SFW-ness, the ad server, and Naughty Tentacles

Only because you don't know the context. She doesn't actually get raped, nor are the tentacles (AFAIK, at least) trying to do that; the animators were just being clever by invoking the porn version's imagery.

Would you feel comfortable viewing Rule of Sexy's page at work? Or Spy Catsuit?

edited 5th Apr '12 6:48:58 PM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

That one actually isn't as NSFW.

That isn't what the average person looking at that would think.

edited 5th Apr '12 6:50:21 PM by lolacat

Seeing all these piss ant tropers trying to talk tough makes me laugh. If Matrix were here, he'd laugh too.

Those aren't nearly as bad. There might be other worse ones, though.

edited 5th Apr '12 6:50:01 PM by Firebert

Support Gravitaz on Kickstarter!

I've said it before, but I'll say it again: Why are you even on TV Tropes at work in the first place? Because I think your boss would question THAT first.

Yes. I would feel comfortable with that.

Since nothing bad besides her... being held up by tentacles is happening. It's suggestive, but that's at best.

Quest 64 thread

To quote my boss "Am I paying you to watch the internet, do it at home and get back to work".

I'll admit I still can't quite get my head around the internet being something people casually use at work. Must be getting old.

This. Honestly if people must use the internet at work then you'd think they would have sense to stay off of sites that might have content they wouldn't want their cow-orkers seeing. And caring about what your cow-orkers think is a highly mileage variant thing, depending on thickness of skin (yours and theirs).

edited 5th Apr '12 6:53:43 PM by CrypticMirror

I've put lolacat out of the conversation.

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

While I was hoping things didn't reach that point, you have my thanks, Eddie. Arguing like this is very exhausting and mentally taxing. <goes to hit the sack>

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

.

edited 23rd Jul '17 1:27:04 PM by Jicragg

I think that we can't account for all workplaces ever. I mean, some might think that my icon is pervy. Why is there a flower in it?! Flowers are plant genitals you know!!! You just have to keep to your best judgement.

That's just a bit exaggerated.

Support Gravitaz on Kickstarter!

I don't think anyone would seriously make that argument, I just mean it's a matter of taste. To me, just as long as boobs(unless covered by a baby's head), genitals and suchlike aren't all over the place, I'm cool.

If they're literally covered(you know, full suit, only armpits showing at worst), I'd say it's Safe for Work, really.

Any genitalia showing, yeah, no.

Quest 64 thread

I feel like the old image was NSFW. We could have an Image Links page if it was really necessary—although from the title and description, it shouldn't be. I do think the old description was fine though. As for the examples, it depends on how creepy they were/might get (although we should allow parody examples).

Any updates yet on if we need to nuke any more examples?

One Piece blog Beyond the Lampshade

I was happy upon seeing this thread at first. "Yay! They finally removed all the creepy shit from the Naughty Tentacles page! What a victory for TV Tropes being a media analysis site instead of a porn directory!" And then it turns out that everyone's pissed off about it, and they only did it because of external threats. And now you have to ban Lolacat for being happy about it? (I hope she's merely suspended and not bounced, she's one of the best people around here.) I don't think I'm leaving TV Tropes, but I'm tempted to consider it as a possibility.

I find it interesting, by the way, that two major dissenters on this issue (me and Lola) are in the 15-16 age bracket. No idea if this fact is significant.

At first I didn't realize I needed all this stuff...

From the mouths of babes, no doubt (I say as the old man of 18 years I am ).

edited 5th Apr '12 10:41:58 PM by Firebert

Support Gravitaz on Kickstarter!

That's because nobody else has any reason to care about it at all. Were you expecting people to come into this thread and post "I have no strong feelings on this issue"?

Rhymes with "Protracted."

I have no strong feelings on this issue*

.

I'm all for clean up and de-creepifying. I'm not for nuking legitimately used tropes or works.

Most of us are doing what I just said. Unfortunately, not all felt that way and that soon became against the wiki's goal.

Quest 64 thread

I think most of us are willing to concede that as far as reasons for nuking legitimate tropes go, "it is actively costing the wiki ad revenue" is as good a reason as you're ever going to find, and invoking admin fiat to deal with ad server issues is absolutely justified. It seems pretty clear to me that there is not much to see here, move along.

Rhymes with "Protracted."

Except the fact that no tropes like that are going to get nuked, just trimmed down.

There's a lot in question about the current ad revenue, as noted by this topic. So we don't know what'll be done exactly.

Quest 64 thread

Also, would a wiki, which is supposed to be a dynamic site of information, have to yield to ad providers constantly case by case? It would be better if there was a consistent policy beforehand.

Now using Trivialis handle.

In a related note, is this moral guardian issue the reason the picture on Fetish got removed? Not that I'm anxious to see it back. I'm honestly just wondering.

I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.

It would appear so, DQZ, considering that Eddie also Example Sectionectomied that page.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

Wow, this discussion progressed fast during the night - and not in a good way either.

There are some more pages affected:

• Naughty Tentacles
• Fetish
• Fetish-Fuel Future
• Dominatrix

I think I'll go ahead and add them to Locked Pages. I'll also give a somewhat more detailed explanation on the discussion pages so that there won't be any bitching.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman