# ::raises hand::  I have a question!!!



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

So I just inserted an image from Flickr in a post... and now there's an "attached photos" thing showing up under my post?  Even though I inserted the image directly?

What's the deal with that?  WHAT DID YA'LL DO?!?!?!


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

ALSO... I just read this somewhere:

"*that said polite discussion can continue in the subscribers section if subscribers want to talk about the issue*."

Subscribers section?  What the hell is THAT?


----------



## mishele (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> ALSO... I just read this somewhere:
> 
> "*that said polite discussion can continue in the subscribers section if subscribers want to talk about the issue*."
> 
> Subscribers section?  What the hell is THAT?



If you are a member there is a private section for ya........=) You can only see it if you are a member. Crazy stuff happens in there....lol I remember from my member days.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> So I just inserted an image from Flickr in a post... and now there's an "attached photos" thing showing up under my post?  Even though I inserted the image directly?
> 
> What's the deal with that?  WHAT DID YA'LL DO?!?!?!



You forgot to unclick to pull the photo and save it to the TPF server.  When you attach an image from a URL, you can do 2 things, you can save it to the TPF server, or leave it where it is.  It is set to save it to the server.


----------



## 412 Burgh (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> ALSO... I just read this somewhere:
> 
> "*that said polite discussion can continue in the subscribers section if subscribers want to talk about the issue*."
> 
> Subscribers section?  What the hell is THAT?



my post got moved there... sigh, I'm not paying to be a member lol.


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

mishele said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > ALSO... I just read this somewhere:
> ...



So member as in.......... SUPPORTING member?

HA!  Yeah right.  No thanks.


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > So I just inserted an image from Flickr in a post... and now there's an "attached photos" thing showing up under my post?  Even though I inserted the image directly?
> ...



I unclicked... a thingy.  I dunno what it was.  Maybe I missed something else that needed to be unclicked.


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

412 Burgh said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > ALSO... I just read this somewhere:
> ...



The boudoir one?  WHY?


----------



## 412 Burgh (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> 412 Burgh said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...



money maker....sigh :thumbdown:


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

412 Burgh said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > 412 Burgh said:
> ...



Okay... I STILL am not understanding WHY...

Explain it to me like I'm a 5 year old... I haven't been around this forum in a while.....


----------



## 412 Burgh (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> 412 Burgh said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...



Wish I could tell you. I don't know even know why. NSFW photos are the only ones that are in the "private forum for members" I do believe..


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

Look.  I need someone to come and tell me what the hell this is all about, because last I checked, as long as they weren't NUDE... boudoir pictures were okay here. :er:


----------



## IByte (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> 412 Burgh said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...




NFSW little lady, don't want to go to work and BLAMO! boobies on the screen, got to have some standards lol.


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

IByte said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > 412 Burgh said:
> ...



Again... once upon a time when I was active on this forum, boudoir was allowed... we MARKED it as "NSFW" in the title... but it was allowed... so... what's up with this crap?


----------



## IByte (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> IByte said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...




Probably some had a sh$% fit about some butt cheeks, complained and they  closed down that forum.  I never knew about it until they reopened it  recently when someone wanted to post some fake death photos.  Oh BTW Rosebud no more brew 8(


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

IByte said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > IByte said:
> ...



And WHICH forum is that exactly?

Everyone I knew just posted their boudoir to "People Photography".

Which forum are you talking about?

And... I mean I know some people are squeamish, and I say this not knowing the whole backstory... but what's the issue with "fake death photos"?

Jesus, I'm not gonna be able to post ANYTHING here then.  I'm starting to shoot boudoir and I have an idea for a "death" series I'm thinking about starting.

I might as well just... slink back to the Facebook Landfill I crawled back out from.  :lmao:

Or maybe I've just grown up too much for this forum and I need to stick to the big girl forums.  :er:


----------



## IByte (Jul 7, 2012)

But, but I like the sass, it's giving this forum some new life into it Oo.  What I meant to say was Nude forum/thread, but I do not know the whole story only it's been  blocked to the non-supporters...last beer


----------



## Overread (Jul 7, 2012)

EROSE  calm 



Ok so few things 1 don't ask me about the forum image hosting - cause - I don't know that well 

As for the subject of discussions, we've always had the policy that discussion in the subscribers section can be more political/risky than in the open site. The view being that those who pay to get in there will conduct themselves in a better manner so as not to get removed from there. It is still moderated and if the line is crossed it will be dealt with; but we do allow more hot button discussion there (its stone cold dead at present though ). 

