Ann Coulter pic

Ask questions about this discussion board here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Hogeye
Posts: 1047
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 3:33 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Contact:

Ann Coulter pic

Post by Hogeye »

I'm not too clear on the rules. I understand you do not want people to post prurient pictures, but what about links? For example, I was reading the Ann Coulter thread and wanted to put a link to this postcard. Is that cool?
"May the the last king be strangled in the guts of the last priest." - Diderot
With every drop of my blood I hate and execrate every form of tyranny, every form of slavery. I hate dictation. I love liberty. - Ingersoll
User avatar
Savonarola
Mod@Large
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:11 pm
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50
Location: NW Arkansas

Post by Savonarola »

Moving to Help.

-- Sav, C&O Moderator
User avatar
Savonarola
Mod@Large
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:11 pm
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50
Location: NW Arkansas

Re: Ann Coulter pic

Post by Savonarola »

FFForums has a policy of editing or deleting denigrating or abusive material. My opinion is that we'd prefer our members to stick to pertinent topics.
If we're going to bash Ann Coulter, I'm sure we can simply look at just about anything she's ever said and be able to roast her, without the need for an incredibly poorly-done fake nude. We may not mind being despised for being infidels, but we'd rather not lose contributors by repulsing them with tasteless content.

This question may get especially tricky when considering satirical parodies, which (IIRC) are both protected by law and allowed by copyright statutes.

I would like to suggest that -- if such material is to be allowed -- it be allowed via link only (i.e. no such images visible on our board), and links to "prurient" items be required to be accompanied by a warning or notice of some kind. "Not work safe" or "not safe for work" (or "NSFW") seem to be popular "disclaimers."

That said, I will defer this decision to the site admin.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Dirty bits etc.

Post by Dardedar »

DAR
Good answer Sav. I wanted to talk about this anyway. Might as well do it all out in the open rather than in a private email.

I would like to see minimal censorship and maximum freedom. That's the goal. However I would also like to be able to invite religious conservative folks and perhaps junior skeptics to the site and not have them run away because they don't want view graphic images of genitalia etc. In my experience freethinkers come in many flavors, from the free love orgy extreme to the downright prudish and conservative. About 120 years ago, when Ingersoll was asked if he wanted to join or associate himself with some free love branch of freethinkers he responded to the effect (paraphrase): They are free to inspect each others private parts but they won't be inspecting mine (I wish I could find that quote).

So lets try this. If you feel you need to share something graphic to make a point (sexual, war, torture or otherwise), give a link AND an explicit warning IN CAPS so that people who don't want to view it will be without excuse. Thus this Coulter pic (which I already had on file but would probably never have occasion to use) would have a warning like [WARNING: EXPLICT NUDITY].

Regarding language I want a lot of slack. Sav recommended banning the F-bomb (and thus probably the C-bomb etc), and as much as this goes against my Carlin, Bruce, Stern, Flynt honed sensibilities, it's probably for the best. Sav probably has more forum experience than I do and I'll defer to his judgment on some of this unless it starts to feel too stuffy in here. Remember the goal.

What I will be more likely to want purged will be considerable gratuitous abuse, trolling or attempts to sabotage the site by making it an unenjoyable experience for those interested in conscientious adult exchange of ideas.

If this doesn’t work we’ll try something else.

D.
--------------------
Remember the true enemies of freedom:

"From the polluted fountain of indifferentism flows that absurd and erroneous doctrine or rather raving which claims and defends liberty of conscience for everyone. From this comes, in a word, the worst plague of all, namely, unrestrained liberty of opinion and freedom of speech."

--Pope Gregory XVI (1765-1846) attacking the Enlightenment
User avatar
Savonarola
Mod@Large
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:11 pm
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50
Location: NW Arkansas

Afterword

Post by Savonarola »

I know of at least one forum that does not ban the f-bomb. Despite my personal views on censorship, I feel it is better to avoid losing readers who might find it intolerable. This can be changed in the future if necessary.
Darrel wrote:What I will be more likely to want purged will be considerable gratuitous abuse, trolling or attempts to sabotage the site by making it an unenjoyable experience for those interested in conscientious adult exchange of ideas.
Personal attacks will be removed, no questions asked. If the attack is just a single word or sentence, the rest of the post will remain intact.
Our current decision is to not censor trolling, rather to let users dismantle the troll's talking points. Any user or IP that has been determined to be repeatedly trolling will be notified via private message and subsequently banned if the behavior does not change.
Considering that both of the above are forms of "sabotage," any user or IP that has been determined to be a saboteur will be banned.

ETA: The C-bomb has been censored too.
Post Reply