Banned Photos...

[kathyt]

I think someone needs to get laid, because this thread is giving me a headache. I can only imagine how the mods feel!

Pick me,Pick me!!!!! ughhh!!!!!just reread the headache thing

Yeah, I wasn't referring for me needing the pick me up!

 

[Steve5D]

Would a "what do you drive?" thread where people post pics of their cars get taken down because it isn't artsy?

The photo in post #2 in this thread is artistic gold: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photo-themes/39751-automotive-your-car-photography.html

Clearly, artistic in every regard...

 

[Overread]

What's alarming here is the very real fact that, if a moderator doesn't believe a photo is "artistic", he or she can remove it, and that removal needn't be justified beyond "It's not artistic".

We can't form an artistic panel formed of highly respected artists and artistic lecturers from top universities and galleries. We're a photography forum on the internet; and mods are voluntary staff. There's no budget for it and honestly no actual real need.

You can rest assured that we do discuss things in the background - and should a user feel that they've not been treated fairly we do respond to pms and feedback and we can revise choices made if a good case is put forward. Thus far this has been the only removed gun content (that I recall) since the rule went into place and far as I can tell no one is really disputing the fact that within the context of the thread it was the right choice considering the rule.

 

[Steve5D]

There are still to many who, for whatever reason, will take a very aggressive and hostile angle to such content.

So. You. Ban. Them.

Wait. You ban people for finding offense?

Given that logic, I could ban you.

 

[manaheim]

Steve, I think your arguments here are conveniently side-stepping elements that I genuinely believe you are aware of and understand.

What are the facts?

* Guns are a hot-button topic in the same vein as religion and politics
* TPF is owned by a private party
* TPF is a business with customers and advertisers

The owners have established rules that they feel appropriate in a manner to best serve both their customers and their advertisers. As with any ruling, it does not make everyone happy.

As a sign of flexibility, the owners have decided to allow SOME gun images... or, more specifically, "any image which includes guns that is also artistic".

This was a VERY cool thing of them to do, but it does have this one fundamental problem. That is, simply, it's not a hard-line rule. "NO GUNS!" is an easy rule to govern. "AS MANY GUNS AS YOU LIKE AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT PINK!" is an easy rule to govern. "Guns as long as we think they are artistic, and it doesn't cause huge raging fights on the forum" is a really HARD rule to govern.

I think you know all this.

So, in the end, rather than making a hard-line and universal judgment call of "NO GUNS!", the owners have decided to make a more flexible ruling of "GUNS WHEN ARTISTIC!". Since that requires judgment calls to be made on a per-post basis, they leave it to the moderators to make those judgments.

Needless to say, those judgments are going to be VERY subjective, and I can tell you from even recent experience that all the mods will not necessarily agree on any given post. How could they? There are no rules to follow here. It's just a judgment call.

I don't think any of this is news to you.

As with anything in a situation like this, ultimately you're at the mercy of those in authority and the decisions they make. Unfortunately, it is also a case of "If you don't like it, sorry... you're free not to visit anymore".

You can certainly make the case to change the ruling, but honestly posting this kind of thread on the forum isn't the way to accomplish that. You'd need to go directly to the forum ownership. I suppose you could point back to this thread as a way to show support for the idea, but really... were I the site owner, I'd pretty much politely respond explaining all of the things I just told you, and then move on. I would not change the rule.

And again... I think you know ALL of this. All I'm doing here is highlighting it.

 

[Steve5D]

We can't form an artistic panel formed of highly respected artists and artistic lecturers from top universities and galleries. We're a photography forum on the internet; and mods are voluntary staff. There's no budget for it and honestly no actual real need.

I agree.

What I don't agree with is a moderator removing a photo because he or she thinks it has no artistic merit, and then essentially requiring the poster to defend what he sees as its artistic qualities. That defies everything I've ever learned about what art is, and it's disturbing, especially when you consider that it's coming from others who are, allegedly, also artists...

You can rest assured that we do discuss things in the background - and should a user feel that they've not been treated fairly we do respond to pms and feedback and we can revise choices made if a good case is put forward.

Unfortunately, that equates to trying to un-ring a bell...

 

[Overread]

So. You. Ban. Them.

If we banned everyone who got into an argument or fight we'd have a very quiet forum. Arguments happen. Sometimes its easy and its a select ego or two having a bash at each other and they'll cool off on their own - sometimes its a specific member who has a problem with a specific content type or person - we can deal with that too before even pressing the ban button.

Sometimes though its a subject and the subject draws in a wider number of the population. Where that happens we can't simply ban people - its a form of disruption and breaking the community apart. Instead we simply remove the core problem and thus remove the chance for the disruption to start in the first place. We don't do this that often because honestly it isn't that common - guns are a hot-button topic and for a site that has a multi-national membership we have to respect that its a subject where people from different countries can have very big differences in their viewpoint. It's for this same reason that religion and politics are curtailed in discussions.

 

[pixmedic]

I don't think anyone has implied that art is not subjective.

Terri did. If any member posts something, believing it to be "art", the moderators have the latitude to determine whether or not it is. That's not subjectivity. That's objectivity...

I think the solution is to just make TPF a "no gun" zone again. much simpler. no artistic qualities to define, and you get a definitive "line" that isn't subject to mods opinions on whether it is art or not.