As for the subject of photos. The site itself is remaining safe for work; we recently re-allowed nudity and other subjects, but only in the subscribers gallery section. Boudoir should still be allowed as far as I'm aware -- however I'd respect members to realise that sometimes this area can get a little hazy with regard to what is classified as boudoir. If you are ever in and doubt pm a mod/admin or raise the issue in the feedback section. 

Also - far as I'm aware - we are now not moving threads but lock/hiding them if the member who started the thread is not a subscriber and posts content suitable for the subscribers section (this also comes with an offer for them to become a subscriber if they choose to).


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

Okay, then I wanna know what was wrong with the boudoir post that 412 Burgh posted?

Again... I'm not talking about NUDES... Nudes have never been allowed since I joined (although I know they used to be at some point).

I'm talking about a girl in a corset top, underwear, and stockings in a bedroom setting.

Probably MORE covered than a girl wearing a bikini... and THAT gets moved to the member's only section?

I'm just trying to understand what is allowed and isn't, since I haven't been around for any changes that may have (and apparently have) been made.


----------



## Overread (Jul 7, 2012)

I'm asking  
I didn't deal with that specific situation so I'm not sure who called and moved it.


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

Overread said:


> I'm asking
> I didn't deal with that specific situation so I'm not sure who called and moved it.



Thanks.

I iz just confuzzled.


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 7, 2012)

there isnt really much clarification noted in the NSFW section concerning exactly what constitutes "NSFW" except that NSFW has to be in the title.  I would venture to say that if there is any question as to whether a pic should be in that section or not, you could probably message a moderator and ask. just to be safe. let one of the Mods's make the decision and it takes the liability off of you.


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> there isnt really much clarification noted in the NSFW section concerning exactly what constitutes "NSFW" except that NSFW has to be in the title.  I would venture to say that if there is any question as to whether a pic should be in that section or not, you could probably message a moderator and ask. just to be safe. let one of the Mods's make the decision and it takes the liability off of you.



What liability?  

If I'm questioning whether or not something is NSFW... I'm just gonna mark it as NSFW to be on the safe side...

What I'm trying to figure out is what KIND of NSFW content is ALLOWED... since Over is saying boudoir is okay... yet a boudoir post got moved... or deleted... or whatever the hell happened with it.


----------



## 412 Burgh (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:
			
		

> What liability?
> 
> If I'm questioning whether or not something is NSFW... I'm just gonna mark it as NSFW to be on the safe side...
> 
> What I'm trying to figure out is what KIND of NSFW content is ALLOWED... since Over is saying boudoir is okay... yet a boudoir post got moved... or deleted... or whatever the hell happened with it.



KmH moved it to the supporting member forum so it's outta my hands. Can't even see it. Woohoo! &#128077;&#128077;


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

KmH is a mod now?

What ELSE has changed around here?


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > there isnt really much clarification noted in the NSFW section concerning exactly what constitutes "NSFW" except that NSFW has to be in the title.  I would venture to say that if there is any question as to whether a pic should be in that section or not, you could probably message a moderator and ask. just to be safe. let one of the Mods's make the decision and it takes the liability off of you.
> ...



that was my point. in the NSFW section it doesn't TELL you what kind of photos are supposed to be in there.. just to mark the NSFW in the title. it doesnt give any criteria, or examples, or anything.  I would just assume that anything I wouldnt want my kid to see should go in there.


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 7, 2012)

some mods seem more or less zealous about certain things.


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 7, 2012)

Maybe we should have a section for boudoir photos that don't show enough skin to really be NSFW.


----------



## IByte (Jul 7, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> Maybe we should have a section for boudoir photos that don't show enough skin to really be NSFW.



LOL I can see it now, smiley faces on the woman's chest with a PG-13 rating.


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> that was my point. in the NSFW section it doesn't TELL you what kind of photos are supposed to be in there.. just to mark the NSFW in the title. it doesnt give any criteria, or examples, or anything.  I would just assume that anything I wouldnt want my kid to see should go in there.



*What* NSFW "section"?????

Like I said before, boudoir was just always put into the People Photography section last time I was here...



fjrabon said:


> some mods seem more or less zealous about certain things.



