Can We Cut It Out With The Racy Avatars?

[geegee]

grommit: i'm with you. i catch enough noise for this "hobby" without subjecting myself to additional abuse from my spouse or co-workers who happen to spy those interesting avatars while passing the pc.

Same here, and I'm glad you brought it up. I'm also glad to know the solution to the problem is easily resolved as well. geegee

 

[Kyui Su Kim]

I don't see anything wrong with the avatars. Like everyone else said if you have a problem with it don't look.

 

[Esav Benyamin]

To each his own. I agree with grommit that some avatars are over the top for the young and impressionable. I also agree that turning off avatars altogether is the best solution for those who have youngsters reading Bladeforums. Not an ideal solution, but we all have to decide this for ourselves.

Personally, I have a number of members on Ignore because I don't like their attitudes, and I have two on Ignore because their avatars revolt me, and I don't want to lose the pleasure of viewing the others.

Collucci is a baaaad influence !!!

 

[panella]

[

Granted, I respect the morals and ethics of others, but to tell someone to tone down their avatars because you find offense in it is outright censorship.

posted by K.V. Colluci

What would you consider "crossing the line?" Are full-on sex avatars o.k.? We have standards of conduct on the forum. It sets the tone for this place. I think that they're very liberal in allowing for a lively and often heated free range of discussion. Why not for avatars?

Even though I don't think its possible to reach a consensus on what is acceptable in an avatar, I wouldn't mind some general guidelines. Then let the moderators step in quietly and "moderate" any pics they think are too much.

I gotta' say that I saw one avatar today (not yours Colluci)that, for me, crossed the line - for THIS site. I thought it took avatars to "the next level" IMO. I'll bet most of the posters here know EXACTLY which one I'm talking about. I'm NOT offended. And I'm not going to disable my avatars.But some guidelines might be nice.

I'll go put on my flamesuit.

 

[Danbo]

Help, Mommy, the bad man has a semi naked woman in his avatar! :barf:


Stop wining and change your settings so that you no longer have to look at such bad stuff!

 

[grommit]

Seeing as I have now turned off the avatars, I have no idea if I would have found any offense in any of them or not. I can not see any of them.

So asking everyone to tone down this type of avatar so that I do not show them to my children, or my boss, or whoever by accident is censorship? Asking for the general forum to be office friendly and first time visitor friendly and children friendly is censorship? Your freedom of speech does not give me a responsibility to listen or watch. My lack of co-operation in listening or watching is not censorship. Asking you not to take over the entire look and feel of the entire community is not even censorship.

As discussed earlier in this thread I really did not want to start, there are places provided in Bladeforums to share just about anything you jolly well please. Unfortunately the avatars designed for there also show in general.

Many of the current avatars are racier than some of the pictures that get warnings about office friendliness in other threads and posts. The avatar is automatic and can have no such warning. Guests and first time visitors have no way to know that intentional filtering may be required for their environment or even themselves, let alone that it is an option.

I have enjoyed many of them in the past, and the insight into the authors they provide, but with the current trends I will not be seeing any of avatars any more.

Furthermore I will not be suggesting this forum to much of anyone anymore. I am not in a habit of handing out used copies of Playboy or Hustler to schoolchildren, and I have to apply the same standard to this forum's visual appearance with current trends. I can change the visual appearance of the forum on my computer, at least until someone erases my cookies again, but have no control over anyone elses computer, nor do I desire to have that control.

Every person has the choice of where to go, what to look at, what to say, how to dress. I do not wish to censor anyone, but I was hoping for some help here. I would not allow even a friend to bring materials like this into my home and share them with my family, but some of you seem to be insisting that you have the right to do just that to me as my cost of belonging to this community

 

[Warthog]

*edit: Just changed mine...not anything to do with being a dick because of this thread, just been meaning to have a diff pic. Still, nothing you wouldn't see walking in a mall or somewhere in the summer time or on the beach, anywhere (although if you see someone like Michelle Rodriguez, let me know).

Warthog.

 

[Ken C.]

It's not what I consider crossing the line, it's what Spark or the moderators do. Outright porn I don't think would be tolerated, but what I use as an avatar and that others use, I consider tasteful and not out of bounds.

Then let the moderators step in quietly and "moderate" any pics they think are too much.

This would qualify as censorship. Not something I'm for. Granted, Spark can do what he wants with the forum and if, and only if, he tells me that my avatars cross the line I will respectfully change it. Maybe change it to one of Ren's poop pics! Believe me, some avatars are absurd, but I don't think anything I have posted qualifies as pornographic.

 

[hardheart]

Man, I need it so good that I can expend effort complaining about something so trivial. Much better than finding out what can be done through user settings.

 

[Ken C.]

Seeing as I have now turned off the avatars, I have no idea if I would have found any offense in any of them or not. I can not see any of them.

So there you go, problem solved.

So asking everyone to tone down this type of avatar so that I do not show them to my children, or my boss, or whoever by accident is censorship? Asking for the general forum to be office friendly and first time visitor friendly and children friendly is censorship? Your freedom of speech does not give me a responsibility to listen or watch. My lack of co-operation in listening or watching is not censorship. Asking you not to take over the entire look and feel of the entire community is not even censorship.

Your request is unrealistic and not bound to happen. You were told how to take care of the "problem" and you did. Leave it at that and stop worrying about everyone else. By suggesting that we "tone down" our avatars is a form of censorship. You think that by rallying the troops your request will have a leg to stand on and your "crusade" will come to pass.

 

[Keith Montgomery]

Ken's avatars are of beautiful women tastefully posed. They are not suggestive or even mildly pornographic. Erotic yes, pornographic no.

