PDA

View Full Version : New Board Amendment - Every Member Read



FinHeavenAJ
04-08-2003, 05:27 PM
Complete TOS (http://www.finheaven.com/boardvb2/showthread.php?s=&postid=15180#post15180)


Added April 8, 2003 – For FinHeaven & Co to make this a message board appropriate for any age group and gender, we have decided that there should be a restriction on the amount of skin shown in some of the pictures that are shown in posts, signatures, and avatars. While generally pictures of women are allowed, please try to use your own judgment on what should and should not be posted. Keep the skin limited, and refrain from using thongs, etc.

I hope everyone understand where the staff is coming from. If anyone has any questions, please let me know.

Thank you very much,
The FinHeaven & Co Staff


NOTE: Amendment DID NOT PASS

FinHeavenAJ
04-08-2003, 05:30 PM
Looking around, SkapePhin's signature would violate this amendment... :( (even though that's a great pic)

Please note, this is truly not a "bannable" offense unless you post something that TOTALLY does not belong on a public website.

Muck
04-08-2003, 05:59 PM
Gotcha. It was getting a little out of control. But that's what happens in a large room full of red-blooded men. Gotta be put in check sometimes.

fins1
04-08-2003, 06:10 PM
:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

SuavePhin
04-08-2003, 06:12 PM
Uhhh am I still legal? heck its the only reason my posts get noticed :lol:

p.s. Maybe have a "pic forum" for those who love to show off our respective hotties? just a thought :goof:

FinHeavenAJ
04-08-2003, 06:15 PM
Originally posted by SuavePhin
Uhhh am I still legal? heck its the only reason my posts get noticed :lol:

p.s. Maybe have a "pic forum" for those who love to show off our respective hotties? just a thought :goof:

We thought about a pic forum, but it would just get way too out of control, and would end up being a "softcore forum."

FinHeavenAJ
04-08-2003, 06:15 PM
I think the avatar is good, but I'll have to check the sig...

LeftCoastPhin
04-08-2003, 06:20 PM
:rolleyes:


Are you taking notes from the NFL? a.k.a the no fun league.

Can we still wear different colored socks?

But alas, in today's world you do what you gotta do. One bad apple still spoils the barrel.

No worries AJ

dean_siu
04-08-2003, 06:41 PM
How about a board where we all vote if avatars are acceptable??? That way everyone can judge if picks meet "acceptable standards"!

infiltrateib
04-08-2003, 07:38 PM
Wait, so does this mean we can't make a "hardcore" forum too? ;( And can I still make my "picture of my junk" avatar?

LeftCoastPhin
04-08-2003, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by infiltrateib
Wait, so does this mean we can't make a "hardcore" forum too? ;( And can I still make my "picture of my junk" avatar?



Go right ahead. I can see what you're trying to do and it didn't work. :D

infiltrateib
04-08-2003, 08:28 PM
Originally posted by LeftCoastPhin
Go right ahead. I can see what you're trying to do and it didn't work. :D

Heh, I don't even know what I was trying to do, make a joke I guess :/

DeDolfan
04-08-2003, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by SuavePhin
Uhhh am I still legal? heck its the only reason my posts get noticed :lol:

p.s. Maybe have a "pic forum" for those who love to show off our respective hotties? just a thought :goof:

That's an idea !! :cool:

DeDolfan
04-08-2003, 09:26 PM
Originally posted by FinHeavenAJ
I think the avatar is good, but I'll have to check the sig...

I sure hope mine's all right. Too many would miss her other wise!!
:evil: Besides, if you make me take her down, I'll put one up of a bunch of gay guys huggin' and kissin' and stuff anf whatever else that gay guys do !!! :D :D :D :D

FinHeavenAJ
04-08-2003, 09:27 PM
Yours is cool

WharfRat
04-08-2003, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by FinHeavenAJ
I think the avatar is good, but I'll have to check the sig...

AJ..my $.02 on suave's sig?

It doesn't show anything more than anyone can see in a Sears catalog. In fact... you can see more in the catalogue!!

;)

FinHeavenAJ
04-08-2003, 09:33 PM
Ok, then it stays.... now see, that's easy... lol

Thanks...

