Check out today's most popular photo (contains nudity)

[gavia_immer]

Well, now it's about nudity, next time you know people start finding photos of Jews offensive. It's all so small...

No actually it will be pictures of Catholics b/c of their radical liberal morality. Have you seen the inside of the Sistine Chapel? Nudity all over the place. Even full frontal nudity. It is shocking I tell you. They have the nerve to call this perversion art!

[bobt54]

people usually use words like "censorship" and "discrimination" as bad words.
without censorship and discrimination, the popular galleries page would either be a porn site or a shrine to the back street boys and britney spears.

the popular galleries page is intended to be a set of fresh, interesting examples of photography from a variety of people. it's not a contest nor can it be a pure democracy.

3 guesses as to whose quote this is. To be clear this quote was not in response to the matter currently being discussed. It has to do with the last incident of "censorship" that occurred in October of 2004.

[pinkytuscadero]

Will this thread EVER END???? You guys are like a bunch of school girls crying!!! And the female sex are babies????
Who gives a fucking shit!!!! Don't look at this shit if you find it offensive. It's that simple.
WAH.....but he deleted my pictures, but not yours....WAH!!! Grow up or go somewhere else if you don't like this site.

Shut the FUCK UP ALREADY!!!!!!

Ta

[gavia_immer]

Will this thread EVER END???? You guys are like a bunch of school girls crying!!! And the female sex are babies????
Who gives a fucking shit!!!! Don't look at this shit if you find it offensive. It's that simple.
WAH.....but he deleted my pictures, but not yours....WAH!!! Grow up or go somewhere else if you don't like this site.

Shut the FUCK UP ALREADY!!!!!!

Ta

Hey pinkytuscadero is back! Grammatical styles are so interesting and telling. How cool. We haven't seen pinkytuscadero since... well since this really strange thread below. Gee looks like Bob had some issues on that one too. I really really don't want to be part of this thread b/c I think it is a pointless piece of crap at this point and I really don't want to post this message b/c I am really just here for the photography and I don't have an issue with anyone but this is just too interesting. No I don't know what it means either but it is indeed interesting. Welcome back pinky!

http://forum.pbase.com/viewtopic.php?t=13737&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

I wonder if this is abuse of an account under the Pbase rules? No pictures; apparently created to respond to a thread by someone already familar with it. Now a number of months later used for same. That sounds suspect. But hey I'm not on patrol.

[srijith]

I do not think a personal attack against anyone is warranted in this discussion. No one really is in a situation to question someone else's moral views on porn, nudity etc. So, I hope we can drop these attacks.

What needs to be questioned instead is the way PBase handled this matter. While I personally would not have liked to see the image in question appear on the front page of PBase, I do not agree that a blanket blocking of the artist under question from appearing in the popular gallery is the way to go. This might have happened because the system just does not scale enough to work any other way.

[hmetal]

What needs to be questioned instead is the way PBase handled this matter. While I personally would not have liked to see the image in question appear on the front page of PBase, I do not agree that a blanket blocking of the artist under question from appearing in the popular gallery is the way to go. This might have happened because the system just does not scale enough to work any other way.

We agree here. However, I hope that Slug, Emily and Co. can (or farm the job out to someone who can, if they cannot) adapt the current script to filter based on specific image IDs rather than the entire member's collection or container gallery.

Then they need to update the TOS so that any abuse of the system results in a guaranteed action. This way, people can't just use the image replace functionality to override the decision on that specific photo.

You see, I am not unreasonable. While I don't necessarily agree with it, I can see why they might remove the single image of mine that they found questionable content. But as you said, I don't agree with the entire collection being removed from being qualified for popular photos display.

The best solution would be a content rating/filtering system. But if that is too large a job for quick implementation, the single image filter would be a "second best" solution.

[ralphandkylie]

Sounds good to me.

Ralph

[gilp]

Will this thread EVER END???? You guys are like a bunch of school girls crying!!! And the female sex are babies????
Who gives a fucking shit!!!! Don't look at this shit if you find it offensive. It's that simple.
WAH.....but he deleted my pictures, but not yours....WAH!!! Grow up or go somewhere else if you don't like this site.

Shut the FUCK UP ALREADY!!!!!!

