Advertisement
It is a constant phenomenon these days on Tribe where either multiple people belonging to a tribe are flagging specific pics to be removed, or - the true story - TOU (Terms of Use) Guy is choosing pics he determines are too . . . something-or-other, explicit, whatever, and removing them himself. This is happening in this tribe, among many others.
pics such as . . .
images.tribe.net/tribe/upl...9748f2e534
images.tribe.net/tribe/upl...bac25af494
and
images.tribe.net/tribe/upl...c1eb17ed6f
not a big deal, but an unfortunate circumstance all the same.
pics such as . . .
images.tribe.net/tribe/upl...9748f2e534
images.tribe.net/tribe/upl...bac25af494
and
images.tribe.net/tribe/upl...c1eb17ed6f
not a big deal, but an unfortunate circumstance all the same.
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
-
Re: pics removed
Wed, April 5, 2006 - 7:27 PM
-
-
Re: pics removed
Mon, April 10, 2006 - 12:57 AMThe TOU guy or KIBBITZER, if it's the same guy, randomly chooses pictures with no rhyme or reason. I have challenged his logic on many occasions, I was sent a link that was supposed to detail what is defined as pornography and this only severed to substantiate the hypocrisy of TOU and the policy of flagging. I saw a photo of a naked man that was flagged and next to it was a cum dripping penis, and that image is still available. I pointed this out. I showed where, in the "Policy" they claim to hide behind, that by definition, peoples names and sites would have to be removed. I pointed out "random censorship" amongst other faults and KIBBITZER stopped responding and started removing every photo I posted in a variety of tribes. I'm no lawyer (I wish I was) I firmly believe what they are doing is random, hypocritical and by the most basic of standards an infringement of our first amendment rights to express ourselves. Many of these groups complied to new reg's and became private. We were lead to believe that "Private/By invitation only" gave us the freedom to post our images nude, naked, erotic, artistic, whatever you want to call it ... yet they are still targeted and being removed. No one from the administration will answer my charges. I made a strong and valid argument a few weeks back, and no longer get a reply. It is my guess the TOU guy is in fact a right wing, repressed, victim of an abusive relationship or childhood, with anger issues amongst just the many other problems that plague a narrow-minded individual as him. I would go so far as to guess "Oedipal"... In any case, seriously disturbed and a coward when faced with facts that prove him and his actions to be unconstitutional, erratic and an abuse of power. -
-
Re: pics removed
Mon, April 10, 2006 - 7:42 PMsounds like an accurate appraisal. though i would just call him a . . . shithead.
I too have been hounded by this dude. I've been threatened to be ousted from Tribe if i keep adding images - art and drawings - of a sexually explicit nature to my *sex talk* tribe. You should see some of the stuff he removes - Picasso, and shit. -
-
Re: pics removed
Wed, April 12, 2006 - 4:29 PMthis one removed too, apparently obscenely explicit images.tribe.net/tribe/upl...ff83d1443b
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: pics removed
Tue, March 6, 2007 - 9:52 PMI've had the same sh....t dumped on me by this TOU guy too.
So, I'm doing searches and seeing where his stuff is, and I'm objecting to his tastes.
If he doesn't like my views, he doesn't have to look. He can certainly "change the channel".
However, when he intrudes on my rights, then it bestows the same responsibility on me: judging his purient, twisted, debauched, pusilanimous slant.....
-
Re: pics removed
Thu, April 12, 2007 - 3:33 AMCouldn't agree more - if people look at a site devoted to Nipple Fetish, what the hell are they expecting to see? It's about sexuality, right? Or have I got this wrong somewhere, and it's actually about gardening, or motor maintainance. Ah well, we must keep pushing I suppose. I speak as someone who has just had 75 pics slashed of his site!!