SuavePhin
04-08-2003, 09:39 PM
On behalf of myself, Warf (and about every warm blooded male on this board) Woohoo!! :D

WharfRat
04-08-2003, 09:45 PM
Originally posted by SuavePhin
On behalf of myself, Warf (and about every warm blooded male on this board) Woohoo!! :D

yeeeowwwsahhh!!! :evil:

Miafan
04-08-2003, 10:36 PM
hate to be the party pooper, but why does the sig pic have to be so damn big. Dont get me wrong, she looks hot as hell, but it sucks when 20 people have sigs that take up the whole screen.

fin-atic
04-08-2003, 10:41 PM
What a shame. I wasn't aware of any complaints. In fact, most were received with appreciation.

Hell you can go down to a public beach and see a thong. Aren't we getting a little too carried away?

I mean is this reallly an issue?

Lets keep it light and fun. It is nothing you don't see from cheerleaders in the game and on the cover of Maxim in the stores.

I agree with no nudity or porno, but swimsuits and thongs? That's America baby.

Boone
04-08-2003, 11:11 PM
I hope my signature is okay...it took me awhile to find it...

WharfRat
04-08-2003, 11:25 PM
Originally posted by fin-atic
What a shame. I wasn't aware of any complaints. In fact, most were received with appreciation.

Hell you can go down to a public beach and see a thong. Aren't we getting a little too carried away?

I mean is this reallly an issue?

Lets keep it light and fun. It is nothing you don't see from cheerleaders in the game and on the cover of Maxim in the stores.

I agree with no nudity or porno, but swimsuits and thongs? That's America baby.

That's why it was decided that people should use their best judgement... AJ is not trying to censor anyone... but some of the pics have been getting more and more revealing... there have been no problems yet, but he'd like to keep it that way, and nip it in the bud before it got out of hand...
We have to remember that there are some young people on this board, I wouldn't want a parent to start complaining about the content on a sports fan site...

Cranx
04-08-2003, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by Boone
I hope my signature is okay...it took me awhile to find it...

Your sig would be OK if it weren't of J-Ho...YUCK!!!:toliet:

P4E
04-09-2003, 12:14 AM
Doesn't restricting the hottie pics mean the terrorists have won?:goof:

jtown777
04-09-2003, 12:20 AM
Mine is in good taste.....Right?:confused:

Baz
04-09-2003, 01:01 AM
I think yours is fine jtown. I don't see anything you wouldn't see at a public beach......

Bobby Humphrey
04-09-2003, 01:22 AM
but i can't read

WharfRat
04-09-2003, 01:26 AM
Originally posted by Bazinet37
I think yours is fine jtown. I don't see anything you wouldn't see at a public beach......

never mind the beach... I see that type of attire at the mall... ;)

Baz
04-09-2003, 01:27 AM
I guess it doesn't hurt that she may be hottest chick I've seen since pre-slut Chistina Aguilera......

SkapePhin
04-09-2003, 01:27 AM
Ahh.. so Do I need to change it??

Baz
04-09-2003, 01:33 AM
As much as I'm going to regret saying this tomorrow when its gone, you do. As hot as she is (and boy is she hot), her whole ass is showing. What about D2K2? You know he is going crazy seeing this. I'm just kidding D2K2. Maybe you have a more concealing picture of her? It would be a shame to have her disappear completely from the board.......

SkapePhin
04-09-2003, 01:35 AM
Its cool.. I understand completely..

RHoffman
04-09-2003, 08:39 AM
I understand the reasoning but that was a definite highlight...
luckily I was able to diskette a copy of the picture for my viewing enjoyment.

:D

dolphan39
04-09-2003, 09:14 AM
Of course, the exception is always going to be our lovely cheerleaders, i.e. these photos - http://www.miamidolphins.com/cheerleaders/photogallery/photogallery_mar03.asp Since it is Phins-related :biggrin:

dolphan39
04-09-2003, 09:33 AM
please note this from our TOS (http://www.finheaven.com/boardvb2/showthread.php?s=&postid=15180#post15180) :
Added: May 30, 2002 - Please do not post an entire article. Instead, post the first three or so sentences, and then include a link to that article. The reason is simply because of copyright issues. And I for one do not want to have The Sun Sentinel coming after me in a lawsuit many of you have been guilty lately

Coral Reefer
04-09-2003, 09:35 AM
No offense to the site operators. It's you site and you can do what you want obvoulsly, however I think this is a little rediculous. I don't choose to place pics in my post but I don't mind those who do.

