Interesting nude photographs.

[Oslo_Ostragoth]

@mhendo

Thanks , Oslo, but the reason i didn’t make a proper link is that we’re not supposed to give direct links to pictures containing nudity or any other possibly-offensive material.

I realise that these pictures are pretty tame, but some people have to be careful what they click on they’re at work, and i wanted to err on the side of caution.

Oops! :o

Sorry.

I deserve punishment.

[Dunderman]

@Oslo Ostragoth

I deserve punishment.

Damn right. We should plant palm trees in your genitals and go fishing in your belly-button.

[monica]

@mhendo

Really? They look pretty real to me. If they were edited in, then it was a pretty expert job.

But if they were on the people to begin with, some of the stuff wouldn’t have stayed put, like the sledder and the skier- I suppose they could have glued them, though. Also, a lot of those people look way too limber and realistic to be figurines, IMO.

[USCDiver]

@monica

But if they were on the people to begin with, some of the stuff wouldn’t have stayed put, like the sledder and the skier- I suppose they could have glued them, though. Also, a lot of those people look way too limber and realistic to be figurines, IMO.

I originally thought this was a Photoshop job as well, but if you look closely at the one with the bridge between two breasts, the bridge is clearly indenting the skin of the right breast. And the shadowing of the figures is too subtle to have been done by any but the most skilled at the Photoshopping (ie the reflection of the fishing line in the belly-button pond)

[C_K_Dexter_Haven]

Moderator Speaketh: Look, we have a rule that no direct link can go to anything that might not be “workplace-safe.” That includes “objectionable nudity,” whatever that means. We have lots of folks who browse the SDMB during work hours, and we don’t want an accidental click on a link. It’s not that we’re prudes – you can set up secondary links sure enough, so that you get there by two links.

It’s just that we don’t want anyone accidentally embarrassed (or worse) by having something pop up on a workplace computer that might raise eyebrows (or other parts.) It happens often enough that a cursor moves over a link and is inadvertently clicked. We have the two-link rule on the grounds that once could be accident, twice is deliberate and you’re on your own.

So, I’m leaving the url in cut-and-paste form as mhendo did it originally – no one can accidentally get there, which is our main concern. That’s correct procedure, mhendo, and I’d take off my hat to you if I were wearing one.

I have deleted the direct links provided by Oslo, for the reason stated. Yes, I agree, this is pretty mild and it’s hard to imagine anyone at work getting too upset over it, but still.

And mhendo – and everyone else – when you quote someone who’s posted a link that shouldn’t be there, please don’t compound the problem by quoting it!!! Makes double work for the Moderator, since then I have to delete the link from your post too. Same thing with any material that you think the Moderator will delete – hit the REPORT button (the little exclamation point in the upper right corner of each post), great, but if you must respond, please don’t quote it… as I say, it just doubles the Mod’s work.

[mhendo]

@C K Dexter Haven

And mhendo – and everyone else – when you quote someone who’s posted a link that shouldn’t be there, please don’t compound the problem by quoting it!!! Makes double work for the Moderator, since then I have to delete the link from your post too. Same thing with any material that you think the Moderator will delete – hit the REPORT button (the little exclamation point in the upper right corner of each post), great, but if you must respond, please don’t quote it… as I say, it just doubles the Mod’s work.

:smack: :smack: :smack:

Of course, i should have realised this.