Offensive Photo?

[Dynasty]

Clarkmeister, who likes as little moderation as possible, sent me this comment about a photo which appears in a WPT forum thread.

I saw the pic in that thread, but I figured the WTF
Nigger stuff was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay
over the line. I couldn't believe you left it up.
Even if it's not intended to be hateful towards you,
letting a big nigger script in a photo stay around has
got to be bad policy.


Here's the photo (and yes, it's me at last week's MGM Grand MagooFest).

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v720/DynastyPoker/503730372mlgvbpph9gn.jpg



I burst out laughing when I saw it.

[timprov]

Looks like one of those rare things where it's only funny if it's done to you.

[Lloyd]

I'm personally very surprised it's still up.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm personally very surprised it's still up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? Do you think "nigga" used in this way is that offensive?

[MrWookie47]

I think that the n-word, even the nigga derivative, is a term that's hard to use in a funny context. It's become so infamous that, even while this isn't a remotely racist context, it's going to be found to be very offensive to a number of people viewing this site. Personally, I'm indifferent to the photo, but I think it should be taken down.

[jdl22]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm personally very surprised it's still up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? Do you think "nigga" used in this way is that offensive?

[/ QUOTE ]

As MrWookie pointed out it is offensive to a number of people in general. Perhaps I'm looking looking for something to offend, but I think you having an OE 40 in front of you may have played a role here.

[Evan]

You banned jason_t for saying "stfu" but you're leaving this? Are you out of your mind or can you just not get enough attention?

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
You banned jason_t for saying "stfu" but you're leaving this? Are you out of your mind or can you just not get enough attention?

[/ QUOTE ]

You just don't seem to want to listen. I suspended jason_t for trolling OOT by repeatedly responding to my posts with the same STFU messages. He was intentionally trying to create a problem despitte repeated warnings. He deserved that suspension.

Suspending the guy who put up that photo isn't something I'm even considering. It's obviously a joke.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
You just don't seem to want to listen. I suspended jason_t for trolling OOT by repeatedly responding to my posts with the same STFU messages. He was intentionally trying to create a problem despitte repeated warnings. He deserved that suspension.

[/ QUOTE ]
I understand that completely. I disagree, but I can fully comprehend what you're saying. Jason says you never warned him, but that's hardly relevant anymore.

[ QUOTE ]
Suspending the guy who put up that photo isn't something I'm even considering. It's obviously a joke.

[/ QUOTE ]
Who cares if it was a joke or not? What if I posted that I hoped your mother died at the hands of a rapist? Would that be okay if I didn't really hope that but was just joking around because I thought it was funny?

Just so we're clear, I don't think there's any reason to ban the guy that posted that picture; based on your past actions though, I don't see how you can possibly justify not banning him and maintain that other bannings were appropriate. I just wish you'd be more consistant or at the very least admit that you're not.

[Mat Sklansky]

I had the same reaction as dynasty, but if this many people disagree, it should come down. I'll do it.

[BottlesOf]

It's pretty funny, but it shouldn't be posted.

[BottlesOf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm personally very surprised it's still up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? Do you think "nigga" used in this way is that offensive?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it may be offensive to some, and it's also low content bs that doesn't speak very well about the quality of discourse we're trying to uphold here.

[Greg J]

On a personal and political level, I'm a pro civil liberties kinda guy. However, some things posted on a message board are clearly out of bounds, and private groups (like 2p2) can and should have more leeway in controlling content. At least IMO.

So anyhow, where do we draw the lines with avatars? Jiggling boobs is one thing, but that about this?
(There are taken from right clicking properties and pasting the image url of real current 2p2 avatars.)





http://tgp.emy18.com/series/whiteshirt/thumbs/10.jpg

and this?

http://www.vinnie.org/images/Vida%20Guerra%20Great%20ass2.jpg

[Take just a moment here. Go ahead and get all the giggles out people. You done? Cool, time to be serious again.]