You can see girls in bikinis on the beach, on TV, in magazines, in catalogues even on an average street with some of the revealing outfits they sell today. Nothing anyone has put in their sigs are offensive and as far as I can tell the pics came from respectable websites as well.

Seeing that, I think this is rediculous.

DrAstroZoom
04-09-2003, 09:59 AM
I would have to agree with Trekbiz and Finatic. Going so far as to put such a clause in the TOS seems to be a complete overreaction.

dolphan39
04-09-2003, 10:02 AM
Originally posted by DrAstroZoom
I would have to agree with Trekbiz and Finatic. Going so far as to put such a clause in the TOS seems to be a complete overreaction. I think you are reading too much into this...we are simply saying you have to draw a line somewhere so that people do not think they can post software pix or such. Probably 99% of the pix that have been posted are OK under this new clause.

inFINSible
04-09-2003, 10:03 AM
Okay guys....where do you feel the line should be drawn? Or do you feel there should be no line at all?

DrAstroZoom
04-09-2003, 10:06 AM
I think the former terms of service were just fine. Obviously, we don't want nudity, sexual explictness or profanity, but asking users to "use their best judgment" on posting pictures of women in swimsuits, etc. is just ridiculous.

In short, I say strike the amendment.

DrAstroZoom
04-09-2003, 10:09 AM
BTW, what are "software pix"?

inFINSible
04-09-2003, 10:46 AM
I think he meant softcore........

Anyway I understand what you are saying......but I don't think the new amendment is much different except that we are drawing the line a little lower to incudle thongs....Now you may think that these things are everywhere for you to see but, let me ask you this....how old are you?......

You are allowed to go places where you can see things like this, you are allowed to go on web sites that show stuff like this.....but most 9, 10, 11,and 12 year olds are not......they are not allowed to go to south beach....they are not allowed to see MTV.....or R rated movies....or soft core porn sites...or Maxim magazine sites.....IF... their parents don't want them to......So imagine that you are a parent of a 9 or 10 year old boy or girl and they tell you they are on a Miami Dolphins website and you just happen to walk by and catch a glimpse a girl in a thong.....and then as you check out the site you find there are 10 girls in thongs.....Now, are you going to let your child come back to this particular Miami Dolphins site? Or are you going to try to steer him towards one that doesn't have this "problem" (for lack of a better term)?

DrAstroZoom
04-09-2003, 10:56 AM
inFINS ... a couple things.

First of all ... there's a big difference between a girl in a bikini top and a thong and softcore pornography.

But in in general, I'm just saying once you start drawing lines like "The Thong Clause," you can't stop. I know a lot of parents who would be disturbed and offended by your "demonic-looking" avatar (that would be the term they'd use). Should it be banned because some parent of some kid reading the board might get offended? Of course not.

I realize that's a ludicrous example, but hopefully, you see what I'm getting at.

inFINSible
04-09-2003, 11:15 AM
I see what you are getting at....unfortunately, I can't make or change any policies myself......I can assure you it will be discussed further in the staff forum....you bring up a good point I think.

(how's that for diplomacy huh???)

DrAstroZoom
04-09-2003, 11:20 AM
VERY diplomatic, you demon bastard from hell! :lol:

inFINSible
04-09-2003, 11:26 AM
:lol:

LeftCoastPhin
04-09-2003, 11:28 AM
Mentors = kiss asses :lol: :lol :goof: relax......

P4E
04-09-2003, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by Bazinet37
I guess it doesn't hurt that she may be hottest chick I've seen since pre-slut Chistina Aguilera......

Yeah... she was a cute lil girl when she was 11, wasn't she?

Tatonka
04-09-2003, 03:11 PM
fine.. i will remove my avatar.. i know it is sexy, but i dont want anyone getting excited and ruining their keyboard :D

DolFan31
04-09-2003, 04:08 PM
Tatonka I like the "Working mothers agree Crack Cocaine hits the spot everytime" one dont remove it man!

