Locked topic reply

[Doug]

Sorry, I just erased the entire thread by accident I think. Anyway, here is my reply:
---------------------------------------------------------------
I locked it.

I dont know how many times I have to tell you guys, if you are going to post offensive material, USE A DAMN LINK. We are all smart people, its not a hard concept.

Sorry to be such a jerk about this but abide by the rules or don’t post here. I'm getting tough on this one because its a reoccurring problem and I believe the solution is a good one. There is no reason to post a picture inline with the posting so its automatically viewable - not here anyway. You absolutely must use a link. (To clarify what I'm talking about - I am referring to POSSIBLY inappropriate material, normal bike pictures are fine to post inline. If you are not ABSOLUTELY certain the post is pg-rated, then use a link) Dallara, so YOU are clear, Let me define pornographic for you: "Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal."

You should make a link to the image and title the link appropriately so it is OBIVIOUS what is contained within. That way people can decide if its ok to view the image at that time.

I've received many emails from people through the years about this and its time it stopped. I personally don’t have a huge problem with the images, but I do have a problem if some of the people on the site cant enjoy it because of these posts, which frankly, are useless, and totally posted in the wrong section. This is no way this in any way is related to the r1150r. At the very least it should be in Patrick's section. These are the rules, they are fair ones.

If you don’t want your post deleted, you now know what to do!

(ps- If you want to push the subject, I'll have the distinct privilege of hitting the "BAN" button for the first time on this site.)

[dallara]

Well, Doug...

First off, it is *YOUR* website, and forum, so I have to agree with what you say is what goes. I appreciate you having and hosting this site, and since that essentially makes it your "home" I will most certainly conduct myself as a though I were a guest in your "home". That is only good manners and common courtesy.

That said, I will say I am surprised you locked that particular thread. I simply can't see how it was objectionable, moral or otherwise, to anybody. Perhaps some of the replies and pictures were in the wrong forum, and should have been in "Off Topic" or "Patrick's Playhouse", but still... It was pretty mild stuff at worst, and essentially harmless.

You have had two woman members state quite clearly that the posts and pictures were not objectionable to them, so I am even more confused. Now that you have wiped out the second thread completely, however, no one will ever get to read those replies from the women members again, which is a bit sad...

I certainly had no idea that guests carried such weight here... evidently more than members... but now I know, and I will abide by your rules.

Thank you for taking the time to clear up the controversy, and again, I appreciate you having the site. However, if you honestly feel the best response is to *ban* me from the site, I will graciously abide by that decision, too. If that is the case, please allow me to post a goodbye and farewell message to some of my friends here.

Cheers!

Dallara

[Doug]

My reply, in short:

Let’s not get dramatic. I am not requesting that you leave.

You don’t have to be a woman to be offended.

Some people just don’t want to see that stuff - what if their kids are reading along? What if they are at work? What if a guy's computer-illiterate wife walks by while one of those pictures are up and now she thinks he's looking at happytime all night instead of reading a good website? There could be a million reasons why pictures like that should be links instead of posting them inline. They should also only be in Pat's section. Then fair warning has been given to those who may be viewing the site, and if they want to click on the link and see it, they know what's coming.

I'm going to be deleting (without warning or explanation) any posts I see that do not meet the criteria from now on. I encourage the moderators to do the same.

[rdsmith3]

I applaud Doug's position.

I would also like to suggest that we do not pile on those who do voice an objection to the pictures. If someone is offended, we should not ridicule them for it.

[Shaman]

Was it my naked backside video crash post?
I DID link, and I did warn.

I need a gold star.

[geechie]

I would also like to suggest that we do not pile on those who do voice an objection to the pictures. If someone is offended, we should not ridicule them for it.

Now that is an adult speaking.

And I have to agree. rrfan (Aaron) made his comments with clearly the best of intentions. While I might not agree with his take on judgements to come, I do appreciate that his heart's in the right place. I think he got jumped on unnecessarily.

Ridicule is for mean kids.

I'm better than that... mostly.

George

[toner87]

Thanks, Doug. I'm not a prude and my wife knows I take an "occasional" look at racy pictures, but she works at home and can see my PC screen from her work station. I like to be able to choose to see this content by clicking or not clicking such links. Thanks for all the hard work. Now, back to motorcycles!
T.