Ta

yeah,,,, giggidy, giggidy!

[bobt54]

What needs to be questioned instead is the way PBase handled this matter. While I personally would not have liked to see the image in question appear on the front page of PBase, I do not agree that a blanket blocking of the artist under question from appearing in the popular gallery is the way to go. This might have happened because the system just does not scale enough to work any other way.

We agree here. However, I hope that Slug, Emily and Co. can (or farm the job out to someone who can, if they cannot) adapt the current script to filter based on specific image IDs rather than the entire member's collection or container gallery.

Then they need to update the TOS so that any abuse of the system results in a guaranteed action. This way, people can't just use the image replace functionality to override the decision on that specific photo.

You see, I am not unreasonable. While I don't necessarily agree with it, I can see why they might remove the single image of mine that they found questionable content. But as you said, I don't agree with the entire collection being removed from being qualified for popular photos display.

The best solution would be a content rating/filtering system. But if that is too large a job for quick implementation, the single image filter would be a "second best" solution.

::Stunned

Ray, I can not believe that we are probably in complete agreement here. The TOS on this issue was silent at to what Objectionable and Questionable material was all the while giving us a vehicle for reporting it. Since it was obvious that Ray's definition of Objectionable and Questionable differed widely from my own, a debate like this was inevitable. Slug could have cleared this up by explaining his reasoning why he decided to remove the image and give us some guidelines as to what he thinks is Objectionable and Questionable. Instead he quietly removed not only the image I had an issue with but all of his others. At first I thought that he was simply enforcing a standard and that all of Ray's other images were below that standard, but when Gil P's image which is arguably more Questionable and Objectionable than Ray's was allowed to exist in the popular galleries it became clear that removal of Ray's other images was more of a punishment than anything else, a punishment I disagree with. Without Gil P's image, we might have been able to guess at what Slugs standards were but since it is still exists, I have no clue and I have no other choice than to continue to apply my own standards.

I also agree with that there should be a filtering system. We already have one in place right now for American Politics. This is what I have been after all along.. the right for people to choose.

Here is another thread on Censorship from last year. If you look at the participants in this discussion, you will probably find a few that were for censorship back then that are against it now.

Here is the link to that thread. If it doesn't take you to page 4, go there and then scroll half way down the page.

http://forum.pbase.com/viewtopic.php?t=5921&start=45

in the future, we'll expand the concept of topical photography

Slug, the future is now.

[gilp]

Man, you guys spend way to much time talking about photos and not enough taking photos....

[hmetal]

Man, you guys spend way to much time talking about photos and not enough taking photos....

Hey Gil, I take at least a photo a day, which is more than many of my non-PAD associates can say.

Peace brother.

[pinemikey]

Taking a picture everyday doesn't make you better, just more prolific.

Pardon those of us who choose not to post a picture, whether it's any good or not, everyday.

[hmetal]

Taking a picture everyday doesn't make you better, just more prolific.

Pardon those of us who choose not to post a picture, whether it's any good or not, everyday.

Nah, don't be offended. I wish humor came across better in the forums.

[philgo]

This touches a nerve as many of us realize that the only reason that this photo became such an issue was due to the number of votes it got over a short few days.

PADers swap votes and comments and thus propel their galleries into the top positions. This clearly goes to their heads, leading them to think that they are the top 20 photographers, or so, on Pbase. Of course, this is not true at all, but rather a function of the lack of (particularly concentrated) voting by others.

Ray's recent comments reveal their smug condescension to the rest of us who choose not to play with a PAD project. They really seem to think that playing the PAD game and investing even more time in comment and vote trading makes them into superior photographers, where in reality all it does is reveal the amount of time they have on their hands, and perhaps their OC tendencies....

Not to say that some of them are not quite skilled, nor that practice improves one's skills, but they are hardly in a league of their own as their dominance of the populars would suggest.

Ray and others are in denial over this obvious reality as it undermines their sense of photographic superiority. "Censorship" aside, clearing a few more of them out, at least temporarily, would really allow more of the cream to rise to the top, as as the case with the all time populars galleries, and photos, now those are some spectacular images.

[ethicalheretic]

Can't we just feed the Christians to the lions and get on with other topics?