[ QUOTE ]
I am going to put some emphasis this discussion again since I just ran into it in this section again.
If your NSFW is one click away, the post is coming down.
[/ QUOTE ]
So if you post a picture on DA, and a person who makes a comment on it has a horribly disturbing gallery, you can't post that picture, even if it was of fuzzy bunnies or something? Or are we only going to refer to the ARTIST'S gallery?
I'm not trying to be snarky, but that "one-click" thing gets really hazy on places like DA and other places where there are links and links and links to everything. You can click to the front page of DA from any piece posted here and that could potentially have NSFW material. Also, if you're pulling things down for having NSFW pieces one click away via DA, you wouldn't know that unless you were signed in on your DA account, and you yourself have enabled those pieces to show. "You" referring to anyone.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am going to put some emphasis this discussion again since I just ran into it in this section again.
If your NSFW is one click away, the post is coming down.
[/ QUOTE ]
So if you post a picture on DA, and a person who makes a comment on it has a horribly disturbing gallery, you can't post that picture, even if it was of fuzzy bunnies or something? Or are we only going to refer to the ARTIST'S gallery?
I'm not trying to be snarky, but that "one-click" thing gets really hazy on places like DA and other places where there are links and links and links to everything. You can click to the front page of DA from any piece posted here and that could potentially have NSFW material. Also, if you're pulling things down for having NSFW pieces one click away via DA, you wouldn't know that unless you were signed in on your DA account, and you yourself have enabled those pieces to show. "You" referring to anyone.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't understand the confusion here.
If you post a link to NSFW content, the link gets pulled.
What's not to understand? A page full of links is not NSFW. A page full of NSFW pictures is.
A link going to a page that does not have any NSFW content on it will be left alone.
A link going to a page that does not have any NSFW content on it but does have links to NSFW content will be left alone.
One click means one click.
This is not rocket surgery.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am going to put some emphasis this discussion again since I just ran into it in this section again.
If your NSFW is one click away, the post is coming down.
[/ QUOTE ]
So if you post a picture on DA, and a person who makes a comment on it has a horribly disturbing gallery, you can't post that picture, even if it was of fuzzy bunnies or something? Or are we only going to refer to the ARTIST'S gallery?
I'm not trying to be snarky, but that "one-click" thing gets really hazy on places like DA and other places where there are links and links and links to everything. You can click to the front page of DA from any piece posted here and that could potentially have NSFW material. Also, if you're pulling things down for having NSFW pieces one click away via DA, you wouldn't know that unless you were signed in on your DA account, and you yourself have enabled those pieces to show. "You" referring to anyone.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't understand the confusion here.
If you post a link to NSFW content, the link gets pulled.
What's not to understand? A page full of links is not NSFW. A page full of NSFW pictures is.
A link going to a page that does not have any NSFW content on it will be left alone.
A link going to a page that does not have any NSFW content on it but does have links to NSFW content will be left alone.
One click means one click.
This is not rocket surgery.
[/ QUOTE ]
A stunning lack of understanding of what is being asked and discussed.
[ QUOTE ]
A stunning lack of understanding of what is being asked and discussed.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh really? So you are seeking guidance on what is NSFW?
You shouldn't be. That's even more simple to understand:
NSFW content is whatever LH, Ex, Niv and Kos decide it is.
If you want some safe guidelines, look to the corporate world:
Sex, nudity, racism. All NSFW.
I haven't misunderstood what's being discussed. I'm simply mocking those attempting to weasel around it.
Be well, people of CoH.
Afraid I am gonna have to agree with Bill here. Not sure why some are having trouble understanding this.
Paragonian Knights
Justice Company
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A stunning lack of understanding of what is being asked and discussed.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh really? So you are seeking guidance on what is NSFW?
You shouldn't be. That's even more simple to understand:
NSFW content is whatever LH, Ex, Niv and Kos decide it is.
If you want some safe guidelines, look to the corporate world:
Sex, nudity, racism. All NSFW.
I haven't misunderstood what's being discussed. I'm simply mocking those attempting to weasel around it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think some of the sticking point is that the rules seem arbitrary, as any rule of this sort will. As the "Uncaped" thread's deletion shows, it's not just sex, but also implied sex. But that standard is not enforced consistently, so it's sometimes hard to say what is or isn't allowed.
And this leads people to being snarky.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
I read that thread, Ironik. Someone stated that the artist's DA page was also linked and that page was full of NSFW content.
A lot of people seem to be ignoring that.
Be well, people of CoH.
