically!

 

[Celaquil]

you cannot claim with so much certainty that all muslims do not like God. Are you God Himself to know what a human feels?

Err, he's not. He's saying he knows some Muslims who do.
Or, more accurately, that he knows Muslims who believe in it this way,
either way, he's not claiming at all that all Muslims are like this.
- By that statement.

EDIT: Damn you, Mag.

 

[Shadow Fury]

Ah ok sorry for misunderstanding then.