Filtered gallaries?

"In the old days people used these tools; and did thei own filtering; instead of whining."

 

This aint the old days now is it?? Plus, many have been doing their own filtering for some time now. If current technology allows for the site to implement these filters, then what is the harm to you, to the site, to those that want them, to those that want more nudes?? I fail to see the logic behind most of these counter points, illustrations, or other ideas resiting the option of a CHOICE! At least be fair and reasonable about it.

 

In fact think about it for a minute friends: If those that want nudes can still have all nudes they currently have (there's ONE happy group). And if those that have learned to work around the nudes, can now just use a click of the mouse to filter most out from showing up on their monitor (there's the SECOND EVEN HAPPIER group) How about those that refuse to use the site at all...or are possibly not even allowed to acces the site?? Is it not true, that even more people would appreciatively use this website?? If Photo.net is not so sure about this possibility, then I suggest put it on the front page. WOULD MEMBERS OF THE PHOTO.NET COMMUNITY LIKE TO SEE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A NUDE IMAGES FILTER? See what happens. You cannot be any clearer to those that are resiting that YOU will not be affected in any way. Nudes will always be available...it's really that simple!

I am in favour of an opt-in check box category which could then be filtered out if required by individual users.

Wading through this thread, I am amazed at the bickering, and defensive stances taken. Here is how I feel. I do not consider myself a prude, and I do not believe in censorship. But I do get tired of having nudity in my face over and over. It is much more than once in a while...often it is half a page. I would like to view the pages at work. Recently an employee got fired for viewing a pornographic site, and I am afraid that the pictures that pop up on my screen might be misconstrued. If there is any way to implement it, I am all for it.

I recently printed a photo for my 5-year-old son as he really liked the #1 of mashed potatoes. My son seeing an artistic nude is no problem but my son seeing a nude and going home and telling my ex is another story or worse yet if the nude could be described by him in a pornographic light.

There really are so many different reasons to have a filter, and an argument of censorship makes no sense if everyone gets to have what they want. Actually censorship is about forcing ones will on another and not giving a choice. An argument could be made that not having a filter could be considered censorship a censor of choice. I can�t make that argument, as there are other photo sites but that makes more sense to me than the people that are arguing censorship pertaining to a filter of choice.

If there ever was a no brainer this is it.

Precisely, Gerald.

 

Photo.net does not have the incentive nor the ability to implement the asked for changes to filteration. This filteration is currenttly available on other newer sites. There is no reason in the world why we cannot frequent the sites that have the filter in place rather than continue to argue that photo.net should implement changes when they are not able to do so.

 

If you prefer the possibility to use this filtration see Usefilm or (my preference) www.photopoints.com. Newer, faster, 'clones' who have learned from the old experiment (10 years in syberspace is a dinosaur) and improved on the old. Its ever the way. Why would you try to make your Grandmother wear mini-skirts and spandex jeans? Try one of the newer sites and find the place you are satisfied with the philosphy, PLEASE. This site began as forums and still contains some of the best information in its forums on <b> PHOTOGRAPHY </b>. I don't want to lose that information to the 'subway' current mentality. What is the DR.'s recent opinion on his site, I wonder? He seems to be gone on to other things. So, too am I.

These were your own words just a couple months ago Margaret! So what changed??

 

M.M. Meehan , nov 03, 2003; 02:30 p.m.

"None of it is being 'ruled' out. If you read Bob's post, he seems to be suggesting that you will be able to look at anything you care to look at. He seems to me to be suggesting that we make our own decisions on whether or not we are going to be looking at anything catagorized as adult or not seen on the prime time television news. Dead people or someone being killed are never shown on news broadcasts, naked people are never shown, nor are sexually explicit 'art' shots shown. There is generally a warning by the news media announcer if there is going to be anything in the stories that might be offensive, so that people who have small children or any other aversion to such things, can click the button 'off'. No one decides to click that button but your own self. This is a feature in effect on, dare I say, photopoints. Its never been a big issue there. You simply put a check mark in a small box and the filtering is done for you. Surely there are a few mature individuals on site who would be able to assess any photo that is not put into the catagory (lets call it 'adult'); as being 'adult', and mark it as such and thus put it behind the filter. What is so difficult to understand about this? It allows freedom of choice for everyone. If you want your children to see everything the world has to offer that is called 'art' don't put the checkmark in the box. But let's allow those who want to make their decision on not showing everything to children, their choice. THEIR OWN CHOICE."

 

I agree with you then!

Just another vote for Vincent, Michael, Gerald, Lou Ann,Walter,Pete and others for A CHOICE!

I vote for a filter that eliminates everthing BUT the nudes.

I would like to see a choice to filter out just the 'nude' category that category that photographer selects. I think we all know when we see it what we would like to be excluded. I often peruse notes.net at lunch at work, and I have to look over the shoulder at work since looking at the nudes at work could be trouble.

Have fun perusing notes.net, whatever that is, but if for some reason you cannot abide

looking even accidentally at photo.net nudes during work hours... then don't peruse

this site when you're at work.

Can we get a tool to filter boring threads too!?<p>]:@~