When does an image cross the line and become offensive? What is the litmus test for public decency standards on Caedes?

We need to define what sort of image or language would be in clear contravention of or noncompliance with established community standards. We need to establish a convention of community standards for this site. We need to define the difference between sensual and sexual in content. What are the acceptable limits? What constitutes offensive, disrespectful or distasteful images or language?

While I'm at it, should we really be putting our children's pics on here as well? Doesn't seem too smart or safe to me yet I sure enjoy looking at your cute heartstrings and wish I could look at them all day long without worrying where their pic (or worse) may end up on here. Okay, I'm done. Thanks.

Prism: I completely agree parents need to take more responsibility, the violence in children's and prime-time programming is terrible. I'm not arguing that, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with art. But all it takes is one hyper-sensitive person to ruin it for everyone else.

I'm not going to say anything else to be misinterpreted and leapt upon. I agree with the committee idea.

Ok, can't read and not comment here - as a teacher we have a fairly good rule of thumb at our high school. In meetings, if censorship comes up, we look at child protection issues (i.e for caedes, think of restricting out-of-site links?) and we ask what the teachers who are also parents think. They all vary in their opnions, but their censorship is usually based on what their experience has shown them about how their own kids react to such things. My kids look at this site to check out mine and others work. I would be happy if a few of the mods who were parents were offered the chance to vet problematic images/comments. That way someone with a real reference point for making such decisions can be involved. In saying this, however, I have also told my kids that if they come across something that makes them uncomfortable they should minimise it and I'll check it out, to help them decide what the image is about. What I actually worry about is not so much nudity as violent images or ones that are upsetting/disturbing. But at least here images are seen as thumbnails first and have to be selected before being seen in detail. Also, the images are kept on site long enough to be accessed by me as well as my kids, so I can keep a (loose) track of what they see. As a parting comment though, I can't help making a soccer-mum ref here ... "if in doubt, kick it out!"
Thanks for reading.

wise words mum :)

I have no problem with nudity per se - Camerahound's Torso was very good for example. However, Clayton I can't see your door image anymore - has it been deleted? I thought it was very good.

We do need to think about Caedes liability here though - it's his site and he will be the one primarily taking the flak. It might be a good idea to avoid any words like 'nude' to keep any undesireable visitors from pinpointing it on search engines.

I for one think the voting idea might be the way to go, but it is Caedes' call.

It will be back I had pulled them to imbed my name and logo do to I found two of my images on another site for sale . alot of my work is batch copy righted. But all my images will be back shortly.

My view of the matter is just not to flirt with the line in the first place. There is no necessity for anything that can be considered questionable. Why even raise the issue? There is so much else out there that is neutral but beautiful nevertheless.

Half agreed with Beowulf here. There certainly are many moe beautiful things out in the world. But then again the human body is a beautiful thing if portrayed and also interpereted the same way as the artist meant i to be. Nude art is becoming quite popular. Does Cades need to keep up with the latest fashion in art?Or can we keep manipulating and taking shots of other things? I'm 15 and I've seen some images containing nudity and I thpought they were beautiful and done in a very tasteful manner. I'm for tasteful nude art on the website, even if the rules mean i don't get to see the images. Digital FX's idea of having an elite group of mods who are willing to handle the work.& this idea could be incorporated with the Over 18's gallery ( which I won't be able to reach!) or suitable warnings indicating a nude picture. So this is a young persons point of view, I'll keep checking up on the thread to see what is decided. Thank you!

It seems thought that if we have a 'no one under 18' gallery, and let some through, that more and more will start to come here. If we start letting some come, more will come. Some people say that only "tasteful" stuff is ok, but then when does "tasteful" because "non-tasteful" is there an exact line for that?

Like Beowulf said, we should just not even try to find a line, just stay away from it.

Tommy-

What I've been trying to say above, in my definition of pornography, as well as citing the inherent contradistinctions between sexuality and sensuality, is precisely the contrary. We need to establish community standards, a convention by which the Mods can rely on the results from the committee.

It is better to have standards that place limits on what is acceptable rather than no limits at all. Even worse would be a blanket abolition of any and all 'questionable' images, which would be a disaster for the freedoms of speech and expression, not to mention conceivably unconstitutional.

your right there Tracy,, i'd really like to see the 'Caedes Committee' set up so the community can establish some of its own standards.. as soon as we could.... all this is in total respect for Caedes' final power of veto.. on all image content within the site :D

Image Mods are mandated to approve images by the owner of the site.
They (seem to) have become Image Mods through contributions of various sorts, but all appear to have heavily invested in the site through their works, their comments and their advice and support. They are largely responsible, it seems to me, for having nurtured the site into one where being made to feel uncomfortable (see my comment above) is unlikely.
I would hope that in defining/reviewing guidelines the mods can keep the site free from images that would ultimately destroy the community that exists at present.
Thus I guess we rely on caedes to select mods that have shown the necessary responsibility and maturity required for the task.

"Even worse would be a blanket abolition of any and all 'questionable' images, which would be a disaster for the freedoms of speech and expression, not to mention conceivably unconstitutional."

I don't know what Caedes' view is on this, but this is his site and I don't believe there ever has been freedom (in the sense of "license") of speech and expression on this site. This is his private creation with him as the absolute authority here and therefore it also can in no way be unconstitutional because of the private nature of this site.

"We need to establish community standards, a convention by which the Mods can rely on the results from the committee. "

You are right we need a set standard. We do have one, but it is pretty vague. I have taken it to mean that an image basically has to be at a 'G' rated level in order for it to be approved. The reasoning for avoiding all questionable images is that on a purely pratical level you are going through a lot of time and hassle for a few images. An "Over 18" gallery would put a lot of legal stress on Caedes and also exclude the unversality the members feel at this site.

An 'over 18' gallery is impractical and unenforceable, which is why we need to establish some sort of functional community standard. That way, if someone is clearly in breach, there won't be as much confusion and misunderstanding as in the past.

Among the meanings for constitutionality are: equity, evenness, fair play, fair treatment, honesty, impartiality and integrity. Not too bad a spectrum of words with which to define a site.

And unless you're Caedes himself, and you wish to judge each and every single submitted image (absolute authority), then it is best to help those whose jobs it is to do so. In that regard, I think this is a valid concern, and not something to be dismissed out of hand.

You are right. We do need a functional community standard. I am not calling for us to dismiss the issue here I am saying we don't need to try to pin down some sort of "line" between what is appropriate or tasteful and what is not because there is no such thing. I am saying that the line should be that if an image can be considered questionable, don't approve it. I believe this because it is the closest thing we can come to a clear sense of a "line" by which we can all recognize.

Nudity will always be questionable.It has always been so I dont see how that will change anytime soon.

Exactly. Then therefore I think it is easiest to just out and out say, "no nudity" and not have to go through all the hassle of drawing the line of how far is too far.

yeah, i completely agree to having that Committee, it should be done in my POV, but i agree & disagree with the '18yrs & over' gallery, that would result in what i refer to as the fence around the pool effect. its not a practical idea.

I guess my question is why nudes?Isnt there enough other things to make wallpapers from to not include nudity?

I'm sorry for posting this and being so direct. We are worried so much about image that content that we overlook profile name content and it's effects on the young.

Hey boss how are you today. I have to ask you something. I know that we’re in a major discussion over the amount of censorship should be allowed pertaining to nudity. That is a concern.
We are so worried over this, but yet we allow a profile name like
( miniwhore5foot4 ) on the site. Wouldn’t it be more advantageous to worry about that type of name that would encourage adolescents to engage in on line conversations with a person who may use the site for lewd conversations’ that may cause concern with many parents, and put the site in jeopardy? I fear that this type of name will cause a chain reaction causing more and more to log onto the site with the kind of intentions that it is causing right now. See I’m not so against letting up on the restraints of censorship a little. But not at the cost of allowing childish people on the sight that are just doing it for the shock value of just being a spoiled little brat that wants attention by proclaiming her ability to be a whore.