How offensive is this to female posters? I know that while female poker players and gamblers are the exception, but that does not mean we should not consider how this kind of stuff makes them feel.

I should be clear. There is a difference between sophomoric but less objectionalable avatars like those above and this:

http://img332.imageshack.us/img332/889/avatar2xl.jpg

This is not so bad. I can see a woman just rolling her eyes in that "boys will be boys" kind of way to this, but not really being offended. I know it's subjective, but where do we draw the line? I'm not trying to advocate sexism, but I don't want to be a content nazi either.

I just I'm just rhetorically asking "where do we draw the line?" with things that are racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. A swastika? Yes, that is unaaceptable clearly. A confederate flag? I would say yes, but I'm from Mississippi, so I'm accutely aware of the BS behind the "heritage not hate" lies (yes it is a hate symbol). Then again, I don't want to be the pc police here.

I see this being a bigger deal with misogynistism than racism or homophobia though. I see more and more avatars approaching a line that we should probably not allowed to be crossed. I think it's time to address this issue.

[Mat Sklansky]

I remove avatars like the first two when I see them.

[FeliciaLee]

I don't care, but I should have been a guy, anyway.

The ones that bother me are the ones that make me ill. Like induce a gag reflex. I ask the posters to change their avatar. I don't demand it, I just ask out of kindness to myself and others who might be nauseated, lol.

[craig r]

I agree with Greg on this. This is a poker/gambling site, and I don't see any reason that people should be made to feel uncomfortable. I am all for free speech, but I at least like it when ideas are "challenged". And there really isn't anything challenging in most of these types of avatars. Plus, there is the whole NSFW issue.

Also, like Greg, I am not all about being PC for the sake of being PC, but there are things that are said that would be offensive to some. And generally those who knock "PC" ideas are not from a minority group; i.e., women, african americans, lower classes, etc... </end rant> /images/graemlins/smile.gif

craig

[Mat Sklansky]

Seriously, feel free to remove any avatar you guys feel is inappropriate. Just send the user a pm telling them you did so. I've done this countless times without complaint, except for one ironic exception: clarkmeister.

[Evan]

Huh? Those are offensive to women? Sometimes I feel like I'm in preschool around here. Come on guys, what is offensive about that?

If one of the girls had a picture of Brad Pitt or something as an avatar, would you be offended? If you would can you please tell me immediately so I can finish laughing in time to get my homework done tonight?

[Lloyd]

I don't think I'd particularly enjoy seeing Brad Pitt in a thong. Yes, I might just throw up in my mouth a little. That's not necessarily offending me, just kind of disgusting and that's still an issue. And there is the NSFW issue as well.

[stabn]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think I'd particularly enjoy seeing Brad Pitt in a thong. Yes, I might just throw up in my mouth a little. That's not necessarily offending me, just kind of disgusting and that's still an issue. And there is the NSFW issue as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why don't you let one of them say something before putting words in their mouthes.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
there is the NSFW issue as well.

[/ QUOTE ]
I know I'm in the minority with this opinion, but I'm really sick of all the work bs around 2+2. It's a god damned gambling site! If you're supposed to be working then [censored] work. If you're on leisure time then you're on leisure time. I don't see any reason to cater my avatar to someone who is slacking off at their job and can't be alert enough to realize what someone's looking over their shoulder.

[AngryCola]

You may be surprised that I actually agree with you about avatars here. If someone is that concerned about a coworker or boss looking over his shoulder, he can just disable avatars.

Now, if 2+2 doesn't want an avatar up because of their own image concerns, that's another issue.

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

While I am HUGE fan of bouncing breasts and naked ass pics and avatars, I think enough people surf at work, the library, around their kids, etc., that such avatars should not be used.

As to pics of such things, they are easily avoidable, just stay out of OOT while surfing in a public or semi-public place. When at the library with the kids, my 7 year-old is on a computer, my 5 year-old is playing with the puppets, and I am surfing 2+2 (but staying far away from OOT!). Bouncing titty avatars make this more difficult.

