What’s the policy on posting links to pictures of female breasts? I noticed I got chewed out throughly for posting one even though it was clearly under a SUBJECT of same & the message clearly identified it as such. Yet a few days later another link, which stayed, from another user came up with a photo of some nice juicy female breasts just barely (bearly) contained in a bra.
Also another link, which stayed, was posted to a bra manf site, again more breasts.
Frankly, I prefer the link I posted; but I would like to know the policy on posting links to this stuff?
And before you start linking to every lingerie catalog on the 'Net: we’d rather not see links of the “TITS IN BRA” variety in every single thread either. It’s just that they’re not strictly verboten. As always, common sense is your best guide.
Um, not that it’s any of my business, but why is it okay to have an adult website as your homepage that anyone can link to, yet it’s not okay to link to a site that shows unclothed breasts?
"Um, not that it’s any of my business, but why is it okay to have an adult website as your
homepage that anyone can link to, yet it’s not okay to link to a site that shows unclothed
breasts? "
Nice point, cause some people have major XXX sites in their profiles, but I guess cause it’s not something i did yet, if it were something I did, you can be sure it wouldn’t be allowed either!
Seriously now. WHY is it okay to have an obvious porno site as your website that anyone can click on, yet, we are not allowed to link to pictures of bare breasts.
Case in point. Stoid has a homepage as http://www.retroraunch.com but, if I were to link to a site that showed ANY of the many pictures that are on that homepage, I would be chastised?
Not trying to be a butthead and definitely not trying to emulate handy, but, huh?
Side not…this is NOT meant to be a criticism of the board, the mods or anything else regarding the MB. I really do wonder where the breaking point is.
Xploder I kinda agree with you. ::wheeze,wheeze:: JeeZ(you should excuse the expression) He’s heavier than I would have thought.
I rather agree and disagree at the same time. The site you link to is hardly what I would call a “porno site.” Commercial? You bet! And, as such, I think should be banned. Remember, we are guests at a private web site, allowed to be here at the whim of some mythical hippies who are trying to make a buck. But whoever said that they have insights as to profits that are off-limits to more traditional capitalists?
I think the Reader should cull throught all posters info and exorcise anything they find offensive, be it porno, commercial, beastiality, or competitive.
Okay, we were not aware of that particular link; the last time we checked, wasn’t like that.
I’ll send an email to the party involved.
The problem with the page is, as has been mentioned, there’s no chance for the casual user to opt out before they’re shown images that may be upsetting. If there had been something beforehand, even that page would be fine. But you got to give people choices in that regard.
The problem was that clicking on the “www” icon in the board or going to the link in the profile brought you immediately to a page containing all manner of nudity and other fun situations.
For some, coming across that sort of thing is an unexpected delight; for others, it’s distressing.
All we ask is if you link to such a page that you give potential clickees the chance to opt out of viewing these images before the images are presented. (We also ask no links to commercial porno web sites either, not in posts, profiles, or sigs.)
The situation has been corrected, it was an honest error, now it’s not a problem.