Agreed. Some profiles are very disturbing. Even icons. Like the one pointing a gun in my face everytime it shows up!

Unfortunatly the user names and avatars are not filtered like the images are,but this problem has been addressed with the complain button below the user name and avatar.The offensive names or avatars are usually taken care of as soon as they are discovered but there are so many new users that sometimes a few will slip through.

I know that we can use the complain button, just don't have a clue what's acceptable there either. ;-? Obviously the nic Prism referred to was (I hope) way unacceptable, but just because a gun in my face offends me, does that mean all on here will be offended? I don't think so. So I am leary to "complain" although I think I got away with doing just that. ;(

well. i think that nudity should be exepted. but only if in a form of art. for instance a black and white photograph of a womens torso is art. but some things, i wont go into detail, are not. i think we should make a separate gallery for nudity. call it..i dont know. something good and artistic. not like "nude pics" or something. as for rasism and profanity. that stuff is just discusting. i think that after 5 reported offenses you should get IP banned. just my opinon

What constitutes offensive, disrespectful or distasteful images or language?

Damn good question. I've been working on a political based image...it projects my opinions on the state of world leadership. I wonder if that would offend someone...or would someone think it distastful because it goes against their views. Would it get banned from the site? What exactly constitutes an offensive image? This issue will not stop with nudity. This could go beyond nudity. I personally do not want to see this happen. But we have to imagine that there is that possibility. This community should not be subject to complete censorship when it comes to our art. I think that caedes has covered himself with his statement on the uploading page. It says that he holds no responsibility for what gets on this site. We all need to realize that we all view things differently. We all have our own opinions. If you take that away you cease to have a community.

I havent seen any vulgar images that would be of a disturbince... Torso was a suprise but i have respect for that piece and believe that it is no where near any line. purely art.
As for the avatars and screen names... i think that people really dont need to put anything that might offend someone or be sugestive as their screen name... if they do they should simply not be allowed to sign on and the name be terminated. avatars... i like the gun one lol

I’m sorry nudity in art is one thing. And mode racy is good but I just don’t think that names like the one above I posted earlier and D_A_R_K ANGEL69 & 69er. Are needed on this site! What’s Ironic these are the same kids we are probably trying to protect from provocative pictures. There has to be a program that catches Key words and rejects them.

Obscene names are not as bad as offensive images. Most kids will not have the slightest clue was a 69er is whereas if they see a nude they will most certainly know what that is. The problem with pornography and nudity is not that they show too much, but they show too little. They debase the nobility of the human (and in most cases, women) to purely physically object of desire.

once i was comeing back home after a 10 mile bike ride and i saw a dead deer so part of me thought" oh look bambi got hit by a car, perhaps i should take a picture and post it up on that neto website" then the smarter part of me thought" YOU SICK ASSHOLE i want you to go to hell and die you sick sick basterd!!!!"

so i never took a picture of it....

irst there is a definite difference between pornography and nudity. One celebrates the human form and the other degrades it. And as far as these kids posting an obscenity as a posted name; they know exactly what they are doing. My girl friend is a therapist and she has told me that kids know the difference from the truth and a lie by the age of 5 years and by the age of 7 they no right and wrong and are considered legally accountable for by 14 year’s of age. They know what they are posting. They do it to see how far they can push the limits. They are starving for your attention and will attempt to get it in any way by using any words that they can.
So by your recollection nudity is perverse. If so, you would have to go as far as the bible to clean up the obscenity and erase a large portion of the Sistine chapel.

