tenchichan
12-17-2010, 03:57 PM
I recently had some screencaps I posted taken down with absolutely no reason given, so I put them back up. Of course, they were taken down once more, but this time someone actually had the decency to let me know why, because the photo's contained underage persons.
Okay, no.
Look, I appreciate the sensitive nature of this site and I appreciate the moderators trying to protect the site, but there's a difference between child pornography and a photo that happens to have a young teenager in the picture.
The pictures in question were of a barefoot Andy Richter getting a pedicure from his fake kids from a TV sitcom. Only a few of the pictures were taken down, despite the fact that there were teen kids in every shot.
The teens were completely clothed, not bare foot and literally standing around in the background, yet this pictures were taken down for having underage persons in them.
This is paranoia at its finest folks. I'm sorely disappointed in this site and its management for feeding into this type of baloney. These are screencaps of a family TV show, not some naked pictures of underage children. The management in this case is being frankly ridiculous. No court is ever ever EVER going to convict anyone for child pornography because some 17 year old actor gave their fake TV a foot rub. ESPECIALLY when the person being sexualized here is the 40-year-old man.
If this is the case then I hope the moderators are going through every picture on this site with a fine tooth comb to make sure no kids or teenagers are hanging out in the background of any foot shots. I can guarantee I'm not the only one here.
And here's another thing, you took down the pictures without saying anything. If this is a rule I'm supposed to know, why don't you fucking communicate it to me? I would have NEVER thought these pictures could be construed as child pornography, maybe because I live in a logical world where they AREN'T, but still I can't read minds.
If anyone wants to see the pics in question just go to the YouTube link provided with the pictures. I guess the folks at YouTube haven't figured out how OMG!Childpornographic the scene really is.
Consider me extremely disappointed.
Okay, no.
Look, I appreciate the sensitive nature of this site and I appreciate the moderators trying to protect the site, but there's a difference between child pornography and a photo that happens to have a young teenager in the picture.
The pictures in question were of a barefoot Andy Richter getting a pedicure from his fake kids from a TV sitcom. Only a few of the pictures were taken down, despite the fact that there were teen kids in every shot.
The teens were completely clothed, not bare foot and literally standing around in the background, yet this pictures were taken down for having underage persons in them.
This is paranoia at its finest folks. I'm sorely disappointed in this site and its management for feeding into this type of baloney. These are screencaps of a family TV show, not some naked pictures of underage children. The management in this case is being frankly ridiculous. No court is ever ever EVER going to convict anyone for child pornography because some 17 year old actor gave their fake TV a foot rub. ESPECIALLY when the person being sexualized here is the 40-year-old man.
If this is the case then I hope the moderators are going through every picture on this site with a fine tooth comb to make sure no kids or teenagers are hanging out in the background of any foot shots. I can guarantee I'm not the only one here.
And here's another thing, you took down the pictures without saying anything. If this is a rule I'm supposed to know, why don't you fucking communicate it to me? I would have NEVER thought these pictures could be construed as child pornography, maybe because I live in a logical world where they AREN'T, but still I can't read minds.
If anyone wants to see the pics in question just go to the YouTube link provided with the pictures. I guess the folks at YouTube haven't figured out how OMG!Childpornographic the scene really is.
Consider me extremely disappointed.