One of the quirks of the DeviantArt system is that an artist might have scads of NSFW art safely tucked away in her gallery, making a link to her page seem acceptable. Then a new piece gets added and it shows up automagically in Recent Deviations, and your acceptable link is suddenly unacceptable through no fault of the linker.
Is there a way to create a link to a DA page that insures a PG view of the artist's home page, even if that possibly means NOT showing Recent Deviations?
Using Soul Train's redirect idea is one way.
Saving the picture to some other webspace, like that which is often provided by ISPs, rather than linking to a site well know for its NSFW content is another.
There doesn't appear to be a way to directlink to images hosted at deviantart so that nothing but a single image appears.
Be well, people of CoH.
Sure there is!
Just click on 'Download' if that is available, if not you might have to right-click and select View Image, but either way you're bound to get a URL like that that you can directly link to.
Though I would REALLY DISCOURAGE this practice, as it makes it practically impossible to comment on the picture or find the artist who did it and it's just bad form if you ask me.
[ QUOTE ]
Is there a way to create a link to a DA page that insures a PG view of the artist's home page, even if that possibly means NOT showing Recent Deviations?
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, if the artist in question is entering their pieces correctly, there should be. If you're not logged in to DA, everything that is NSFW should be blocked from view. But that requires the artists to be flagging their work as SFW or not, and not all artists bother to do that. You can't even be guaranteed not seeing NSFW by going to the main DA page.
TL
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A stunning lack of understanding of what is being asked and discussed.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh really? So you are seeking guidance on what is NSFW?
You shouldn't be. That's even more simple to understand:
NSFW content is whatever LH, Ex, Niv and Kos decide it is.
If you want some safe guidelines, look to the corporate world:
Sex, nudity, racism. All NSFW.
I haven't misunderstood what's being discussed. I'm simply mocking those attempting to weasel around it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope. Not seeking guidance at all. Your post here continues to show a lack of understanding of the conversation as your previous post did. Understanding what is NSFW is not the point. How to acceptably link when web pages can be a moving target is. In your attempt to be smug, mocking and accuse people of trying to weasel around standards, you miss an opportunity to have a conversation about the subject preferring I guess to go the route that you know what the answer is when you don't even have a clear grasp on the complete conversation.
Yeah. The 'mature filter' on DA as a solution is most definitely NOT a solution at all because it relies on PEOPLE to make decisions, and people in general are not very smart.
(Everyone here is! Because you are all persons not people!)
[ QUOTE ]
Sure there is!
Just click on 'Download' if that is available, if not you might have to right-click and select View Image, but either way you're bound to get a URL like that that you can directly link to.
Though I would REALLY DISCOURAGE this practice, as it makes it practically impossible to comment on the picture or find the artist who did it and it's just bad form if you ask me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not to mention that it bypasses all watermarks or forced-resize features DA may have in place.
I think the problem isn't so much linking to an image page, but linking to a gallery page or an artist page. We love to showcase the artists... but sometimes these folks get racy. And because we're linking to dynamic content, there's no control over what's there.
So, I propose this:
Linking to IMAGE pages should be OK. Yes, there's a risk of someone's avatar in the comments being racy.
Refrain from linking to GALLERY or PROFILE Pages. Instead, mention that they're on a resource page, such as TA's, and link to that. (TA, you might need to clean up the featured selections a little, but not much, you're pretty good at that.)
How's that work for everyone?
"City of Heroes. April 27, 2004 - August 31, 2012. Obliterated not with a weapon of mass destruction, not by an all-powerful supervillain... but by a cold-hearted and cowardly corporate suck-up."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A stunning lack of understanding of what is being asked and discussed.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh really? So you are seeking guidance on what is NSFW?
You shouldn't be. That's even more simple to understand:
NSFW content is whatever LH, Ex, Niv and Kos decide it is.
If you want some safe guidelines, look to the corporate world:
Sex, nudity, racism. All NSFW.
I haven't misunderstood what's being discussed. I'm simply mocking those attempting to weasel around it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think some of the sticking point is that the rules seem arbitrary, as any rule of this sort will. As the "Uncaped" thread's deletion shows, it's not just sex, but also implied sex. But that standard is not enforced consistently, so it's sometimes hard to say what is or isn't allowed.
And this leads people to being snarky.
[/ QUOTE ]
In the uncaped situation, it is the linking I think that was the reason is was pulled, not the art itself. But, that is the question. If you link to an image on an artists page, you may be safe one moment and not safe the next. If an artists page can be nsfw at anytime, we're just not going to be able to link images from it no matter how safe they may be.