Bottom line, this is a commercial website. Perhaps I should not be on 2+2 at work (actually, my employer has blocked it), or in the public library, but if I have to avoid it, others will too. This means less traffic. I'm willing to give up a few boobies for more traffic at 2+2.

[astroglide]

i don't have any problem with avatars unless it's full-blown porn

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

[ QUOTE ]
i don't have any problem with avatars unless it's full-blown porn

[/ QUOTE ]

Oddly, I only have a problem with porn when it's not full-blown porn.

...and welcome to the Star Chamber.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]

When at the library with the kids, my 7 year-old is on a computer, my 5 year-old is playing with the puppets, and I am surfing 2+2 (but staying far away from OOT!). Bouncing titty avatars make this more difficult.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's one of the reasons you have the option to disable them.

[B Dids]

The "just disable them" argument ignores the amazing utility avatars have in helping you quickly scan a thread and only read posts from good posters.

Nobody dies if the avatars are kept "clean". I think this is an area where being conservative is perfectly fine.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
The "just disable them" argument ignores the amazing utility avatars have in helping you quickly scan a thread and only read posts from good posters.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not the point. I'm just saying that if it's a big deal for some people, the rest of us shouldn't have to abide by their standards of decency when they can easily disable them. It doesn't make sense that the people who have problems with a few avatars get to tell everyone else how to do things.

They have the option.

If 2+2 has a problem with an image, that's a completely different thing.

[Greg J]

A girl in a bikini is one thing. TNA soft porn is another step. I'm sure you'll agree that there is a line to be drawn somewhere.

I was just pointing out that I've seen more and more avatars cross a line. This is a gambling site, and does not have to be G rated obviously. Maybe I'm taking this idea too far, and if that's yr opinion that's fine. 1) I'm not advocating bannings or anything of the sort. 2) Notice the interagory tone of my post, I was not asserting the first two avatars WERE offensive by any objective measure, but asking if (and admittedly, perhaps implicitly suggesting that) perhaps some women might find them as such.

FWIW, I just ask my wife what she thought about it, and she said if she were a female poster she would be somewhat offended/made to feel uncomfortable by the first two pics. Felicia, on the other hand, has expressed a different opinion.

Brad Pitt with his shirt off would not bother me. But I don't want to see Brad Pitt's ass cheeks spread wearing a thong.

[beset7]

i miss clarkmeister's kissing chicks avatar.

i'll go with whatever 2+2 wants but personally it'd have to be pretty vulgar for me to independently consider deleting it. So any actual porn and bare naked TNA should go?

[Mat Sklansky]

This seems to be the majority of our audience. I will absolutely cater to them. I need you to be OK with that as a moderator

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
This seems to be the majority of our audience. I will absolutely cater to them. I need you to be OK with that as a moderator

[/ QUOTE ]
If I see an avatar that is blatently porn then I'll kill it, that's about it though. In all honesty I would never even think to do anyting about the ones posted earlier in this thread because they just don't elicit any thought from me. "Oh, small pic of hot girl...." is about as far as I go. I'm not going to be changing Jesus avatars to naked chicks, so I hope you consider that me being okay with it.

There are lots of rules around here that I think are stupid, but I still don't go out of my way to break them. I understand that people read 2+2 at work a lot, but at a certain point I get sick of hearing them complain about NSFW tags because to me it seems really stupid and an excuse to pawn off responsibility for your own actions.

[BottlesOf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
there is the NSFW issue as well.

[/ QUOTE ]
I know I'm in the minority with this opinion, but I'm really sick of all the work bs around 2+2. It's a god damned gambling site! If you're supposed to be working then [censored] work. If you're on leisure time then you're on leisure time. I don't see any reason to cater my avatar to someone who is slacking off at their job and can't be alert enough to realize what someone's looking over their shoulder.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you grow up, you'll understand.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
When you grow up, you'll understand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that I completely agree with Evan, but the above quote doesn't seem very productive.