Prime Time
04-09-2003, 09:53 PM
Bazi I am going crazy! What is this! This is an outrage! Skape's pic was the best. No No do not take my pictures away from me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


STRIKE STRIKE STRIKE STRIKE!!!

I need my pics!!! lol j/k this kinda does suck though them gals always cheered me up.

Fresh
04-09-2003, 11:47 PM
Originally posted by Tatonka
fine.. i will remove my avatar.. i know it is sexy, but i dont want anyone getting excited and ruining their keyboard :D

:rofl:

XNOUGHT
04-10-2003, 07:37 AM
Crap. I need an Avatar.

Maybe I'll get soem naked pics of Britne.....oh wait, I cant do that. Sorry guys.

DNY
04-10-2003, 01:21 PM
Pfffft

Baz
04-10-2003, 01:26 PM
Listen BigBoy, this isn't a case of us being conservative. God knows I loved SkapePhin's picture of Vida in the thong. The problem is what happens when someone tries to beat that picture, and gets one with a nipple showing or something. Then a visitor, an underage one at that, is browsing our site, sees that, and shows his mother. Thats pornography my friend, and as much as we all love it, its against the law for kids under 18 to view it. AJ is simply proteting himself from such a scenario, and the punishments that come with it......

dolphan39
04-10-2003, 01:27 PM
this is somewhat of a legal issue guys...

read http://www.protectkids.com/dangers/porndefinitions.htm

and

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-208883.html?legacy=cnet


or at least 1 approach to hoping we do not need to deal w/legal issues.

no one is saying those of us that are not minors do not want lots of hot pix, we are just trying to make sure the site does go beyond what a site intended for viewing by minors should.

Baz
04-10-2003, 01:31 PM
Hey, that article is about New Mexico! I didn't even know about that law. I really need to start paying more attention to political issues......

Cranx
04-10-2003, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by BigBoy
Just suggesting that it would be nice that people that have power (like those that run this site) to not be cowed by what is considered acceptable, considering that those standards are so absurd and set by a government that has its own agenda in mind.

If you want to fall in line though that is obviously your choice. I can go elsewhere.

1-0 for Mind Control.

So your argument is that violence thoughts breed violent acts but pornography is nothing but good, clean, healthy fun? If that's what you're saying then I will have to say that you're sadly mistaken here.

The fact of the matter is pornography breeds deviant acts almost as much as does- if not more- than does the viewing of violent acts; check the stats. Of course looking at naked people participating in certain acts seems much more benign than does watching someone getting their head lopped off but a far greater percentage of individuals who indulge in pornography delve further and further into the world of deviance (i.e. prostitution, child porn, public exposure, even rape, etc.) than do individuals who view violence delve into the world of violence.

It is also a fact that the murder rate of westernized Europe is equal to, or not to far behind, that of the U.S. (depending upon which country we are talking about) so your argument that the U.S. should follow the lead of Western Europe on this is nothing short of ludicrous.

If you want to make this argument however, be consistent and say that you want both violence AND nudity to be either allowed or banned, otherwise you are making an argument that completely ignores the facts in one case in order to prop up the facts of another. Again, be consistent in your argument and then, at least, intellectually you would make SOME sense.

inFINSible
04-10-2003, 02:29 PM
I simply stated that limiting what we post is tantamount to saying that you believe pictures of women in bikinis promotes violence against women .

Whoa......what a stretch!

DrAstroZoom
04-10-2003, 02:41 PM
I still say if you ban nudity or sexually explicit material, you're covered. I have seen nothing on this site that fits even the broadest definition of "softcore."

Baz
04-10-2003, 02:54 PM
BigBoy, I see where you're coming and I actually agree. However, that same government that is using "mind control" on us can very easily shut this site down permanently. Like it or not, we have to follow their rules. Too bad. I really liked Vida's perfect ass......

AstroZoom, there have been no "softcore" pictures yet. However, if you have noticed, posters have been trying to top each other's hot girl. The latest one, SkapePhin's picture, made us realize the next one may in fact try to beat the thong, and maybe show nipple or something. We are installing these rules now, before it gets that far. Prevention is the best weapon.......

