ALLOW BABE THREADS IN OT!!!

[OutHouse]

having babe threads in L&R doesn't make sense. they should be back in OT where talking about babes is generally a OT kind of thing to do.

 

[rudeguy]

Also, a 3 week ban for posting one babe thread is a bit much.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

Yeah, I really don't see how there is much love or relationship in a babe thread.
More like a Man's art gallery.

 

[tranceport]

Agreed, babes in OT would be fine with me. I also think JohnCU should be unbanned. I do not even think that this http://forums.anandtech.com/me...id=38&threadid=2257969 is a babe thread.

Linking to http://pics.bbzzdd.com/toprecent.php does not a babe thread make. That is ridiculous.

 

[mb]

Seriously. This is the stupidest thing. We are allowed to curse all we want in posts (not titles), and discussions about illegal activities go on all the time, but we can't have PG-13 babe threads in OT? What makes anyone think they belong in L&R in the first place? What does posting/discussing babes have anything to do with love and/or relationships? Nothing!

 

[GrantMeThePower]

agreed. I said something to this extent when they split the forums in the first place and that they would keep an eye on it...but nothing changed. I dont even see the rational...L&R should be for more serious stuff and let the oogling happen in OT where more fun is

 

[nismotigerwvu]

Why not even have a subforum just for babe threads...now that would be some sweet action

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu
Why not even have a subforum just for babe threads...now that would be some sweet action

How about no more freakin subforums

 

[olds]

You guys must fail at the google. Tons of babe threads there.
Let me help

 

[DrPizza]

Any of you ever noticed that you have to be logged on in order to view L&R? One reason the babe thread was placed there, rather than in OT in hopes that the neffers who nef from work won't find this site blocked because it's become R rated, rather than PG-13. Toss a bunch of bikini threads into OT, and it wouldn't be too long before the people with filters in their workplace found that Anandtech was filtered out.

The really odd thing, I can't figure out why the babe thread grows at a slower pace than the threads we end up locking in OT. You want babes? Post there!

 

[FDF12389]

I dont think John's post is a babe thread though, I mean, there's a picture of me on there (last one). And I'm hardly a babe.

 

[Farang]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Any of you ever noticed that you have to be logged on in order to view L&R? One reason the babe thread was placed there, rather than in OT in hopes that the neffers who nef from work won't find this site blocked because it's become R rated, rather than PG-13. Toss a bunch of bikini threads into OT, and it wouldn't be too long before the people with filters in their workplace found that Anandtech was filtered out.

The really odd thing, I can't figure out why the babe thread grows at a slower pace than the threads we end up locking in OT. You want babes? Post there!

yes but what % of nsfw pics came from babe-specific threads. I mean the other day I saw a guy with his face ripped of from piranhas on atot. by your logic all nsfw pics should be banned, unless you think babe threads contribute to a very high % of the nsfw pics

 

[Nik]

L&R is a fucking joke. So are the rules for babe threads. The 2008 versus 1708 comment is absolutely spot on.

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Any of you ever noticed that you have to be logged on in order to view L&R? One reason the babe thread was placed there, rather than in OT in hopes that the neffers who nef from work won't find this site blocked because it's become R rated, rather than PG-13. Toss a bunch of bikini threads into OT, and it wouldn't be too long before the people with filters in their workplace found that Anandtech was filtered out.

The really odd thing, I can't figure out why the babe thread grows at a slower pace than the threads we end up locking in OT. You want babes? Post there!

yes but what % of nsfw pics came from babe-specific threads. I mean the other day I saw a guy with his face ripped of from piranhas on atot. by your logic all nsfw pics should be banned, unless you think babe threads contribute to a very high % of the nsfw pics

I didn't find the piranha thread to really be NSFW. For what it's worth, displaying images of scantily clad females on your desktop at work falls under "sexual harassment" by creating a hostile environment for females who simply don't want to see male coworkers staring at such pictures. i.e. it leads to lawsuits. Things that are gross, well, they're just gross. There are plenty of things that are "nsfw" for reasons other than sexuality. And, looking at them might get you in a little bit of hot water. Staring at babe threads? That's the kinda thing that gets you fired in many professional environments.

Do a search for "NSFW" - the majority of the time NSFW appears, it's not the thread topic. And, most of the time when it is in the thread topic, whatever the content that makes it NSFW is usually borderline. (i.e. only at really strict workplaces.) But, things of a sexual nature are often looked at differently by employers. For better or worse, that's how our society is in the U.S. Furthermore, it's usually not the content of the thread that's NSFW. The NSFW is located at some external site. However, the characteristic comments in the babe threads cause the threads themselves to be NSFW. Employers don't generally look too kindly upon workers reading stuff like "I'd do her in the butt" while at work. If someone complained at work about you reading threads with that kind of content, then if a female walked by your computer and saw such a comment on the screen, better luck on your next job. Most employers aren't going to go to that extreme if you're reading "the piranhas chewed his face off!" "Gross picture, possibly NSFW." But, as I said, things of a more sexual nature tend to be far more NSFW than things that are "nsfw" due to language, violence, etc.

