"Free Tango01 - DH'd for a Nude Fig on the Nudes Board?" Topic

How is this possible, in today's more enlightened society, where we have had nude art and statues since the medieval/renaissance periods, we have a Nude or Partially Nude Figs Board clearly labeled NSFW (meaning Not Safe for Work), and when someone posts an image of a nude miniature on said clearly labeled board, he gets Doghaused for 4 days for that?

What's next?

Will figures in miniskirts and bikinis be banned from being shown next, and only women in full burkinis permitted to be shown?

Clearly, we are sliding back towards the Dark Ages, so we need to make a stand.

Free Armand, and put an end to this silly censorship.

If people can't stand seeing a sculpture of a naked, female miniature or body, it's really their issue and not ours.

They should turn off the board, or not click on the pics. There doesn't need to be an individual warning for each posting, IMHO, since the all of the postings on said board say "Nude, or Partially Nude, and NSFW".

Most the time, even those are fully clothed.

So, exercise a little bit of self-control, and don't click on the link, instead of throwing posters in the clink!

Or "Click on the link! Throw'em in the clink!"

Oh, the humanity!!

The policy is clear, Tango knows the policy, Tango has been previously warned to tag the nude pictures properly.

It is pretty screwed up. It's on the nude board. Should any post with violence or depictions of violence be prefaced with a R rating?

Ridiculous. I am not always fond of what Tango01 posts, and sometimes I tell him as a reply, and sometimes as a PM. But if we have naked bondage fetish rape dioramas on a ckearly labelled board, by all means let it be. That's why we have such a boatd. Anyone who views anything on that board and then reports it for being relevant should be the one in the DH. And I am against the DH in general.

Let Tango01 out. It gets boring around here without him.

The policy is just silly, Bill.

The entire board is "tagged" properly, and the jihadists complaining about his postings, but still can't help themselves from clicking on the board message threads are out of line.

How will I know what the Russians are up to now? :)

I agree Coyotepunc.

Not sure how I'm going to find the time to post all the current, relevant, ultramodern wargaming scenario fodder links, like NK threatening to attack/nuke US and SK troops – yes, again; Angela Merkel's take on Putin being in violation of international agreements on Ukraine; German protestors standing on the Brandenberg Gate to protest illegal aliens; Sweded and Finns becoming less infatuated with illegals in their countries; China trying to negotiate side deals with the locals on their SCS bases; F-35 having issues still and even the program manager/director isn't pleased with progress there, but the party line is "everything is fine", even when it isn't working, despite being declared "operational"; Hurricane headed for Smokey; etc., etc..

Whew, that's a lot, even without an overview and links.

;-)

Yes, this stinks to high heaven.

Never fear, Weasel, I'm keeping a close eye on Vladimir.

Sorry Bill but this is the first time that I can honestly say that I disagree with your stance on this one.

This is ed.
There is no rule posted under "the rules" that posts have to be correctly labelled.
I have had enough of this and will find my miniatures news elsewhere from now on.

How do you tag them?
I missed that memo.
Not that I would want to….

Silly, silly, silly, and, once more for the daily exercise, SILLY.

Get a grip.

NOT a DH offence, from where I sit.

It's Tango, fer cripes sake.

Eric

Last time I was in the DH, I knew what I was doing and how it got me there. No remorse. In fact I expected it.

Seems a bit illogical and overly redundant to have to announce that you're going to post a "nude", or "semi-nude" image of a figure on the "Nude and Semi-Nude Figures – NSFW" Board, especially when the description says "For discussion of nude and semi-nude figures".

I mean, a picture is supposedly worth a 1,000 words, so that seems a little better to include actual images than trying to describe them in detail, without actually posting the pics, for those that might want to actually know about and click on those subjects.

Others that are offended by such stuff needn't click on those threads, or even visit the board, for that matter.

Absurd and idiotic. How can be a proposed a poll to stop this nonsense?

Free Armand, and put an end to this silly censorship.

Here, here, quite agree.

Mike Bunkermeister Creek
Bunker Talk blog

Maybe we need a poll to make the rule that everything on the nude board is automatically considered nsfw?

It already is,and is labeled as such,as was pointed out above.

Hence the kerfuffle: "ATTENTION! I AM POSTING A NUDE OR SEMI-NUDE FIGURE,WHICH IS NSFW,ON THE NUDE AND SEMI-NUDE--NSFW BOARD!"

Apparently, that is the new requirement.

Makes perfect sense to me. . .

This really is a stupid web site.

"Tag" as in "include a warning in the title" you mean?

Seems unnecessary given the title of the board, surely? At least what he's posting is relevant to the board.

Just when things were calming down again, the silly season is back, it seems.

I have not been a member for long but this does seem a bit over the top to DH someone for posting a picture on the correct board.

If enough people complain about this "rule/requirement" then surely it should be changed.

Apparently, he even inquired with the editor about how to comply in a PM, and whether he was doing it correctly, didn't receive a reply, so proceeded, and was DH'd for his trouble.

Wrong, Bill, it's on the Nude board it's tagged.

Here is a question regarding the nude figure board: given that is also "for discussion," what if I feel the need to.post some reference material, such as a nice full frontal Kim K nude for Vallejo paint number suggestions?

it's tagged

Indeed! But apparently some people need additional warnings because they don't understand that "nude" means "without clothes" and that anatomical parts like, my Gosh! Nipples! can be seen on naked women.

It' so absurd that defies comprehension. It's irrational.

With the best will in the world, let's get some perspective here: I have no opinion one way or another on whatever Tango/Armand/Raul had or hadn't posted (above what I will occasionally post or PM him when the contents – and my opinion of his lack of judgement – just pushes my buttons too hard). But Bill hasn't banned him forever, he hasn't shot his dog or slashed the tyres on his car. He hasn't even stopped him reading the forum and the posts other people make (which would be a novelty…).