I'm assuming that racist, demeaning, insulting, hateful, riotful images are being included in this umbrella? Freedom is such a funny word thrown around - if given it completely - this would suggest no limitations! Clearly there are already rules in place - which we accepted upon registration. So are the rules to be altered or diminished? I'm asking this genuinly to quantify what's being debated. In regards to the site content - what a refreshing change to discover a site where everyone's work is suitable for all ages! Where I don't get endless pop-up's that leave me yawning. :-| To ask for the "freedom" to put up 18+ images - here - not only takes the site in a new direction, and says 'my opinions matter' for some this could be seen as saying ''my opinions matter - more". It's the 'some' whose feelings and opinions should also be validated here - for they are just as important. Personally - as one whose studied the Fine Arts for the last 14 years or so - from Rembrandt to Body Piercing, I can appreciate (almost!) all art I chose to. I feel that if the site takes a new direction - as is perfectly its' right - it should be made very clear the intention to do so to ALL users old and new - so they can make appropriate decisions.

You are right Prismmagic there is that essential difference between pornography and nudity. I was wrong. Some images though seem to bridge the two. They do not glorify the body but artistically show the erotic which was what I was thinking when I posted earlier.

I'm glad you agree the major problem is that fine line, which I feel again, is the issue here. To me the site integrity is off great value.

I'm glad you agree the major problem is that fine line, which I feel again, is the issue here. To me the site integrity is off great value. And yes it should include images and text that is insulting and demeaning in any form. This is an ageless site of no discrimination and that is the thing we must take into account first. But I do feel we can offer image and text that will not insult the hearts and minds of educated as well as uneducated mind of the site.

wow matt. you really know your stuff. i really like what you had to say. you too pris. very nice everyone. just thought i'd say that

Tracy's political image. Its says in the code of conduct that any hateful remarks etc will be deleted. So people who do not approve of the image won't even bother commenting. They may not even go to the commenting page, since they are looking for images that appeal to them.

I apologise, the above was a bit off topic. Ok, so say you have a committe. Many of the people here have contributed to the site so much they of course would get a seat since their opinions are valued. There would be a certain number of commitee members. If a certain images is uploaded, the image will then need a certain number of commitee member votes to be allowed on the site. This way its certain that the majority of the site will not be offended.
This may mean a lot of work for the commitee, depending on the amount of images that are uploaded. But it is certainly an easier option than finding the 'line', defineing( i apologise for my spelling) and making it known to all Caedes goers.

Another thing - is Caedes much busier than usual? This is an important issue but he's only commented shortly 3 times...We need your guidance oh creator!

This sounds as though - only a decisive - arbitrary [1 : arbitrary = depending on individual discretion and not fixed by law] conclusion can be made now...

In a nutshell, Raziel252 is correct about the committee that should be established.

So now what happens now?

We just act cool till the master comes around and pronounces his infallible will. =)

Yah I agree with Mathew: It's going to have to happen eventually. Were Just waiting for the Boss To look down on us mere mortals from his Ivory tower and grace us with his decision.

To me, as a programmer and a hater of bureaucracy, i think a committee is a bit much, and a bit much work to set up. Granted I see the concerns that might be held by it, but i feel a line can be drawn to where things can be compromised on. A committee would be made of people...people who vary depending on their moods, and all questionable images would not always be handled by the exact same committee members. Some images would still get through that even other members would have declined.
I have no problems with responsibly taken nude shots but in order to keep things simpler and keep the site out of potential legal troubles, I think it's better to either not allow them at all, or create a well-known line. My feeling on the line is it should be no genetalia and for female nudes no worse than normal dresses cover...but i realize this "line" will be debated on where it actually is, legally.

No genitalia should be absolute. But I think the more key issues will regard breast exposure and how much is to much. Do you only show so much? Only from the back, the front, the side. What is expectable?

The way it works at the moment is that if an imagemod is unsure about an image, they place it in limbo until caedes can have a look and decide if it is acceptable. The only drawback with this system is that if caedes isn't online, the poster may have to wait a while before a decision is made; however, a commitee would only take longer, as you would have to wait until all the members had been online. I thik the way it works at the moment is fine.

