• New threads will not be visible until approved by a moderator.
  • Customize your forum experience with the xenForo-G-1-0 browser script.
    For additional information, see: Useful Custom Forum Script: xenForo-G-1-0

  • Welcome to the forum!
    You must activate your account in order to post and view all forum content
    Please check your email inbox & spam folders for our activation email, then follow the link to validate your email address.
    Contact Us if you are having difficulty posting or viewing forum content.
  • You are viewing our forum as a guest, with limited access.
    By joining you will gain full access to thousands of Videos, Pictures & Much More.
    Membership is absolutely FREE! Registration is FAST & SIMPLE.
    Register Today to join the first, most comprehensive and friendliest communities of nude celebrity fans on the net!

Celebrity Videos - cleaned

blueoystercult

Socially Isolated Since God Was A Boy
Staff Alumn
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
1,929
Reaction score
349
Warning for cboard: Comments In Content Threads

Post: Jael de Pardo
User: cboard
Infraction: Comments In Content Threads
Points: 0

Administrative Note:
Why you have just been warned


Message to User:
We do not post comments in contents threads here. Please read the board rules.
BOC


Original Post:
 

blueoystercult

Socially Isolated Since God Was A Boy
Staff Alumn
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
1,929
Reaction score
349
Karina Jelinek and Ronda Rousey

These posts are obviously cause of much contention but there doesn't seem to be any difinitive answer either way to resolve the questions.
Since there are real questions and concerns and we want the best possible forum we can create I have moved these posts to the "Jihad" section (please can we change that name?) here
http://www.nudecelebforum.com/showthread.php?t=236418
and would invite other moderators and admin to offer up any confirmations (not opinion. We've all got one of those)they might have or can find. We want either originals to prove the fake, or difinitive IDs.
Thanks very much for your kind attention
BOC

add on 17 (uncensored)

 

blueoystercult

Socially Isolated Since God Was A Boy
Staff Alumn
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
1,929
Reaction score
349
Read the rules of the forum again.

Rule 05c. Do NOT post duplicates of images already posted or fully clothed images or head-shots; images must have 'sex-appeal'

This is a much relaxed revision to the previous rule that was "Nude Only". Why do you think this place is called the "Nude Celeb Forum"? Because it's catchy?
All pictures removed fail to make even the basic standards required by this forum. They may well be acceptable to other forums that don't mind you posting papparazzi shots of shopping trips and endless red carpet events and magazine shoots where the subject is wearing so many clothes they might as well be wearing a burka.
Moderators spend hours going though your posts and because most of you either can't be bothered to read and understand the rules or simply disregard them in the hope your endless imagetwist clickthru pennies will keep rolling in. There's almost no thought most of the time. Some of you dump everything here like you're upending your hard drives after grabbing all you can on your social media trawls. Fully clothed, dull, pointless, tiny, low res, galleries of exactly the same thing, shots focussing on men, or, my personal favourite bugbear, featuring kids (and blurring or blacking out the kids doesn't make it "acceptable". It just makes it creepy). Half the time you're posting almost identical sets to the previous post. And I swear to chuffing Christ if I see one more Bella Thorne workout selfie I'm going to go postal. They are just the same picture over and over and over again.
We end up clearing half of it as junk because it doesn't meet even the most liberal interpretation of the above rule, or the frames are so similar as to be identical, or the light and resolution of yet another pointless poxy social media selfie is so piss poor the shot looks like it was taken by Rorschach.
We have spent literally HOURS arguing about how far we can bend the interpretation of this rule to accomodate posters who think someone walking down the road drinking coffee in opaque gym gear meets the basic standard set out here. We don't want to do it. It's a complete bloody waste of our time, but that's the position you force us to take by not reading and understanding the rules. There actually came a point a few weeks ago where I was discussing with another mdoerator whether one photo constituted showing sufficient cleavage to not be removed, and I suddenly wondered to myself, "What on God's earth am I doing with my life?". And why? Because you have no self restraint and can't be arsed to read and grasp the meaning of a simple set of rules.
If you want to post shots of people dressed from head to foot or with the sex appeal of lettuce there are lots of fora that would welcome those contributions. This is the wrong place to do it.
Bottom line. Meet the standards and the mods will simply check the links and approve the post. Don't meet the standard and the posts will be cleared.
BOC
 

blueoystercult

Socially Isolated Since God Was A Boy
Staff Alumn
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
1,929
Reaction score
349
Agreed Yak. A good early step on a long and complicated road. There're some very positive moves here.
One thing puzzles me though because I've never seen it here. How do you make everyone aware of the rule changes that will effect their posting habits, such as caps, banned hosts, newly approved hosts etc? Judging by what goes on day to day, most members have barely read the rules page, if at all.
BOC
 

blueoystercult

Socially Isolated Since God Was A Boy
Staff Alumn
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
1,929
Reaction score
349
Ah. Subjective interpretation. I draw my learned friend's attention to my previous statement
"We end up clearing half of it as junk because it doesn't meet even the most liberal interpretation of the above rule"
Oh yes. Heigl. The picture the main focus of which was her bloody husband in the foreground, while you can just about make Heigl out in the background in what looks like her granny's bra. The bloody thing was so big it could well have passed for a crop top.But the main focus of the shot is still the morose bearded dude in the shorts and T-shirt. And what are this fabulous couple who personify sex appeal doing? Glaring off into the distance with expressions on their faces like someone had just farted.
Yes. A hairy man in scrappy shorts and a T-shirt. Sexy.
FFS.
BOC
 
Last edited:

Ruffah

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2010
Messages
6,166
Reaction score
2,268
Jodie Foster @ Catchfire (US 1991) [butt]



Title : Jodie_Foster_-_Catchfire-(US1991)-RUFFAH.avi - 73.3 MiB
Duration : 3mn 10s
Res : 720 x 400 @ 25.000 fps
Video : XVID @ 2 994 Kbps
Audio : ac3 224 Kbps@48.0 KHz
Channels : 2 channels

Download:

http://Dead Link Removed.net/file/f82v2dbf/
or
Dead Link Removed


.​
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top