...which is why there needs to be a clear cut rule... although in saying that I can already see how that would just probably cause even MORE issues....



pixmedic said:


> Maybe we should have a section for boudoir photos that don't show enough skin to really be NSFW.



As far as I'm concerned, all boudoir is NSFW... but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be able to post it if we just warn people..... like we USED to.  :roll:


----------



## Overread (Jul 7, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > pixmedic said:
> ...



Hmm I thought we had rules there - I'll see about getting something drafted up and added. 

Thus far the only topic I know that might (and I'm stressing the word might) be on the cards for actually being moved is gore/horror/blood type posts. This has mostly not been something we've directly dealt with because our primary horror photographers are missing in action and its not been a topic to see much (if any) recent action. 
The overall policy for what is allowed is "family friendly" and whilst one can argue that fake blood isn't anti-family some of the more extreme examples would be on the cards to be put in the subscribers only section. 


Other than that boudoir should be allowed, although overly sexually suggestive kinds might get the push - but the difference is always a bit of a rocky area to pin down and define.


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > that was my point. in the NSFW section it doesn't TELL you what kind of photos are supposed to be in there.. just to mark the NSFW in the title. it doesnt give any criteria, or examples, or anything.  I would just assume that anything I wouldnt want my kid to see should go in there.
> ...



ah, i understand your question now.. sorry, my bad. they added a NSFW section that you can only see if you are a donating member. and thats where all NSFW photos are supposed to go. boudoir or otherwise. 

there really is no actual "rule" as far as I know. (which may not be much) maybe they need to convene a moderator council meeting and work it out in committee.


----------



## 412 Burgh (Jul 7, 2012)

I'm on e.Rose's ship.... Looking for alternative forum to post them for CC without having to pay


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 7, 2012)

412 Burgh said:


> I'm on e.Rose's ship.... Looking for alternative forum to post them for CC without having to pay



for the record, I didn't become a donating member because I wanted to look at artsy nudes. (more of a "movie" guy) I donated because this is a great forum with really good people and a lot of them are willing to help you at the drop of a hat.  None of what makes this site work is free, except for peoples donated time. Since I cant donate time to help, money also helps
keep this forum up and running. Its the least I can do, and very cheap for the help and advice you can get here from experienced people. try going to some photographer and asking how much they will charge to "teach" you something. this is far cheaper by comparison, and for the most part extremely effective. well worth the price of admission.  IMHO of course.


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

Overread said:


> Hmm I thought we had rules there - I'll see about getting something drafted up and added.
> 
> Thus far the only topic I know that might (and I'm stressing the word might) be on the cards for actually being moved is gore/horror/blood type posts. This has mostly not been something we've directly dealt with because our primary horror photographers are missing in action and its not been a topic to see much (if any) recent action.
> The overall policy for what is allowed is "family friendly" and whilst one can argue that fake blood isn't anti-family some of the more extreme examples would be on the cards to be put in the subscribers only section.
> ...



So 412's boudoir post was considered overly sexually suggestive????? :shock:

So then, what kind of boudoir ISN'T considered overly sexually suggestive if *that* was?





Good lord, I hate censorship. :banghead:



pixmedic said:


> As far as I'm concerned, all boudoir is NSFW... but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be able to post it if we just warn people..... like we USED to.  :roll:



ah, i understand your question now.. sorry, my bad. they added a NSFW section that you can only see if you are a donating member. and thats where all NSFW photos are supposed to go. *boudoir or otherwise. *

there really is no actual "rule" as far as I know. (which may not be much) maybe they need to convene a moderator council meeting and work it out in committee.[/QUOTE]

If that's the case, then that's just dumb.

Whoever said it is right.

It just comes down to money.  There are several other forums that allow boudoir... even NUDES... as long as they are tagged with "NSFW" and I don't have to pay to view or post in them.


----------



## Overread (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> As far as I'm concerned, all boudoir is NSFW... but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be able to post it if we just warn people..... like we USED to.  :roll:



Like I said - far as I know this has NOT changed. 
NSFW was opened up to allow an increase in content allowed on the site by re-allowing nudity as a subject for those who wish to post it. Only the horror subject has changed in maybe the most extreme also being moved to NSFW. The rest of the site rules are running without any changes

Allowing nudes was NOT for the money (heck there are 12 subscriber slots up for free each year with photo of the month). Mods asked the admin for allowing a restricted access section of the site for nudity - which means we used the built in subscriber feature; its a perk more than anything for those who choose.