He's been stopped posting for a few days. Big whoop!

So what?

John T

See I had no notion there was something of a nude board on a wargames forum.
This means to be offended one has really to go there. Like the puritan who goes tonpoison the soap reserve in the house…as he knows the place ( seems to have just happened in my favorite kingdom).
(Bleep house in that case totally kills the meaning. Puritans, you lose so much from life…many a good book could not have sen the day. Written post censorship.)
I just come here for games, often sidetracked on news, geopolitical subjects that might one day be miniature history just like the 1829 campaign in the Balkans. Err…

By the way do Theban hoplites with their shields at the side be a problem here?

Its called a concubine, thats tag enough to suggest the figure may not be fully clothed.

Its on the Nude board.

What is going on here?

John T – fair comment, but what did he do? Where is the requirement to post a label? Rules need to be written, not implied surely.

cheers
Jon.

It amazes me that we are in a hobby which is based on killing people yet some folks get upset over a model of a naked figure – some perspective required. Really what is more – a model that depicts, albeit sometimes in an exaggerated/idealistic way, a naked human being doing nothing or one depicting a clothed one with a weapon designed to dismember, isolate or inflict pain/death on another human being?

What's new…

Admittedly Tango DID ask if what he posted was correct and if so, for Dear Editor to delete it or give him guidance.

So for his troubles for trying to toe the line…he gets tossed in the slammer.

Cripes, Sheesh and What the Heck!

But Dear Editor will come up with some logic to explain his lack of logic as always.

Bill…everyone knows what the NSFW Nude board is and I have seen no one here violate it…just go back to what it was before. Let parents mind their own kids, after all, they've already seen this and much worse on the intranetz.

Last word from me on this subject, since I'm not going to get drawn into a back and forth over this one.

Absurd…

What label is he supposed to use? And, what rule has been broken? I looked at the FAQ, but didn't see an applicable rule. I am curious as to why my day is starting off on a negative note.

Apparently, he even inquired with the editor about how to comply in a PM, and whether he was doing it correctly, didn't receive a reply, so proceeded, and was DH'd for his trouble.

The editors have explained to Tango in multiple PMs how to correctly tag the photos.

The editors have explained to Tango in multiple PMs how to correctly tag the photos.

Come on, Bill! It is rule absurd.

The "adult filter" only works if pictures are correctly identified.

TMP link

Let me put a warning in your warning so you have some warning to go with that warning.

The "adult filter" only works if pictures are correctly identified.

The children, oh please someone think of the Children?

I'm beginning to really think that the editor just enjoys creating this circus.

'The "adult filter" only works if pictures are correctly identified.'

NOTHING about TMP works properly. I've just made several attempts to add a new post -failed. Not going to bother again – my next 'new' post will be when TMP is fixed, until then I'll just reply to others.

I greatly enjoy TMP, it is something that I look forward to visiting on the net every day so I'm not undertaking this lightly.

Being offended at seeing a photo of a sculpture representing a nude human form (look, these aren't even photos of people, they're hunks of white metal or resin or vinyl) on a board labelled nude/semi nude is like walking into a bar and then being offended that they serve beer. Go to any website of any good Art Museum and you'll see similar. Go to the website for their stores, here is an example from the web store of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC (full disclosure, I'm a member)

link

The Board is already labelled "Nude Semi-nude NSFW, what more do people want? I can choose what I open and what I don't. I realize that Tango broke the rule but, out of solidarity and in hopes of restoring sanity here I request that I be Dawghoused alongside him.

Why aren't all the pictures on the nude board tagged adult by default? Seems to me that if it's where you post the adult photos, they should be assumed to be adult and get tagged by default. On that board you should have to turn it OFF if it's not, not on…

I'm beginning to really think that the editor just enjoys creating this circus.

+1 Daler

Guys it is the editor's sandbox so it is his rules.

I agree Tango should be released … if for no other reason … it was a very well sculpted model. Come on Bill …

Please stop this sillyness of "being dawghoused" ! It's like squabbling children in Kindergarten and surely only a real small minority seems to be so emotionally disturbed that pictures of figures of scarce clad females (often fabulously painted !!!)are said (by them) to shock them. Personally I would be far more worried about the disappearance of posters with really interesting items. Cacique Caribe for instance, and I am sure more can be named !

I am retired and therefore have enough time to read also this site. Unfortunately the site has become less and less interesting because of all the things posted that have nothing to do with the (our ? Is that including the posters I just mentioned in this sentence). So throw away the silly dawghouse, stop the nonsense posts and return to things about miniatures (the meaning of the M in TMP).

Just another bad decision in a series of bad decisions.

I have just spent (wasted) ten minutes going over the FAQ on formatting and can find NOTHING about "tagging" nudie pictures.

Bill, it is not at all clear how to do that.
Not that I am likely to post a selfie of me at the computer or the latest half finished green of Degenerate Miniatures ArchDemoness with 4 boobs, but…

You keep coming up with new rules and regulations. NOBODY KNOWS HOW THIS ONE WORKS.
Obviously you approve of nudie pics. You set up a board to post them. But it is now nothing but a boobie trap. (See what I did there?)

So I suggest that you clarify for one and all how to post nudies. Obviously Tango tried to do it the right way. He *bleeped* it up.
You should pardon him.
This time.

I did find this:

'I want to post a link to a funny video, but it's not safe for work.
Then you must include a warning, so that people don't click on it without knowing what they're getting into.'

But if it's already posted on a not safe for work board in the first place…