Celebrity Videos - cleaned

[Jony 07]

Laura Allen / Dirt S01Ep04 / (US 2007)



duration 01:14 size 14.1 avi 680 x 384
L.A.D.1.4.rar

 

[blueoystercult]

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)

Ooops Topless during photo shoot in Miami Beach

 

[supers992]

Chasty Ballesteros - Hot Bot (2016) Web HD 1080p



Video: mkv, 1920x814
Duration: 01:53
Size: 110 mb

Dead Link Removed
Download from Oboom

 

[SceneUpDD]

These Final Hours (2013) Gifs

Kathryn Beck



Others


​

 

[manugor]

could you repost this clip?

 

[1man]

Unknown Photoshoot

 

[blueoystercult]

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]

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

 

[paranormal]

Renee Griffin - Cyborg 2



Matroska - File Format
102 MB - File Size
00:01:59 - Duration
1280 - Width
542 - Height


https://www.bigfile.to/file/jZDtT9aV8yuj/1C.rar​

 

[paranormal]

Lauren Lee Smith - Cinemanovels



Matroska - File Format
177 MB - File Size
00:05:45 - Duration
1916 - Width
812 - Height

https://www.bigfile.to/file/xdEBHb5UNMhE/2C.rar​

 

[paranormal]

Jovana Stojiljkovic - Panama 2015



AVI - File Format
178 MB - File Size
00:11:30 - Duration
720 - Width
304 - Height

https://www.bigfile.to/file/h8SAUVsjMGva/3C.rar

 

[paranormal]

Chiara Caselli - Beyond the Clouds



AVI - File Format
42.3 MB - File Size
00:01:11 - Duration
1280 - Width
716 - Height

https://www.bigfile.to/file/CdHdFvHgnVT8/4c.rar

 

[paranormal]

Sabrina Ferilli - The Great Beauty





Matroska - File Format
133 MB - File Size
00:02:22 - Duration
1920 - Width
816 - Height

https://www.bigfile.to/file/3mRw65rbczEu/4c.rar

 

[paranormal]

Dakota Fanning - Now is Good



Matroska - File Format
108 MB - File Size
00:04:06 - Duration
1920 - Width
812 - Height


https://www.bigfile.to/file/nczhSjsVPTrA/6C.rar

 

[paranormal]

Shannon Elizabeth - Night Of The Demons



MPEG-4 - File Format
198 MB - File Size
00:05:49 - Duration
1280 - Width
720 - Height


https://www.bigfile.to/file/eJYrxYM3J4bP/7c.rar

 

[blueoystercult]

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

 

[Ruffah]

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


.​

 

[1man]

33rd Annual Paleyfest Los Angeles ‘An Evening with Dick Wolf’ (March 19, 2016)

 

[blueoystercult]

This is a NUDE celebrity forum. The standards are different here. If you want a forum that approves any and all pictures there are plenty on the net. Please do feel free to avail yourself of them
I didn't set the standards but I do have to apply them. They have been relaxed since they were first imposed but all moderators spend bloody hours discussing and debating what we can and can't leave up and they are constantly being moulded and modified.
As for Heigl, a top that covers her from her collar bone to her solar plexus does not constitute "a good view of her funbags", and if she is in the background and the foreground is dominated by her hairy husband in his scabby boardies, then she is not the focus of the shot. What part of "...images must have 'sex-appeal'" is unclear? Unless of course you find bearded men or a couple who look like they've been arguing for hours sexy. But hey. Whatever blows your skirt up.

 

[blueoystercult]

If cow guts and gorrillas are the things that glitter your chandelier, I'm sure there's a forum or website somewhere out there to cater for you. However, what part of "not on this forum" is in anyway unclear to you? Just because you want it doesn't mean it should be available here.
This forum has specific rules and standards that make it unlike other run of the mill celebrity fora, of which there are thousands and all of which you are at liberty to avail yourself at any time. There you can find pictures of celebrities in full apparel, in company, alone, shopping for salad or washing their hands. You can find all those tiny pointless selfies of them having coffee, or meaningless pap galleries of them walking down a street. Those are the appropriate spaces for those kinds of images and you can apply your "selective view" or "limited perspective" or rampant imagination or anything else you care to. It doesn't happen here even if it is what makes your ovaries ache.
I have hundreds, maybe thouands of images of actresses, singers, dancers, models and others by top photographers, all of which will never be posted here because they do not satisfy board criteria. Sometimes they are a part of larger photosets, some of which do fit the criteria. In that case I post the images that do with the full gallery on the imagehost and I leave a note so members know they should explore. Above all however, I observe the rule and boundary of the board. It's not rocket science. That is the true nature of selectivity as it applies to a specfic space and respects the rules of that space. "Do as you will is the whole of the law" does not apply here. Nor should it.
No one is holding a gun to your head or begging you to stay.
You choose to come here, you respect the rules and conditions of the arena, whether that is in what you are posting or what you find. We will continue to apply the rules of the forum to any and all posts made here, and interpret those rules and how they apply to the best of our ability, in consultation with each other where necessary.
You want something else, you go elsewhere. You want to post something else, post it elsewhere. Any breaches of those rules and boundaries which define this forum will be dealt with appropriately.
It really is as simple and straightforward as that.
BOC

F... the bearded dude, what part of "learn a selective view" is unclear?
I would still have taken the picture even if a gorilla sits besides here and she would be holding cow guts instead of her dog.
I glad I still get notifications and can judge myself.