As for why  that thread was moved - we can't say till KmH logs in to answer. Till then Don't Panic people


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

Overread said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > As far as I'm concerned, all boudoir is NSFW... but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be able to post it if we just warn people..... like we USED to.  :roll:
> ...



Yet 412's post was moved...

THAT'S what I'm stuck on. 

I know you said you're asking... but that's what I'm talking about.


----------



## Overread (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...



I know - can't answer till KmH checks in and stuff  
Ps re-read my last post I edited in an answer to your previous to last post to clarify a few points.


----------



## IByte (Jul 7, 2012)

How about this Over, anyone who posts boudoir pics are allowed to see and comment on their thread only, they will be blocked from other posts until they become a supporting member?  That way the post is moved, the OP can look and view their work.:thumbup:


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

IByte said:


> How about this Over, anyone who posts boudoir pics are allowed to see and comment on their thread only, they will be blocked from other posts until they become a supporting member?  That way the post is moved, the OP can look and view their work.:thumbup:



I disagree.  If I post a boudoir, I don't want C&C from JUST paying members.

I'd rather just go to a different forum altogether if that becomes the case.


----------



## IByte (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:
			
		

> I disagree.  If I post a boudoir, I don't want C&C from JUST paying members.
> 
> I'd rather just go to a different forum altogether if that becomes the case.



Just a thought, and there are at least 1800 + supporting members.


----------



## 412 Burgh (Jul 7, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> 412 Burgh said:
> 
> 
> > I'm on e.Rose's ship.... Looking for alternative forum to post them for CC without having to pay
> ...



1. Ads on this site are ridiculous, whole forum section worth. Money in the bank.

2. Ads on this site while not a member. Money in the bank.

3. Supporting members. Money in the bank.


Trust me, they don't need help with all these ads they are displaying. but it does help. 

Also your avi may be considered offensive to some, its a head wrapped up. Could be considered gorey, or harsh? I don't have a problem with it al ALL. I'm just saying that there needs to be fairness all around. Not attacking or offending you, but I'm simply stating if it's family friendly there needs to be definite answers and not just a mod's opinion...


----------



## Overread (Jul 7, 2012)

IByte said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 where does that number come from? That's bigger than our current viewing list (and that's populated with at least 1000odd guests )


----------



## IByte (Jul 7, 2012)

Overread said:
			
		

> where does that number come from? That's bigger than our current viewing list (and that's populated with at least 1000odd guests )



From a previous thread lemme find it.


----------



## Overread (Jul 7, 2012)

412 Burgh said:


> Also your avi may be considered offensive to some, its a head wrapped up. Could be considered gorey, or harsh? I don't have a problem with it al ALL. I'm just saying that there needs to be fairness all around. Not attacking or offending you, but I'm simply stating if it's family friendly there needs to be definite answers and not just a mod's opinion...



Thus far we've had no reports of anyone finding zombie/mummy pixmedic scary (and even if we did get a report it does not mean we will act upon it and do as requested).

As for answers - be patient - its a weekend and moderation is unpaid volunteer work


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

IByte said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There aren't 1800 ACTIVE supporting members.

There aren't even 1800 active members total.  

And what if there are people who AREN'T supporting members whose opinions I value (and there are)???

Then I'd have to link them to a separate place where I have it linked to... and that's just annoying... and there again, for that, I might as well just post it in a different forum altogether.

As a matter of fact, I have a boudoir image I was gonna share... I literally just finished it up and my intention was to post it here when I was done, before this whole conversation got started, but now I'm not so sure, because if someone decides to move it to a place where I will no longer have access to it, I'ma be pissed.


----------



## IByte (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:
			
		

> There aren't 1800 ACTIVE supporting members.
> 
> There aren't even 1800 active members total.
> 
> ...



Well I was going to edit my response, but yeah you can share it with moi via pm .


----------



## Overread (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> because if someone decides to move it to a place where I will no longer have access to it, I'ma be pissed.



Threads should be locked and removed not moved to unseen sections if the OP is not a subscriber. Though there will be a grace period where you're offered to sign up as a subscriber if you want. 

