DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Fan Feedback Forum This Week's Rules on Images

What exactly are the rules on posting images? Seems a lot of them are being deleted despite their being within the specified size guidelines.

There are absolutely no changes at all regarding the rules on images, particularly on sizes.

The site itself enforces the size limitations, so no image should ever be removed again as a result of that.... if for no other reason than it should be pretty much impossible to post an image outside the prescribed limits.


if an image was removed, I would look to another area to find out what the infraction was with your image.

With that said, the Ref responsible for removing your image would be the one that needs to comment on specifics.

I don't care so much about the image I posted being removed, I believe I understand why it was. But I was curious whether there was a rule change. It does seem things are getting deleted pretty quickly that used to be ok. And I just wondered for future reference.

Quote:

---

It does seem things are getting deleted pretty quickly that used to be ok.

---

without specific examples, I'm at a loss

Things are most certainly more actively moderated right now than we had been for quite a while. Many of us just didn't (and in my case still don't) have the time to check things regularly (particularly during the summer months)... but this has changed lately. Perhaps this explains the perceived difference?

This rule needs some SERIOUS clarification.

I was banned for a photo of Avril Lavigne which was not any way at all lewd or pornographic, the only skin she showed was her face and arms, not even any midriff. I have seen MUCH worse on Nickelodeon.

This was my first offense with a photo which I didn't even think was bad, and the woman who posted a pic of herself showed more skin than Avril! I wasn't even given a warning, I was banned on the spot.

I think this rule should be clarified for future reference because I did not think my offense was bannable...warning? Absolutely, ban? I think not, especially given the fact that I saw women show more skin in middle school than Avril showed in that picture. It was seriously a black t-shirt and black pants.

You have already had this explained to you, we have said we are not allowing the pictures to start even if they do not begin with an inappropriate picture. We have said several times that it is what it leads to that has caused the problem.

You posted that you thought it was lame that pictures could not be posted and then two posts later you posted the image.

We are not going to argue your suspension in the public forum, if you wish to continue this do it in private messaging.

Nobody else is having trouble understanding this as it was made clear in a couple of threads.

Ref3, got a picture question...don't want to get sent to Banville, so I'll ask ahead of time...

Let's just say, in the spirit of the Tribe vs. Red Sox in the playoffs, I've come across a picture of 6 Red Sox players, in their full uniforms posing for a picture on the field. In the picture, Sox reliever Jon Papelbon has his hand on Manny's pelvic area.

Yes or no, with a "Caption this" tag?

I would say "probably not" as we didn't allow it for that infamous Quinn picture either, but I'll leave it to the more experienced Refs.

Yeah, I was thinking back to the Quinn pic. It's very similar.

Don't do it.

Don't post needless pictures of young girls in various stages of undress, (as you often have) and don't post pictures that may lead to captions of sexual innuendo. It's quite obvious from your description of the "hypothetical" photo that is what you are expecting to happen in order to get a laugh.

Pretty good mind reader, aint I?

This isn't Penthouse or Hustler, it's a football message board where side discussions are allowed to be held in other forums on current events, weird things in the news, political arguments, football smack, etc.

If you wish to indulge in pictures of young "hotties" and joke threads of a sexual nature, then go do it on a different message board.

This aint the place.