I mean, if there are legitimate points to be made, I think you should make them instead of just dismissing his opinion because of his age.

This isn't meant to be an attack on you, JBB. I just think Evan would benefit from more productive responses.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
I saw the pic in that thread, but I figured the WTF
Nigger stuff was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay
over the line. I couldn't believe you left it up.
Even if it's not intended to be hateful towards you,
letting a big nigger script in a photo stay around has
got to be bad policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

It amazes me that old dirty Clarkmeister would get so worked up over a single word yet never miss the opportunity to rate a womans ass. If you are removing the post for low content fine. If you are removing the post for being offensive then maybe we should burn some tom sawyer and remove all pictures showing women as sex objects while we are at it too. People really need to adjust their radar as to what should and should not be offensive.

I wrote a different and much more blunt post making my point ever so clearer but I decided it was too much. :-P

Oh well.... I hope this works.

[craig r]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I saw the pic in that thread, but I figured the WTF
Nigger stuff was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay
over the line. I couldn't believe you left it up.
Even if it's not intended to be hateful towards you,
letting a big nigger script in a photo stay around has
got to be bad policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

It amazes me that old dirty Clarkmeister would get so worked up over a single word yet never miss the opportunity to rate a womans ass. If you are removing the post for low content fine. If you are removing the post for being offensive then maybe we should burn some tom sawyer and remove all pictures showing women as sex objects while we are at it too. People really need to adjust their radar as to what should and should not be offensive.

I wrote a different and much more blunt post making my point ever so clearer but I decided it was too much. :-P

Oh well.... I hope this works.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with adjusting our radar is that what is offensive to some, may not be offensive to others. If it said "WTF Kyke", I would personally be more offended by that than if it said, "WTF C-nt". Mainly, because I know what it is like to be called "Kyke" while getting punched by some skinheads, but have no idea what it would be like to be beaten up for being a women and being called "c-nt". But, I can definitely empathize with women, african-americans, etc... And I think it is fairly obvious what is offensive and what isn't.

As far as "dirty old Clarkmeister", why can't he be right about one thing, and wrong about another? He may not think the objectifying of women is wrong, but think saying "nigger" is.

craig

[Mat Sklansky]

From: Ross Flowers < anacardo01@gmail.com>

To: msklansky@aol.com < msklansky@aol.com>
Sent: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 22:04:21 -0600
Subject: Re: Would you like to explain why my account is banned/locked?


I have the following PM waiting in my box:

You are retarded

From: Evan

Don't say dumb [censored] to people who are green.


Care to explain this action, and your drunken disagreements with me in this thread (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=3941674&an=0&page=0#Post 3941674)


If you have a problem with a moderation decision you should bring it up here or privately.

[GuyOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]

I burst out laughing when I saw it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Racist slurs are funny!

?

This one seems like a no-brainer to me.

GoT

[wacki]

First off, he didn't say "wtf nigger", he said "wtf nigga". Those are two totally different things. Also saying "you stupid nigger" is completely different that "yo dog! you ma nigga".

Honestly there are only a few kinds of people that get offended by this crap. They are:

1) Lawsuit fearing CEO's that forget they don't wear panties
2) People that are trying to be politically correct at all costs and are normally ignorant to the actual context or meaning of the message.
3) Black people that are playing the race card to get a free lunch or simply get off on a power trip.
4) about 20% (notice it's not 100%) of the people that use the term "white devil".


Still, it's funny how the only people complaining about this are white.

BTW, last time something like this came up one of my friends said "Man, white people are stupid.". Maybe I should show this one to him.

Dynasty has a bottle of Old E next to him and a WTF face. It's not a racist slur. If the Old E isn't photoshopped, the sign fits. If it is, then it's simply funny.

I can't believe I'm arguing this. Do you guys ever get out of the suburbs?

[astroglide]

i would have just left it up and only removed it if a user complained.

i don't think it's innately offensive because of context and phrasing, but if somebody were offended by it i wouldn't question them.