Baz
04-10-2003, 03:00 PM
So you are all for nudity eh? You wouldn't happen to be "Ugly Naked Guy" from Friends, would you? Just kidding......

DrAstroZoom
04-10-2003, 03:05 PM
"Showing nipple" is nudity, and as such would already violate the terms of service.

You said, "AstroZoom, there have been no "softcore" pictures yet." So SkapePhin's picture should be ok. But I've heard some Finheaven staff members say it's not ok. See the problem?

Can't we just trust members to know "nudity is nudity"? It's all about principle to me.

Baz
04-10-2003, 03:07 PM
Yeah, I understand what you're saying. I'm gonna bring it up in the staff forum and see what the big guys have to say about it......

Baz
04-10-2003, 03:14 PM
If only the cheerleaders knew what their pictures were being used for......

DrAstroZoom
04-10-2003, 03:15 PM
BigBoy ... why can't all political protests be as fun as yours?

inFINSible
04-10-2003, 03:17 PM
That is a perfectly "legal" picture......I'm sorry, if that doesn't do it for you but I still see no reason that anything more explicit than that needs to be on a DOLPHINS website......there are plenty of places where you can excercise your "freedom of speech" besides here....The fact remains that the people who run THIS site have decided that they don't want to have a problem with this issue and they have brought it to the attention of the members in as nice a way as possible....There were some staff members that wanted ONLY pics of Miami dolphins Cheerleaders....So please accept that we understand where you are coming from but we reserve the right to run the site as seen fit by those that OWN the site.

I hope that this issue doesn't dissuade you from continuing to post here but, this is just the way it's going to have to be. We want it to be a website for EVERYBODY , including you so, welcome and I hope we can move past this issue.

Baz
04-10-2003, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by DrAstroZoom
BigBoy ... why can't all political protests be as fun as yours?

LMAO. If they were all as "colorful" as this, I may have to start attending them......

DrAstroZoom
04-10-2003, 03:27 PM
inFINS ... I just hate to see rules degenerate to the point of silliness. And adding a "thong" clause is silly. It gives me the image of a nun with yardstick in hand measuring skirt lengths.

inFINSible
04-10-2003, 03:40 PM
Originally posted by DrAstroZoom
inFINS ... I just hate to see rules degenerate to the point of silliness. And adding a "thong" clause is silly. It gives me the image of a nun with yardstick in hand measuring skirt lengths.

Look we're trying to be as liberal as possible here......Like I said there were those that thought we should restrict it further so please try and understand.....It may sound silly but it is a line that doesn't leave any room for errors in judgement or subject the staff to having to MAKE the judgements......

I think this is turning into a bigger deal than it needs to be but if you feel so strongly about it.....make a new thread and post a poll or a petition......I can't promise it will change anything but I'm sure it will be taken into consideration.

DrAstroZoom
04-10-2003, 03:55 PM
I think I'll do a poll, inFINS.

PhinPhan1227
04-10-2003, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by BigBoy
And for perspective - here is some real violence. We all see violence on TV and movies and the deaths are so clean and there is no mourning - there is nothing but the killing and then the next scene.

This man was attacking police during an anti-globalization demonstration. He, like many others, are tired of the US and European countries "bailing out" failing economies through the IMF by promising loans with the price of a) allowing foreign countries to come in a buy your national assets, b) opening your financial markets when they are not ready to be opened so that most of the capital in the country leaves, and c) supressing the ensuing riots by force. Don't forget d) killing trade unions and giving almost ultimate power to the bosses, and none to the people. That is what the World Bank, WTO, and IMF are all abuot remember. These "global agencies" are finded predominantly by the people who will, of course, profit most from their actions - Americans, Canadians, and Europeans. Just ask people in Indonesia, Thailand - ****, ask Russia - a country completely RAIDED after it accepted the terms of the IMF bailout? Ask people in countless African nations.