Yes, it's always so much easier to run away from an issue than to address it head on. Overread has mentioned the "NSFW" section, of which I posed a few questions...

so whats the solution then?
its easy to cry foul when you don't have to enforce the decisions, or suffer the public outrage for making the wrong ones.
there are PLENTY of people here that are entirely for us re-banning guns.

no matter HOW the mods or admins define "art" SOMEONE is going to be butthurt over it.
everyone thinks their solution is best. everyone thinks their subjectivity is best. everyone thinks their opinion is clearly the right one.
you are asking for an address to an issue that, by the very definition of subjectivity, cannot have a clearly defined answer.
so we roll the dice and hope the masses don't cry for us to be crucified.

the Moderators have always had the latitude to determine whether or not a picture is appropriate for the forum. nothing new there.

im just as guilty for making that subjective mistake Steve...I posted a gun pic in that thread too. both my picture and my previous comment were deleted...someone thought it was more fair that way.
dont see me raising a ruckus over it. fair/unfair, it doesn't matter. the ruling came down, and I will abide by it.
I dont get to be an exception to the rule.

 

[Steve5D]

You can certainly make the case to change the ruling, but honestly posting this kind of thread on the forum isn't the way to accomplish that.

Then perhaps you can explain why Overread suggested I do exactly that.

I started this thread at his suggestion...

 

[Overread]

Changing policy requires understanding the reason for policy then presenting a case that helps resolve the issue that causes the policy to be impose in the first place (or does better than the current policy does in dealing with the issue).

Thus far the only suggestion made is to ban people that argue about guns; which sadly I've had to counter by the fact that its too wide-spread an issue in general. Asides which moderators really don't want to hit the ban-button every time we have a small argument on the site. In fact we really keep as far away from that solution as we possibly can.

If we get good ideas positivly put forward which can help further the site we will consider them - we will put them to the admin to consider and we can, where possible, make changes.

 

[Steve5D]

so whats the solution then?

I offered a solution. Seems like it would be too much work, though, so it's being dismissed...

its easy to cry foul when you don't have to enforce the decisions, or suffer the public outrage for making the wrong ones.
there are PLENTY of people here that are entirely for us re-banning guns.

How about we ban every single out of focus photo that gets posted. Sweet Jesus, THAT'S a problem...

no matter HOW the mods or admins define "art" SOMEONE is going to be butthurt over it.

And how do the mods define "art" with regards to that photo I linked to?

Clearly, the mods must believe that it has artistic merit, as it's been permitted to remain for years. Maybe I'm just missing that particular quality. Could one of the mods point it out?

 

[Steve5D]

Thus far the only suggestion made is to ban people that argue about guns; which sadly I've had to counter by the fact that its too wide-spread an issue in general. Asides which moderators really don't want to hit the ban-button every time we have a small argument on the site. In fact we really keep as far away from that solution as we possibly can.

If we get good ideas positivly put forward which can help further the site we will consider them - we will put them to the admin to consider and we can, where possible, make changes.

The suggestion for a separate section is a sound and reasoned one, yet you don't even mention it.

It would be viewable only to Supporting Members. Those visiting that section would know, before ever opening up their browser, what they'll see when they go there. If they go there anyway, and then ***** about evil guns and evil gun owners, you ban them. Permanently. Making the punishment ridiculously harsh will certainly help curtail the posting of those who just want to stir the pot...

 

[pixmedic]

so whats the solution then?

I offered a solution. Seems like it would be too much work, though, so it's being dismissed...

its easy to cry foul when you don't have to enforce the decisions, or suffer the public outrage for making the wrong ones.
there are PLENTY of people here that are entirely for us re-banning guns.

How about we ban every single out of focus photo that gets posted. Sweet Jesus, THAT'S a problem...

no matter HOW the mods or admins define "art" SOMEONE is going to be butthurt over it.

And how do the mods define "art" with regards to that photo I linked to?

Clearly, the mods must believe that it has artistic merit, as it's been permitted to remain for years. Maybe I'm just missing that particular quality. Could one of the mods point it out?

so...since your solution was not immediately implemented, it must be because the mod team unjustly dismissed it since it was obviously the correct solution to the problem. got it.

adding a section or expanding the NSFW section is hardly a new idea. it has been kicked around several times before, and was mentioned as an option when the "gun ban" was lifted.

have you PM'd the mod(s) you feel have grieved you and spoken to them personally? or did you just take your issues straight to a public rant?
I realize overread suggested a thread in the feedback section, but that is typically for suggested ideas, not specifically calling out mods.

when the gun ban was lifted here, it was done under instructions that those threads would be closely monitored, and the pictures would be moderated a little differently because of guns being such a "hot topic". it isn't simply a matter of whether the picture is artistic or not. it also comes down to the intention of the person that posted it.
none of the guns posted in your thread, mine included, where posted in any artistic manner, nor were they posted for C&C or to show photographic techniques, which was a criteria for the allowance of gun pictures in the first place.

we are readdressing the possibility of adding a gun section, or modifying the NSFW section, or both.
i am not really sure what more you want done about it.

 

[Overread]

The adult/NSFW section already allows guns (as I've said). We'd be totally open to expanding that to a gun specific section IF we got a large enough volume of use. At present we (sadly) don't. As such there is no pressure to add a specific section for that type of content.

Now if we get a surge in gun photos appearing in the NSFW section we would certainly look into expanding it. That's how we got new sections like Macro - volume of content increased and we sought to provide those users with a specific outlet for that interest and to take pressure off other sections.

 

[manaheim]

I love how after all I said you only responded to that one bit. Lol