[BottlesOf]

It's a jopke.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]


Care to explain this action, and your drunken disagreements with me in this thread (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=3941674&an=0&page=0#Post 3941674)


[/ QUOTE ]

What is wrong with his points in that thread? The 15 year old comment? I know 12 year olds that are curvier than your girlfriend. Granted they are well ahead of their age but they could very easily put men in jail with or without a fake ID.

damn.... wasting too much time...

BTW, the Evan's PM response... so out of line yet so funny.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
but if somebody were offended by it i wouldn't question them.


[/ QUOTE ]

Question:

Say all the Jews weren't offended by an anti-Jew joke and wanted more funny anti-jew jokes. Yet an athiest wanted the Jew joke removed because he was offended, would you still comply?

I've come across this situation in real life btw.

On a website of 60K (and otisthemarsupial), your policy is a very bad one.

damn... wasting too much time.

[craig r]

[ QUOTE ]
First off, he didn't say "wtf nigger", he said "wtf nigga". Those are two totally different things. Also saying "you stupid nigger" is completely different that "yo dog! you ma nigga".

Honestly there are only a few kinds of people that get offended by this crap. They are:

1) Lawsuit fearing CEO's that forget they don't wear panties
2) People that are trying to be politically correct at all costs and are normally ignorant to the actual context or meaning of the message.
3) Black people that are playing the race card to get a free lunch or simply get off on a power trip.
4) about 20% (notice it's not 100%) of the people that use the term "white devil".


Still, it's funny how the only people complaining about this are white.

BTW, last time something like this came up one of my friends said "Man, white people are stupid.". Maybe I should show this one to him.

Dynasty has a bottle of Old E next to him and a WTF face. It's not a racist slur. If the Old E isn't photoshopped, the sign fits. If it is, then it's simply funny.

I can't believe I'm arguing this. Do you guys ever get out of the suburbs?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was not necessarily offended by this picture. I honestly could care less, but I would feel bad if somebody was offended by it, especially since this is a gambling message board.

Also, you originally mentioned the word "nigger" and burning Tom Sawyer books. My whole point was that what is not offensive to some, might be offensive to others. And since 2+2.com is a website meant to promote 2+2 material and gambling ideas, concepts, etc... we shouldn't in anyway alienate people (once again I am not referring to this picture). Especially when those who may feel "alienated" can't even defend themselves, because when they do, they are told they are "too sensitive". Once again, it is very easy to say one is being "too sensitive" when you haven't had to deal with being objectified or been attacked because of your ethnicity, sex, etc...

Anyways, decisions like this aren't up to me, but I think, based on the type of forum 2+2 is, there is no need for any discussion of race, religion, etc.. I don't see how any of this makes us any better gamblers.

craig

[astroglide]

it would depend upon the venue. if it's "my house", so to speak, i could easily see myself telling them to go fly a kite. the more commercial/public/large/responsible a situation gets, the more of an obligation one has to comply with requests like this. as a middle ground, i could see myself in certain situations saying "this has been removed at the request of THIS PERSON". if there's a massive number of people that disagree with them, they would be forced to reconsider their position. it would also save me the trouble of reasoning with them individually.

[MrWookie47]

Naming names as to who complained to get a picture taken down is a very bad idea. It's just going to cause the person who complained to be demonized (e.g., Otis), right or wrong. That creates an even more hostile environment that having the picture up in the first place.

[Mat Sklansky]

His points should have been made here. With this many moderators and all the people who get a kick out of taking shots, we don't need "dueling mods" in the other forums.

[astroglide]

note "i could in certain situations"

i was responding to wacki's generalized question, and not operating under the assumption that we were specifically discussing 2+2.

a) removing offensive content without prompting
b) removing potentially offensive contact only upon request, and flagging the person that made the request
c) removing potentially offensive contact only upon request, silently
d) telling the person who got offended to get a life

are all valid responses. the correct one is going to vary from situation to situation.