Banned Photos...

[Steve5D]

I'm starting this thread at the suggestion on Overread, regarding the turn my thread "What Do You Carry" took.

I was shocked to learn that photos of guns are not allowed on TPF. In my estimation, such a decision is senseless. Guns are inanimate objects. Do people get into heated discussions about them? Of course. But people get into heated discussions about everything under the sun.

One of the most troubling things is that thread was when Terri stated that the moderators and administrators are the arbiters of what "art" is. Perhaps even more shocking was that Overread supported that notion, based on the fact that this is a privately owned site. From what I can tell, "art" is now no longer subjective, yet 40 years with a camera in my hand tells me otherwise. It doesn't stop being subjective because of the venue.

But, now, what we see as "art" is subject to approval.

Why is this? Why can we show photos of tits and asses and hateful Christians protesting homosexuals at funerals, but we're too emotionally fragile to handle a photo of a firearm?

We have "NSFW" sections, and those are noted as such. They're viewable only by Supporting Members. People who choose not to view nudity know not to enter that section, because they know what's there.

My thought is that, certainly, an accommodation could be made for firearms or other things which some people have a problem with...

 

[SCraig]

Photos of guns aren't banned as of 1/8/14 unless they changed the policy once again.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/tpf-news-announcements/349015-change-forum-firearms-policy.html

 

[Gavjenks]

I was under the impression that guns were recently allowed, hence the large number of gun photo threads from the last few weeks.

 

[TreeofLifeStairs]

So they can be posted but if the conversation gets too heated then the thread will get locked down. I thought that was pretty much how it went for all threads/posts.

 

[Steve5D]

Where are those gun photo threads?

I posted a photo of one of my guns in a thread, and the photo was removed because it wasn't "artful". The very fact that moderators are permitted to make such a determination is actually a bit more alarming than the photo being removed.

My suggestion about the separate suggestion stands, and I believe it warrants consideration and approval...

 

[Steve5D]

So they can be posted but if the conversation gets too heated then the thread will get locked down. I thought that was pretty much how it went for all threads/posts.

So did I.

Apparently, though, that's not necessarily the case...

 

[runnah]

As a mini mod I can only declare small things as art, such as jewelry, postage stamps and those Russian dolls. Soon I hope to move onto larger objects like statues, buildings and livestock.

 

[KmH]

Photography Forum & Digital Photography Forum FAQ

*While images containing firearms depicted for the sake of art are permitted, discussion of firearms and related politics is not. Like politics and religion, it is another “hot button” topic that can lead to inflammatory discussion. Such discussion posts will be removed by the moderating team.

 

[Tailgunner]

So they can be posted but if the conversation gets too heated then the thread will get locked down. I thought that was pretty much how it went for all threads/posts.

The conversation never got past cold in terms of heated debates. Everyone was just humming along peacefully discussing/posting photos until an Administer decided the photos had to go. I really don't think people was really seriously discussing firearms, it was more of a playful joking around.

 

[runnah]

The conversation never got past cold in terms of heated debates. Everyone was just humming along peacefully discussing/posting photos until an Administer decided the photos had to go. I really don't think people was really seriously discussing firearms, it was more of a playful joking around.

I am just glad he didn't post his ghost photo.

 

[Tailgunner]

The conversation never got past cold in terms of heated debates. Everyone was just humming along peacefully discussing/posting photos until an Administer decided the photos had to go. I really don't think people was really seriously discussing firearms, it was more of a playful joking around.

I am just glad he didn't post his ghost photo.

Wut, I wanna see!

 

[EIngerson]

The conversation never got past cold in terms of heated debates. Everyone was just humming along peacefully discussing/posting photos until an Administer decided the photos had to go. I really don't think people was really seriously discussing firearms, it was more of a playful joking around.

That is what I've complained about. Ditching threads or photos because you "think" it's going to turn south, or because it's "about to" derail a thread is just ridiculous. You don't remove something that hasn't broken the rules yet. That's not moderating,

 

[Steve5D]

The conversation never got past cold in terms of heated debates. Everyone was just humming along peacefully discussing/posting photos until an Administer decided the photos had to go. I really don't think people was really seriously discussing firearms, it was more of a playful joking around.

That is what I've complained about. Ditching threads or photos because you "think" it's going to turn south, or because it's "about to" derail a thread is just ridiculous. You don't remove something that hasn't broken the rules yet. That's not moderating,

Agreed.

If someone derails a thread, deal with them. Period.

Shutting down threads out of fear is kinda' silly...

 

[runnah]

Agreed. If someone derails a thread, deal with them. Period. Shutting down threads out of fear is kinda' silly...

You derailed your own thread by doing something you knew would get a reaction. Now you are crying pity poor me. Seems to me if you hadn't pulled a bs move and started a thread with false intentions this all could have been avoided. **** even if you had made a thread called "look at my sweet gun" no one would have given a ****.

I dislike censorship very much but there is a difference between wrongfully incriminated and just stirring **** up.

 

[EIngerson]

The bothersome part of the whole thing is that some moderators have wrapped themselves around the text of the rule instead of moderating in the spirit the rule was made. Sure SOME post about guns derail and get heated. None of the censorship I've seen lately was done because a debate about beliefs or political views ensued. That's what is so ridiculous about it. The posts and photos are being removed for the wrong reasons.