If off-topic posting got people banned there would be nobody on this site other than the staff.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Adult Film Shot At Santa Monica Public Library During Business Hours Sparks Outrage
- Thread starter DiipuSurotu
- Start date
- Status
If off-topic posting got people banned there would be nobody on this site other than the staff.
Cause apparently no one is paying attention:
I've literally posted threads about the AVN awards for three straight years and the worst I got was a warning on the first one because I was legitimately trolling with my thread title. You can post about porn just fine. You can post about liking porn just fine. You can't post asking for people to send you porn. This isn't that difficult to understand, and I don't get why people are pretending it is.
I've literally posted threads about the AVN awards for three straight years and the worst I got was a warning on the first one because I was legitimately trolling with my thread title. You can post about porn just fine. You can post about liking porn just fine. You can't post asking for people to send you porn. This isn't that difficult to understand, and I don't get why people are pretending it is.
Banned should be allowed a lawyer. Lawyers would be a select group of users, chosen by forum goers in a bimonthly election. You can only be relected three times, after that you have to wait a one year period to try again. The banned's lawyer is allowed an initial post after the thread is started, and can reply to any questions made by the staff and/or those involved in the banning. After 48 hours of discussions, the jury is allowed to vote, which lasts 24 hours. There must be an 80% majority for the banned to be unbanned, same for them to be double-banned. Anything in between means the ban resumes as normal. If, after the 24 hours period of voting no vote is tallied, the member is considered "forgotten" and is permanently banned, with account deletion marked for 1 month after that happens.
OT: Don't see the issue with that ban.
is it still NSFW if you work at a boy's club?
Uh.... is that where boys go to meet boys??
Yeah, maybe the doubling is a bad idea, but I think popularity issues can be mitigated by only allowing the people to vote if they were in the thread where the ban happened.
I think having "lawyers" makes it too complicated, but I like your idea of a vote by a jury. There should be a option in earch member's profile that you can enable if you want to participate in jury duty. That way the jury can always be randomly selected, but only from the people who posted in the thread where the ban happened.
The video may be shot like an "amateur video", but the woman in it is absolutely a professional performer with scenes from professional companies.
Boys club behavior.
I'd say that is the dumbest reason i've seen for a ban here but i'm sure people could pull out 20 dumber.
I'd say that is the dumbest reason i've seen for a ban here but i'm sure people could pull out 20 dumber.
Members need to have been active in the 24 hours for that to work, otherwise less active members would be chosen and the jury wouldn't be fair. Also, the lawyer and the staff should be allowed to filter the jury, to make sure friends/enemies don't vote.
Ehh, I'm not sure about that. The first 5 or so post in the thread we're all asking for links but in a cutesy/plausibly deniable way. Poster just caught a ban cause he just dropped all pretense. It not that serious but it just seems so arbitrary.
Lmao I saw this the other week already and was wondering if that's what it was. The library part is the worst part of the vid.
There was a case last year I think where some blokes making commercial porn on the London Underground were prosecuted.
Make porn all day long, but making it in public places is pretty disrespectul to me, it takes away peoples choice of whether they view it or not. And it's not remotely sexy or erotic.
Make porn all day long, but making it in public places is pretty disrespectul to me, it takes away peoples choice of whether they view it or not. And it's not remotely sexy or erotic.
Fair point on the users needing to be active soon after the ban. But now that you point that out, it would actually make more sense to randomly select the jury from outside the thread. That way there will always be enough people at any given time, and the jury will be detached from the thread's topic.
Yeah filtering makes sense. Random pool of 20 members that gets down selected to 13, or something like that.
54 minutes, shot on portrait mode... yeah, ew...
And to the guy saying Silence is boring... shhhh
And to the guy saying Silence is boring... shhhh
Last edited:
OP
OP
Meaning, there are more than just boys on this website. Yes, people masturbate but nobody wants to really know about what your private habits are outside of your own house. It pushes disinterested parties away.
I had no intention of posting in this thread, but that term seems to be too hard for some to understand.
Official Staff Communication
From our posting guidelines:
Respect a Diverse Audience:
We're locking this thread because it has devolved into metacommentary about bans. You should all know why this behavior isn't allowed here. If you don't know why this person was banned, then you obviously haven't been made to feel uncomfortable or fetishized by men. We do not, under any circumstances, allow exclusionary behavior. Many women, including those on staff, have been made to feel uncomfortable and objectified by the posts in this thread.
Yes, women watch porn. That's cool. What we're not going to allow, however, is a space where male users can freely discuss and share porn and talk about their masturbation habits. Era is and always will be an inclusive space.
- Status