I kinda hate you all right now. Not you, though. I love you still. You're awesome.
[ QUOTE ]
Sure there is!
Just click on 'Download' if that is available, if not you might have to right-click and select View Image, but either way you're bound to get a URL like that that you can directly link to.
Though I would REALLY DISCOURAGE this practice, as it makes it practically impossible to comment on the picture or find the artist who did it and it's just bad form if you ask me.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've linked that way before. Can non-mmebers see them though? I thought they could'nt.
Oh I have no idea.
It's free to become a member so I don't see a problem with that.
You can even use fake info if you have concerns about signing up.
But yeah. Linking to the actual picture page where you can comment and such is fine. It's -EASY- to go back to the main artist's page from there. And if you don't know how you need to follow a tutorial or something!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sure there is!
Just click on 'Download' if that is available, if not you might have to right-click and select View Image, but either way you're bound to get a URL like that that you can directly link to.
Though I would REALLY DISCOURAGE this practice, as it makes it practically impossible to comment on the picture or find the artist who did it and it's just bad form if you ask me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not to mention that it bypasses all watermarks or forced-resize features DA may have in place.
I think the problem isn't so much linking to an image page, but linking to a gallery page or an artist page. We love to showcase the artists... but sometimes these folks get racy. And because we're linking to dynamic content, there's no control over what's there.
So, I propose this:
Linking to IMAGE pages should be OK. Yes, there's a risk of someone's avatar in the comments being racy.
Refrain from linking to GALLERY or PROFILE Pages. Instead, mention that they're on a resource page, such as TA's, and link to that. (TA, you might need to clean up the featured selections a little, but not much, you're pretty good at that.)
How's that work for everyone?
[/ QUOTE ]
That's okay with me but I'm not a mod. Was the image that was pulled linked that way?
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah. The 'mature filter' on DA as a solution is most definitely NOT a solution at all because it relies on PEOPLE to make decisions, and people in general are not very smart.
(Everyone here is! Because you are all persons not people!)
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm very heavy on the mature filter because, you know.... for the children.
[ QUOTE ]
Sure there is!
Just click on 'Download' if that is available, if not you might have to right-click and select View Image, but either way you're bound to get a URL like that that you can directly link to.
Though I would REALLY DISCOURAGE this practice, as it makes it practically impossible to comment on the picture or find the artist who did it and it's just bad form if you ask me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well there ya go.
I see and understand the arguments against doing this, but the mods have already laid down the law. If you link off to a dynamic page that may be clean today but not tomorrow, you are taking the risk of having your post nuked.
There's no misunderstanding, misinterpretation or ill will about it.
Does it make life in this forum inconvenient for you? Absolutely. But rules usually do.
As an aside and for the record, I find the rule stupid. A link is not a picture. Folks have the choice to click a link or not click one.
Be well, people of CoH.
I agree with ya Billz too. We have a rule in the IRC chat that ANY links at all must have a SFW or NSFW tag, and also optional a brief description of what the link is if it looks questionable so people can decide whether or not to click it.
I think the same thing should go here. Now, maybe I'm not 100% consistent, but whenever I post a new art I always put a SFW or NSFW tag, as well as a brief description of what it is. And yes I realize I just broke my own rule by linking to the pic above as an example but you know what I mean
But yes I think everyone should post something SFW or NSFW tag with some description or something.
Generally I think the actual pic page on DA with all the comment boxes is just fine. Avatars while yes maybe they can be NSFW they're generally too small too notice. It's not like a GIANT HUGE PICTURE OF [censored] or anything!
[ QUOTE ]
Sure there is!
Just click on 'Download' if that is available, if not you might have to right-click and select View Image, but either way you're bound to get a URL like that that you can directly link to.
Though I would REALLY DISCOURAGE this practice, as it makes it practically impossible to comment on the picture or find the artist who did it and it's just bad form if you ask me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, I checked it out. I logged out and tried pulling up an image that way and it worked so that is always an option. I'm sure those that are members can figure out a way to get to the artist's page if they want to fave.
Not unless they're told or the artist... y'know. Signed the pic or something. And who knows if the image is on the user's gallery or on the artist's gallery?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am going to put some emphasis this discussion again since I just ran into it in this section again.
If your NSFW is one click away, the post is coming down.
[/ QUOTE ]
So this one is out of the question i take it?...
Also first in under a red name
[/ QUOTE ]
Man, you are asking to get spanked.
The last time I got modded, I used the word "retard," and it was mostly self-referential. Being cheeky is right out.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction