I think we have to accept that social media content is a fact of life now. The question is where and how we draw lines.
I sent the following DM to LARI about his Kardashian flood a while back [this is a text copy, the original having been deleted to clear my message box]
blueoystercult said:
Do we really need any more Kardashian pregnancy pictures? At this point she just looks like she's smuggling a family of pigs in a fishing net and is about as sexy. She's milking the whole thing for all it's worth but do we need galleries of it?
BOC
In Reply to your post
add #610
To which he replied
-LARI- said:
From : -LARI-
To : blueoystercult
Date : 2015-11-08 14:03
Title : Re: Kim Kardashian
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK. I respect that
I left the existing galleries alone and thankfully did not see another picture of Her Royal Bloatedness on the board, so the quiet word thing does work sometimes. Similarly when we had the hissy-fit post off about the Cyrus dildo costume I just deleted all of it and they shut up and resumed normal business. So sometimes the big stick works. That's part of the whole discretion thing
I don't think that banning imagetwist will be a panacea to endall ills, but I do think disincentivising the cashwhore posters as best we can will alleviate some of the problem at least. [On the subject of Friend26, I believe he posts much of what others post, to fit in and to supply what is wanted. He messages me often to let me know about problems or issues and seems genuinely to want to be a part of an online community. If the social media tat ebbed away his focus would be drawn to better quality.]
The imagetiwst issue came to a head for me this evening when trying to check this post
http://www.nudecelebforum.com/showpost.php?p=890075&postcount=29
Firefox on which I have installed a popup blocker and ad stopper, would not load it. Chrome which is add-on free, crashed on multiple attempts trying to load it. Finally I opened it in a sandboxed IE browser to be flooded with pop-ups and redirects. It took me nearly 30 minutes to get to the actual image so I replaced it in the post with the same image Dead Link Removed to the board's pimp and host service.
To my mind that experience is ridiculous. It is things like this as much as the tat posted by click-thru profiteers that makes me wonder if this is a hosting service we should be advocating. However, I don't know what the business model of the board is so can't comment beyond these observations.
None of this has anything to do with my primary query however, which is the establishment of a thumbnail parameter. Because different hosts have different sizes it would be hard to set a pixel dimension, but making it clear that small or moderate sized thumbs are preferred and full sized images unacceptable would seem to be a sensible addition to the rules/guidelines.
BOC