As for the photo, you can always pm a friendly mod for advice


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 7, 2012)

412 Burgh said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > 412 Burgh said:
> ...



Im not sure if you are insinuating that this site makes enough money from ads that it shouldn't  need members donating,  or that you are unhappy with the fact that there are areas on a website only accessible to paying members. I understand you werent making a personal attack on me, not that I would have cared if you had, but I do appreciate the clarification. I assume it was done as a courtesy, thank you.  I am a very "giving back" kind of person, and became a donating member for that reason.  Obviously the whole boudoir and/or NSFW issue needs to be addressed, and I think its a fair guess that after all this, it will be. hopefully before this blows up into something that will make them lock the thread. (which seems to be happening too often lately)


----------



## 412 Burgh (Jul 7, 2012)

Overread said:


> 412 Burgh said:
> 
> 
> > Also your avi may be considered offensive to some, its a head wrapped up. Could be considered gorey, or harsh? I don't have a problem with it al ALL. I'm just saying that there needs to be fairness all around. Not attacking or offending you, but I'm simply stating if it's family friendly there needs to be definite answers and not just a mod's opinion...
> ...



but have you had complaints about the boudoir? What I'm saying there is a lacking of facts... one mod thinks it is too bloody or gutsy...delted.. one mod may think it's fine. I just think the mods need to get on the same page and let there be a solid concrete answer for what is and what isn't allowed... I said my peace I'm done.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 7, 2012)

412 Burgh said:


> Also your avi may be considered offensive to some, its a head wrapped  up. Could be considered gorey, or harsh? I don't have a problem with it  al ALL. I'm just saying that there needs to be fairness all around. Not  attacking or offending you, but I'm simply stating if it's family  friendly there needs to be definite answers and not just a mod's  opinion...




I think it is more up to the MODS to determine if an Avatar Pic is unsuitable... and I think they would take care of it if needed. Same for anything else that comes up.. let the MODS decide! If you feel something is in need of a MODS decision, report it to them, and they will act as necessary. There is NO GORE.. just clean white bandages... what is the issue?


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 7, 2012)

It was an old picture from medic school. I just thought it was kinda interesting. but hell, Im easily distracted by shiny objects so what do I know.


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

IByte said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## 412 Burgh (Jul 7, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> 412 Burgh said:
> 
> 
> > Also your avi may be considered offensive to some, its a head wrapped  up. Could be considered gorey, or harsh? I don't have a problem with it  al ALL. I'm just saying that there needs to be fairness all around. Not  attacking or offending you, but I'm simply stating if it's family  friendly there needs to be definite answers and not just a mod's  opinion...
> ...



Last post and I will stop. I'm just saying someone may see bandages and the implied meaning of it may be one thing. I am no attacking anyone. I just think that everyone has a different interpretation of art, pictures, words, whatever it may be. One thing may be offensive to one member, and 10 members may not even think twice about it. So no his avi wasn't bad but i used it as an example of the meaning the image may entice one to perceive.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 7, 2012)

412 Burgh said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > 412 Burgh said:
> ...



Would you have even mentioned that, if you weren't upset about your thread being moved to where you can't see it? Just curious.... you did mention "Fairness", so it sounds like you are feeling unfairly treated...


----------



## Overread (Jul 7, 2012)

E.Rose - yeps I understand that fully, hopefully I'll have a better answer. However in general everything is indeed up to personal interpretation - that is why we have a report feature and a team of mods. We do discuss things, but we also act before discussion on issues we think are clear cut (otherwise nothing would ever get done). In a very few cases we get something like this which means we have to pause and discuss and sometimes re-evaluate the situation. 
This goes for all things - forum posts, pictures, thread content, avatars, signature content etc...


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

Overread said:


> We do discuss things, but we also act before discussion on issues we think are clear cut (otherwise nothing would ever get done).



Well then the image I'm about to post is going to get the axe because I don't think it's any better in terms of "SFW" than what 412 had posted.


----------



## IByte (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:
			
		

> Well then the image I'm about to post is going to get the axe because I don't think it's any better in terms of "SFW" than what 412 had posted.



Whooo hooo fight the machine...:air fist:


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> > We do discuss things, but we also act before discussion on issues we think are clear cut (otherwise nothing would ever get done).
> ...



post away.. i wanna see it  now!  :mrgreen:


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

IByte said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



:lmao:


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Jul 7, 2012)

412 Burgh said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > 412 Burgh said:
> ...




*meh* its all a crap shoot.