[Gord]

Thanks Doug. This will definitely ensure that I don't become another Stig O'Tracy.

[Guest]

People are offended waaaaay too easy. If there is anything at all offensive or ugly about a set of boobies, i dont know what it is.

There are much worse things to look at than a guys backside or some breasts on a bike...and dammit, you were warned.

When you see it, dont look, but dont wreck it for the rest of us.

Yes it is a guest...i am anonomous. I am also annoyed. Deal with it.

Prudes.

[dallara]

Well, in this case... I'm with the Guest.

Doug may think I am "pushing it", but if so, so be it. But I am not going to go anonymous to voice my annoyance. No, it will be right out front here, with me fully identified.

Yes, this is Doug's board, and so we should conduct ourselves according to his rules, but...

Should we really be locking and deleting threads that deal with what some find offensive on the main board, while allowing (and maybe even endorsing) those who try to try to force their own religious beliefs and moral judgements on others?

Personally, I think that if posting a picture of a fully clothed woman standing next to a bike an international motorcycle show is somehow offensive and distasteful, and therefore is to be relegated to only the "Off Topic" section or "Patrick's Playhouse", then by God (pun intended...) any posts regarding one's religious beliefs or moral judgements should restricted the same way... i.e. No posts or threads about religion or personal morals should be allowed in the main forum or they will be deleted or locked. Any such religious or morals posts should only be allowed in the "Off Topic" section or "Patrick's Playhouse".

Isn't that fair?

See, I find someone attempting to promote personal religious beliefs, moral standards, or otherwise self-perceived "high ground" on me in the main forum to be quite offensive, especially if I cannot respond in a manner I see fit because of the rules of the board.

On another note, I also find it rather disconcerting that the wants and needs of some non-member guests, like the ones in those two threads that were locked or deleted, are taken more seriously than the opinions than other guests... like the one in this thread I agree with...

What's worse, IMHO, is that those guests that take some perceived moral high ground are taken more seriously than paying members of the board.

Probably best I close now, as I have most likely only pushed myself further toward banishment, but I would feel remiss if I did not mention my disappointment over this entire affair.

Cheers!

Dallara

[BobFV1]

Doug -

Could you make Dallara and me moderators, so we could un-ban ourselves in case we get banned?

There's just a couple dinosaurs wandering around the board - we're not bad people, we just want to have a little fun...

[Doug]

Dallara, religious and political stuff is ALSO not allowed in any section but Pat's.

I erased and moved a bunch of posts today (fyi - this is my day off). If your post is missing, it is either in Pat's section or gone forever. If a post did not have a link to the material, I erased it. If it was posted properly I moved it.

[yjleesvrr]

I personally am rather ambivalent about the posts in question. They don't do a whole lot for me first of all - if I want pics of nice looking women, there are better alternatives

I will say however that lately, I have not perused this site as much because I'm often working at my clients locations. While a pic of a bike won't raise any eyebrows, pics of nude or scantily clad women will, especially given that many of my clients have employees who were born in more conservative countries and would look askance at these pics being on my laptop.

So when I need to take a break, I find myself reading the New York Times, Washington Post, or Motorcyle Online these days rather than doing my usual perusing of the R1150R site unless I'm in my own office.

Which all goes to say, Doug has a valid point.

[Shaman]

It is pretty much informal Board policy across the whole net to abbrev. a post status in the title if it might be not quite obvious to the content of the msg (or even if it is)

SFW = Safe For Work (title might imply something it is not and its ok)
MSFW = Mostly Safe For Work (depends on where you work)
NSFW = Not Safe For Work (check in private or at least wait til the orgy)

Examples:
Nipple pops out and she gets hers (SFW)
- actually a baby related mishap involving a bottle

Underskirt Pics of Hungarian School Marms (MSFW)
- No actual nudity, but if people viewed at the right angles they might possibly see underwear

Check out the new model, fast and sleek (NSFW)
- 40yo post topless pics of his 20year old GF on top of his R/11

[darthrider]

Geek-speak.