The line - is where?

[pdg]

[Skudd]

[pdg]

I'm not forcing anyone to read my posts. Nor am I asking anyone to agree or disagree with my perspective.

I can't recall ever posting any images simply to 'push the boundaries'. The images in the opening post of this thread were chosen specifically to be completely 'safe' in general definition and I was wondering if 'general' applied to 'forum definition'. If you have evidence to the contrary I am happy to hold up my hands and admit I forgot about them.

I don't have a problem with following rules if I am able to follow those rules without having to wonder if they have been re-interpreted in the last 3 days.

As I have said, if the person who was banned got banned for a clear and consistent reason I wouldn't have thought about it at all. For instance, he spammed his group, he also sent abusive PMs to those who disagreed with him - both of which are clearly against the rules. I am not defending him at all.



I for one am certainly not going to let one particular normal member bully me off the forum because he or she doesn't like me asking for clarification of a very ambiguously enforced rule.
____________________
Any and all advice given should not be followed - if you have to ask it means you don't know so get a man in to do it for you.

[mentalboy]

I have recently been on the receiving end of the **** treatment on another forum after I wrote the word 'cock', keep pushing the boundaries and how long will it be before BCF gets that way?

How tricky would it be to make more areas of the forum off limits to non-members, in the same way the NSFW tag or the regional forums do? People who don't want to sign up as members could access 'biking news and issues, bike chat and the workshop' only and leave the rest of the place as it used to be? With members accepting that if they sign up and peruse the non-bike specific areas that they may well get nobcatted, etc?
____________________
Make mine a Corona.

[Ste]

[Marmalade]

As I see it.

The nsfw boundary is set by google, this is interpreted by the mods and based on how prudish and pure each mod is, the line can wander a bit.

The nsfw tag isn't for protection of people at work, if i had a job somewhere that had a strict policy, like fuck would I visit BCF while there and people should realise that, but rather, google stamped their feet and said 'we will not tolerate smut on pages that show our ads' so, put a nsfw tag on, the ads don't show and google is a happy bunny.
____________________
Nobby the Bastard: How yo tell the difference between the actual japanese and her just screaming because she's had live fish stuck up her arse? [url=https://www.nicks-shop.co.uk/bcf-goodies-15-c.aspGet BCF stickers and things here[/url] Reflective helmet stickers - Legal requirement in france - Clicky

[pdg]

There is another 'issue' I have that I don't think I've yet touched on about this.

I very rarely look in threads with a NSFW tag. I can't be bothered on the whole. As soon as that tag is applied, it seems that it's jumped on with 'shock' images for the sake of it. "Oh look, a NSFW tag, donkey pron time!!"

So, a thread that may contain an image of a scantily clad person (with or without a bike) that USED to be considered SFW suddenly gets treated as an LPWmkVII thread immediately following the application of a tag.

I have nothing against LPW, many people find it entertaining. In a way, it would be a shame if it went - it wouldn't affect me personally but I still think it should stay.

Time was, an untagged thread could be considered 'middle ground' - it wasn't exactly gbbikers, but it was well clear of LPW.

Now, since the re-interpretation of the NSFW rules it's getting to the stage where there are the two extremes with no middle ground at all.



(Note, these are issues and opinions I have personally, if you don't like them, whatever.)
____________________
Any and all advice given should not be followed - if you have to ask it means you don't know so get a man in to do it for you.

[Ste]

[ScaredyCat]

[pdg]

[pdg]

[Ste]

I for one am outraged by the inconsistency in the enforcement of the rules which aren't clearly defined!!

I will be sending a strongly worded letter of complaint with my monthly subscription payment and I recommend that anyone else who is pissed off does the same.

[bEN_]

I'll be demanding a free month for the inconvenience caused
____________________
2010 Ducati 848 Dark

Lamp Post Enthusiast

[M-C]

[CHR15]

As a mature and responsible adult, I feel I should add my own view point to this informative discussion;
____________________
Turbocharged drag thing / project death weapon / GK73A
Ste: I'm not entirely sure how you'd go about verbally abusing someone with a potato but I'm sure it's possible.

[Ste]

https://i.imgur.com/4M49PD0.png

I doubt they'd be too bothered about their ads being on a nsfw page, maybe korn should get some advertisers like that.

Or, he could put ads for what remains of his pr0n empire.

[G]

Bizarelly, I agree with Skudd and Ste is providing an accurate portrayal of issues related to 'not work safe' images!

As far as there being very clear rules - I think MC has nicely shown why this is a bad thing.
In his case he seems to just ignore big sections, but in others people will try and push the rules right to the limit, rather than not being a twat in the first place.

[Ste]

I consider myself as an expert on the subject.