Fake murdered woman...offensive, moved to NSFW forum.

Fake teen suicide...well that's fine. That's perfectly acceptable for the teen viewers of the forum. What a great message that sends!

:roll:


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:
			
		

> *meh* its all a crap shoot.
> 
> Fake murdered woman...offensive, moved to NSFW forum.
> 
> ...



Makes sense. :er:


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I thought that it didnt make sense, and Bitters post about it not making sense, made sense, making YOUR post about what Bitter was posting about making sense, not make sense.


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

pixmedic said:
			
		

> I thought that it didnt make sense, and Bitters post about it not making sense, made sense, making YOUR post about what Bitter was posting about making sense, not make sense.



Surprisingly, everything you just wrote, makes sense, but what DOESN'T make sense is that you missed that my saying "makes sense" was actually sarcasm... Unless you too, we're being sarcastic, in which case your post makes sense ENTIRELY.


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 7, 2012)

e.rose said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



lets just go with my post making sense entirely!  :mrgreen:


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 7, 2012)

you both are making too much sense! And you are giving me a headache, too! lol!


----------



## e.rose (Jul 7, 2012)

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> you both are making too much sense! And you are giving me a headache, too! lol!



Mission accomplished! :lmao:


----------



## e.rose (Jul 9, 2012)

Over... Are there any answers yet?


----------



## jwbryson1 (Jul 9, 2012)

e.rose said:


> KmH is a mod now?
> 
> What ELSE has changed around here?




Schwetty has completed his full conversion to a woman.  Whatever floats your boat...

(S)he looks HAWT!  :mrgreen:


----------



## The_Traveler (Jul 9, 2012)

jwbryson1 said:


> Schwetty has completed his full conversion to a woman.



I understood it was not actually a conversion more like an added option that can be changed when the circumstances are right; you know, like a convertible hard op on a Mercedes.

I don't know if that is powered or manual but...............


----------



## jwbryson1 (Jul 9, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> I don't know if that is powered or manual but...............




That is a question best left unanswered, Grasshopper...


----------



## Overread (Jul 9, 2012)

e.rose said:


> Over... Are there any answers yet?



Oh yes! *this is what happens when you reply to threads at 3am on a weekend - they slip the mind a little sometimes.

I'll quote Teri since I think that was the best answer we got from the mod discussion:


> The second shot is no biggie but the first shows more "skin" than you'd see going to a beach (I let that be my guide). Even more telling is that the OP even comments that he/she made a separate flickr account so his own family wouldn't see them. It needed to be moved to the private forum.



In short it was just a bit too much in the view of the majority of the mods. Boudoir is still very much allowed; so long as it remains at the "beach" level for the open forum (which is pretty much the same rules as we've had for a long while now). The only change is that, if people want to go further, we now offer the option in the subscribers section.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jul 9, 2012)

OK, I have read these posts again and I've pretty much come to a conclusion but I want to check it out with the others.

Bestiality is totally out of bounds, right?

Even if its marked NSFW?


----------



## Overread (Jul 9, 2012)

I think you'll find that gets you shot out of a cannon from the site - that and its already covered under the "no sex/porn" rules.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jul 9, 2012)

No worries, I had already cancelled my reservation for the llama.
 (but, I did lose my deposit.)


----------



## e.rose (Jul 9, 2012)

Overread said:
			
		

> Oh yes! *this is what happens when you reply to threads at 3am on a weekend - they slip the mind a little sometimes.
> 
> I'll quote Teri since I think that was the best answer we got from the mod discussion:
> 
> In short it was just a bit too much in the view of the majority of the mods. Boudoir is still very much allowed; so long as it remains at the "beach" level for the open forum (which is pretty much the same rules as we've had for a long while now). The only change is that, if people want to go further, we now offer the option in the subscribers section.



We must not be talking about the same thread then, because the one I'm talking about, the girl was wearin the same outfit in each picture and was wearing the same amount of clothing as the girl in the one I posted... Yet it was moved?


----------



## Overread (Jul 9, 2012)

Pm sent - and yeps no tushies


----------



## e.rose (Jul 9, 2012)

Thanks Over! :hug::


----------



## IByte (Jul 9, 2012)

Overread said:
			
		

> Pm sent - and yeps no tushies



You and rose behave Oo.


----------

