You are currently looking at Flamebate, our community forums. Players can discuss the game here, strategize, and role play as their characters.
You need to be logged in to post and to see the uncensored versions of these forums.
-100 votes? | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
i was just voting in itembuildr and these two entries showed up as -100 after i voted on them.
Log in to see images!
are they disqualified or something? or is this a bug? |
||||||
Posted On: 06/23/2009 3:37PM | View wtfmcnuggets's Profile | # | ||||||
|
The first two are basically CP (when combined with the text). The submitters are lucky they didn’t get banned for them. MC Banhammer edited this message on 06/23/2009 3:46PM |
||||||
Posted On: 06/23/2009 3:41PM | View MC Banhammer's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Wait… accompanying text can turn a perfectly clean picture of a child into potential-CP?
I’ll grant you that it’s of poor taste to use images of random children for this kind of item, but I’m not seeing the CP angle. Unless there’s some clause of Canadian law that says (or implies) that if you take a picture of some toddler playing with a pole, then caption it “pole dancing stripper”, it becomes CP by bumociation.
If that’s the case then the law is ****ed up… but there’s not a lot you can do about that. If it’s not the law that’s the problem, then I would want some justification for calling it CP. The children in question are fully clothed after all. |
||||||
Posted On: 06/23/2009 4:33PM | View man-man's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Maybe not CP, but still had to be eliminated. |
||||||
Posted On: 06/23/2009 4:35PM | View ChilePepino's Profile | # | ||||||
|
ChilePepino Posted:
Maybe, the question is why – the stated reason is that they’re “basically CP”, which I question. If they are in fact CP-like enough to be dodgy by the applicable law, then fair enough, but if not then the question of why they have to be eliminated stands open. |
||||||
Posted On: 06/23/2009 4:39PM | View man-man's Profile | # | ||||||
|
The concern is indeed the law and, presumably, how it would be interpreted. Both JB and ET reacted strongly negatively when I pointed out the submissions to them. |
||||||
Posted On: 06/23/2009 4:40PM | View MC Banhammer's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Log in to see images! Laws are dumb. Especially around the whole area of children and protection thereof.
Can’t criticise Canada particularly though, I’m living in the wonderful UK, where… I’m not sure, are drawings of fictional children still allowed to be nude here? I lose track of exactly how far gone down the road of stupid legislation we are. |
||||||
Posted On: 06/23/2009 4:47PM | View man-man's Profile | # | ||||||
MC Banhammer Posted:
I man with a gapping bumhole is perfectly fine but a girl in a dress dancing near a pole is completely uncalled for. Yeah that makes complete sense.
You should have eliminated the idea to begin with. “The latest exercise sensation; get the body of a stripper by dancing like one, and make extra money by letting your daddy’s friends watch!”
Daddy’s friend implies a child.
Seems more like a outright attack on a single person than an entry.
Your mods can make slanderous remarks and threaten give out email addresses and IP addresses and it completely fine.
Post this image and instantly you are the plague…
You need to push away from the computer and look at the real world once. |
|||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 12:09AM | View DarkArmy's Profile | # | ||||||
|
DarkArmy Posted:
goatse… adult. presumably consenting since he’s doing it to himself
child dancing on a pole… child. illegal when “sexualized”. the image itself is fine and dandy and not at all sexual. combine it with that description and it becomes sexualized.
regardless, cz is at risk if they let those be published. it’s their game, their rules, their decision, ultimately.
DarkArmy Posted:
or, you know, 18 or 19 or in the category of “barely legal”
but I’ll agree that the description is poorly written. but a poorly written description does not justify cp being suddenly ok.
|
||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 12:24AM | View spacekadt's Profile | # | ||||||
|
DarkArmy Posted:
We do. That’s exactly why those images were a problem.
So perhaps it’s not us who need to “push away from the computer and look at the real world once”. |
||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 12:41AM | View MC Banhammer's Profile | # | ||||||
|
the moral of the story is: if you owned a website and could go to jail over something as lame as a picture of a fully clothed child, you wouldn’t want that to happen. and you would moderate your site’s user-submitted content to reflect that. TUBSWEETIE edited this message on 06/24/2009 12:48AM |
||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 12:48AM | View TUBSWEETIE's Profile | # | ||||||
|
What about Lil’ Pony Groomers
lots of suggestive materials there |
||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 4:01AM | View Inertia's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Inertia Posted: There’s a big difference between suggestive text and a suggestive image. |
||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 4:16AM | View Johnny Mac's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Johnny Mac Posted:
there are avatars depicting children in that forum |
||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 4:25AM | View Inertia's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Which is the Avatar which shows the man holding a child and covering her mouth with his hand? What about the custom text in Traditional Childrearing Forums that says “If you tell anyone, I’ll kill you”. Let’s not even get started with INCIT entries, and those wins are saved for posterity.
Speaking of which, my arguement boils down to this. http://forumwarz.com/incit/view/92205 |
||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 4:43AM | View Dunatis's Profile | # | ||||||
spacekadt Posted:
Its not CP. I dont really care its not my site, and if it was it would be more evenly objective not lopsided like it is now. You can thank your current mod staff for that. |
|||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 9:09AM | View DarkArmy's Profile | # | ||||||
Dunatis Posted:
PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THE RULES ARE ONLY FOR A CERTAIN FEW MOD EDIT: User banned for this allcaps post in CD. DarkArmy was banned for this post by Nicco DarkArmy edited this message on 07/23/2009 2:25PM |
|||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 9:10AM | View DarkArmy's Profile | # | ||||||
Your mods can make slanderous remarks and threaten give out email addresses and IP addresses and it completely fine.
WHY DID NO MOD COMMENT ON THIS…. Because its true!! |
|||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 9:12AM | View DarkArmy's Profile | # | ||||||
|
DarkArmy Posted:
What are you talking about? |
||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 9:16AM | View kittiejenn's Profile | # | ||||||
|
lol is all-capsing in gd still bannable? oh wait this is buildr, go on Inertia edited this message on 06/24/2009 9:20AM |
||||||
Posted On: 06/24/2009 9:19AM | View Inertia's Profile | # | ||||||