 

[Bill Brasky]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Employers don't generally look too kindly upon workers reading stuff like "I'd do her in the butt"

touche :laugh:

However, it does make more sense to have the babe thread in off topic since there's no love involved in fapping.

 

[mrSHEiK124]

Hear hear! Move the babe thread into OT

 

[sdifox]

L&R scares me more than NSFW threads.

 

[Train]

OT is essentially NSFW all the time anyways. Just because your on a "tech site" doesnt mean you arent wasting time.

If my boss came up and looked at my screen and I was in any forum other than programming or maybe highly technical, it would be considered a waste of time.

If you're in a workplace where you are afraid a NSFW image might pop up and offend someone/get you in trouble, then heres a simple solution: DONT CLICK ON PICTURES!!

its not like AT is one of those forums that lets people embed images in posts (thank god) So I really dont see any problem. Often when you see image links marked as NSFW, people post "marked for when i get home". See? They can read the text but not see the images, but when they read "zomg JLH tits lok huge in this new pic!!!" they want to see it, but can safely NOT do so until they are in a safer place.

If someone isnt supposed to be looking at babe images at work, then not allowing them to do so in ATOT is not going to save them, they will just do it somewhere else.

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Any of you ever noticed that you have to be logged on in order to view L&R? One reason the babe thread was placed there, rather than in OT in hopes that the neffers who nef from work won't find this site blocked because it's become R rated, rather than PG-13. Toss a bunch of bikini threads into OT, and it wouldn't be too long before the people with filters in their workplace found that Anandtech was filtered out.

The really odd thing, I can't figure out why the babe thread grows at a slower pace than the threads we end up locking in OT. You want babes? Post there!

Can you see the user traffic for each section, or posts per day per section? I would bet OT gets a lot more views than L&R. Who wants to go out into a separate section just to hunt down babes threads? Speaking personally, I link straight into OT, and then if I'm bored enough, wander elsewhere.

 

[Woosta]

I think it would be a good idea if we had a sub forum, that way off topic will be free and everyone will be too busy refreshing the threads in the babe forum.

 

[0roo0roo]

i don't know how it ever got into l&r, it has nothing to do with love and relationships. you might as well put a porn thread in l&r as well then.

basically what they did was shove it into its own little ghetto, which is basically an attempt to kill it.

Employers don't generally look too kindly upon workers reading stuff like "I'd do her in the butt"

yea, welll don't click on the thread. how about this, employers don't look kindly on employees spending their paid time in off topic forums at all. to be work safe you should frankly ban all people who are at work from surfing nontechnical forums as there is no way that ot can be work related at all.

 

[Turin39789]

there should not be a dedicated babe thread or a stud thread. There should be threads allowed in OT with babes in them, and posts should be labeled nsfw if they are so. OT should never be channeled into an under 18 bastardization.

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: Turin39789
there should not be a dedicated babe thread or a stud thread. There should be threads allowed in OT with babes in them, and posts should be labeled nsfw if they are so. OT should never be channeled into an under 18 bastardization.

In a perfect world yes. Most people are too stupid to label correctly hence the blanket policy.

 

[speg]

Originally posted by: Amused
The bans in this thread are absolutely ridiculous and are part of the VERY reason this forum has only a tiny fraction of the traffic it had just 5 years ago.

5 years ago, NSFW was a courtesy. Now it a bannable requirement???

Here's a clue: Why are you surfing social OT forums while on someone else's dime anyhow??? And your boss cares about scantily clad pics of girls, but not the thousands of man hours a year you waste on browsing social forums???

Obviously this is now a bannable requirment because we have a mod who posts from work. Hey: How about working instead of wasting your employer's money?

5 years ago babe threads weren't a problem. Now they're a bannable offense?

If pics and talk of girls offend you, get off the gawd damn internet.

Congrats, guys. You've nannied OT down to barely a ghost of what it was 5 years ago. With every new rule and every new bannable offense, you have driven away forum traffic, and therefore advertising dollars.

It's time to throw in the fsking towel and rename "Off Topic" to kindergarten. Because that's what this place has become. While you're at it, change the title from "mod" to "nanny." It fits better.

:thumbsup:

I agree completely. I was away from AT for a good 3-4 years and things aren't the same as they used to be.

I say we take a look at revamping the moderating system when we switch forums.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: Turin39789
there should not be a dedicated babe thread or a stud thread. There should be threads allowed in OT with babes in them, and posts should be labeled nsfw if they are so. OT should never be channeled into an under 18 bastardization.

In a perfect world yes. Most people are too stupid to label correctly hence the blanket policy.

If you are at work you should be able to avoid babe threads even without a strong nsfw policy. Noodz are completely disallowed so there's no danger of clicking anything too far out there. Unless someone is purposefully masking links it's possible to surf at work using just a bit of common sense. Don't go into the Jalba thread to begin with.