 

[Mark Nelson]

grommit


"Furthermore I will not be suggesting this forum to much of anyone anymore. I am not in a habit of handing out used copies of Playboy or Hustler to schoolchildren..."




That seems like a bit much. By that logic sales papers from the Sunday paper would be off limits. Underware ads and such. Much less T.V. or billboads etc...

 

[panella]

K.V. Collucci - It's not what I consider crossing the line, it's what Spark or the moderators do. Outright porn I don't think would be tolerated, but what I use as an avatar and that others use, I consider tasteful and not out of bounds.

I think that's what I was getting at. I don't think anyone posts what they consider to be distasteful. And if you read my post, I specifically said I wasn't referring to you or your avatar. How 'bout some guidelines? Is that censorship?

 

[torment]

I personally think they are fine compared to anything else I see on television. I'd say your problem is solved grommit and can't see why you wouldn't recommend this site to others based strictly on your previous comments. No, I'm not a parent but I realize what I saw when I was a teenager could be obscene to a child, I did have self-control in what I did. I don't mean to fuel the fire, but I don't agree with your thoughts on the matter.

Oh and the comment about handing out nudie mags to school children is rather absurd and far fetched.

 

[Kennieyk]

ok . i think this thread is down right not right ! Why should we be told by anybody what to use as a avatar? If you have problems you should have talked with spark or the people who have the avatars you dis like. Not whine about it in the forums . This is a great site with or without the avatars . If your offended by a stupid little picture you should talk with spark or the mods .

 

[Blue Jays]

Good Evening All-

Perhaps the default setting should be to disable avatars unless desired by the forumite?

Avatars serve minimal utility IMHO and are certainly disadvantageous when one checks BladeForums during lunch/break at work. At the very least, they utilize additional bandwidth. If not disabled, they're quite annoying when the same person posts to a thread two dozen times or more.

Don't even get me going about emoticon/smilie abuse...

~ Blue Jays ~

 

[Esav Benyamin]

grommit wasn't telling anyone what they could or couldn't do, nor was he whining. He discussed a sensitive issue in a very dignified way. He expressed his opinion. He made a request that -- given the size and diversity of our membership -- he probably realized wasn't going to happen.

We should be able to disagree without being disagreeable.

 

[Keith Montgomery]

I started a poll over in the Community Forum on this topic. I thought it would be interesting to get people's opinions on whether some members avatars should be removed.

 

[Kevan Taylor-Perry]

I'd like to bring up a few points, if I may say so.

I would assume most men here have seen a semi-nude woman or women. Most men find the female body attractive, I think we can all agree on that. It's just one of those things Nature has endowed men with to ensure survival of the species and to ensure men continue to procreate. I would guess elk probably bugle to each other with some from of "Did you see the haunches on that cow?! Wa-hoo!!" It's a natural thing. Some here may not believe humans are animals or that evolution plays its little part in survival of species. However, we do not all follow the same moral taboos and codes. So, the point is, how do we all get along?

Now, in modern America, we have seen the rise of what is termed "political correctness". A machine shop that once had tool company calenders with semi-nude women on them suddenly gets a female receptionist whois "offended" by them and bam, the shop gets sued for "sexual harrassment". In other words, men are punished for being, well, men. On the one hand, here are some women who go well out of their way to be attractive to men amd then some go well out of their way to try and legally punish men for the "crime" of asking if they'd like to go out for dinner. It sends mixed signals and some men are confused as to what they can and cannot do. So, in many cases, men that find themselves in the company of other men want to act like men. I'm not saying all men have pictures of semi-nude women all over the place, I'm saying that it is a natural urge for some men to do this.

Now, in some places, people are offended by the display of the American flag. Others are offended by the display of firearms. How many schools now will not allow even allow school mascots that are frontiersmen or cowboys to hold "weapons" due to "zero tolerance" policies? What we are seeing is "being offended" running amok. The Bill of Rights does not guarantee anyone the right to not be offended. But, now we see making "hate speech" a crime looming over the horizon and, in some nations, it already is. My point here is that if one person is offended by the pin-up avatars, next, someone will be offended by the Magen David avatar because it's a symbol of "Zionist oppression" (Note: I don't believe that myself; I support Israel 100%. I am just stating this as an example.) Then someone will be offended by something else. This is what has happened in our own nation, America, right here. Kids can't read Tom Sawyer or Huck Finn because someone was "offended" by a certain word in those books. So, an entire section of American literature became off limits because someone was "offended". Well, sometimes, free thought and speech is protecting what is repugnant to us.

Another point is, this is a private forum. If this was a forum grade schoolers used in their studies, paid for with tax dollars, that would be one thing. But it's not. People must follow the rules of the owners. But as long as the rules are not broken, the exchange of ideas, even those we may not agree with or like, I don't see the point in initiating a PC censorship campaign that will only snowball until everyone is equally offended. I mean, after all, look how many disagree over Cold Steel! Imagine if someone said, "I'm personally offended because I like Cold Steel and you said they're POS so I want your post deleted!" These things escalate. One person is offended by the pin-ups, someone else says, hey, now that I think about it, I'm offended by the display of "Pagan" images, another says he wants all references to Christianity removed. See what happens? Then everyone is too busy finding a stalking horse to use as a gambit to enforce his own personal agenda rather than talking knives.

The way I see it, the "hide" feature for the avatars is the solution. I understand why some people are offended by those avatars due to their moral beliefs and religious beliefs. I respect their beliefs. But I would also think that there would be mutual respect for those who do not follow those particular religious taboos. In other words, let's not call for a Sharia that all must adhere to, whether they believe in the God who set forth those taboos or not. Use the "hide" function. That way, all beliefs are respected as best as possible.

 

[Ken C.]

Kevan,

Well said! Bravo!