This dude got what he should have expected to get when you attack police. That doesn't mean you don't fight the system, you just fight it smarter. And one of the first things you do is start asking your government why so much violence is on TV, but none of it looks like THIS

The answer is simple - because our government needs us to be behind military actions it may choose to take on other countries. The reality of violence, if shown on TV, would be so gut churning that only the uber-violent few would ever support us going to war, unless an army was marching onto uor very soil and occupying the white house. So instead they indoctrinate with a quasi-violent culture, ensuring that when we go to war people won't complain.

Well people would complain if they saw more pictures like these. Maybe then we could stop this disgusting oil-grab.

First and foremost, this post belongs in the War forum, not here. Secondly, for your information, I've seen the pictures. I've also served my country in the military. And while the pictures of a civilian killed by an errent bomb are tragic, the pictures of civilian corpses stacked like firewood are even more tragic. Those corpses are a tiny fraction of the thousands killed every year by tyrants like Saddam Hussein. You may want to ask the Iraqi's cheering in the streets what they think of our "disgusting oil grab". Of course, if I were you I'd do it via e-mail, they might expose you to some "real violence" if you asked them to their faces.

FinHeavenAJ
04-10-2003, 04:35 PM
Ok, since I believe in majority rule, this amendment will no longer be in affect. Please use your own judgement though.

Cranx
04-10-2003, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by BigBoy
It saddens me so much to see how literally brainwashed we've become as a country. You sit in front of your TVs all day long and you believe what they tell you. I beg you to turn off your televisions and read a book. Read a book about what the US is doing that they don't tell you on TV. Read a book about the HORRORS of war. Read a book written by someone who is not backed by corporate advertisers.

We've forgotten how to read in this country. We think that everything that exists on TV is everything there is, and that it's al true. Well I'm telling you it's not. It's not all true. And I put those images in this forum because this forum is about censorship. Once we start censoring ourselves like the government wants us too then we will have truly lost all of our freedoms. That has not hapened yet.

Speak up while you can. Don't let yourself be censored.

I'm seriously sickened by this ludicrous and juvenile mentality that believes that freedom has been handed to them on a silver platter, it's your right to do whatever you want with it, and that freedom comes without any form of sacrifice. Get real!!!

My guess is that you're about 20 years old, are attending some type of institution of "higher learning" and have thus become brainwashed yourself by certain ideologies that are espoused by those from whom you learn. Your mantra which has been spewed (spammed) all over these boards smacks of the same half baked, quasi-intellectualist, nonsense that is regurgitated by the majority of those who represent what is collectively known as "Hollywood."

When you protest this war and whine and cry about the "violence" being "perpetrated" upon the people of Iraq, take half a second to watch what those same people are doing the second they get the opportunity: They are rejoicing in the arrival of Coalition troops, and are literally annihlating every symbol of the regime from which they are being liberated. These are a people who understand that their freedom has a price, and that price includes the shedding of blood. These are people who have been slaughtered for decades now in the name of a man who holds himself up to be God, and whose only aim is to further his own wealth and stature. These are a people who, unlike most of us in the U.S., are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for the sake of their nation's future, and who are YOU to tell them that they do not deserve the right to share in the same type of lifestyle which you yourself so comfortably enjoy?

I will answer that question for you: In light of the present set of circumstances, and in light of the feable arguments which you've made here in these forums, you are nobody. You have likely done nothing to earn the right to make moronic and imicilic comments such as the ones you have made. You have not been willing to put your mind, body, and soul on the line as I- and many others- have. You sit in the comfort and quiet of your dorm room, bedroom, or whatever hovel you infest, and lob rocks from behind the protection of your plexiglass barrier.

It is your right to do this however, and it is your right to act like and infetile little child who adopts the "rebel" view of the world in order to make himself feel as though he is personally doing something worthwhile. It is your downfall however, that you believe that just because a majority of people believe one thing, that it is your obligation to argue that point regardless of the amount of merrit contained within the argument.

I write this knowing that it will change nothing in that closed off, sheltered, unbending, and intolerant chamber you call a mind. I write this knowing that you have shown neither the capacity nor the ability to achieve rational, independant thought.

I feel very sorry for you, and for those at whatever coffee corner you infest. Your self serving quasi-intellectualism does nothing but breed resentment, intolerance, and hatred and it saddens me to think that someone, somewhere, at some time, died so that you could act in this pathetic, childish manner; grow up.