I agree with Sam on many points.. The main problem with setting up a group to moderate is that the comity would have to be of a substantial of at least 15 to 20. So that if a moderator is not available; that there will be a substantial majority of at least 70% to be available to make the decision.
This may be hard for there would have to agree on a set number of rules. Other wise a list of standard question that would apply to the image to answer.
If this cant be done, the site should be left as is for the good of the site.
The key word here is integrity. I my self would never photograph something that would jeopardize my integrity or my reputation there are limits to my own work no mater what type of work that may be.

a minors opinion...15 years old...(several minors i know of on this site...otaku for instance...)

include nudity...but only if it is depicted tastefully (that's why we have imagemods)
violence if it is not senseless...
provocative images can often make a point or inspire

to me there is no fine line in art...it is a personal, soulful matter...and thats why we can't pick image mods in a wanton matter. They have to have to be mature enough and emotionally together. If we have the right type of mods, it would be fine IMO...or the mods could foward this subject material to caedes...


SO...in short...the point im trying to make is an image may be appropriate when taken one way...and not appropriate if taken another. It depends on how it is presented and treated by the artist.

15 A' interesting. Good for you.

Hath our Father abandoned us? Coz we are... like...ya know...ta'kin about unholy matt's un stuff???is et is et?

Nope. If He had, we would be ignoring this important issue. ;)

I asked hi to take a look when he's not busy, he's been on tonight u see.

what the heck?
Is there some reason we cant keep things the way they were?

How were they? =) I think the problem is, is that we didn't have a clear rule regarding these things. I am curious to know how you thought it was however.

I don't believe there has to be unanimity amongst committee members, nor even a majority. A simple plurality or consensus should be enough, as is the case in many situations such as this.

The reason the present system doesn't really work well has been clearly demonstrated by the recent confusion over Prismmagic's 'Quiet Seashore' HERE . In its insidious way, censorship and self-censorship are well served by unclear or poorly defined community standards.

I think a committee is a good idea. There should realistically be only a tiny number of images that would need to be considered.

However, I don;t think it need be a rapid process - time should be given for a reasonable number of the committee members to have their say. I think any reasonable person who submitted an image that was deemed to be 'borderline' would not mind if the image was delayed, even for a few days.

First though it may help to have clearer guidelines as to what images are 'acceptable' and when they would have to go before the committee. Ultimately though, this is Caedes site. 'Democracy', 'freedom of expression' and other such concepts are irrelevant. The ultimate decision is his.

Where is mr.C? save a few times his been relatively quite for a while.

OK guys I think we are at the point of the conversation for the Boss to come in and express his view on the total issue. What he needs to do is take it to the next step, and put all this impute to use of course with the Boss as the O.R.D as he should be.
Someone needs to weigh the pros and the cons of having this type of image gallery.
Someone needs to consider the idea and step up to the plate and take a swing before this post just gets lost like the others in post limbo just waiting for someone who is curious to come across it and reads it.
This can be done in a way that can give every one something that is acceptable and copasetic for all.
I think that The Boss should set up posting topic that will ask the question of what the general public of the sight would consider acceptable. I feel that these opinions should be kept off line so not to offend others on the sight and to give the Boss and the mods the ability to determine in a way that is nonbiased.
They can set up a standard format for deciding the rules of the moderations.
I feel honestly that the mods should set up a scoring system. Of course leaving the Boss with the final decision if there is a problem between the mods. This will leave the Boss with more time to do his job as administrator of the sight instead of having to deal with petty differences. Lets face it guys he has a job, this sight and a life. And I feel it should just be made easer for him.
I realize that many will disagree with this type deliberation but it might be what is best for the sight and the final out come.
As far as the pole you can either have a questioner’ say a list of twenty question or we can do it the hard way and have them to read somewhat over 1000 to 73691 statements. It wont get done believe me.
Weather he says yes or no, It’s his site and I have no quarrels. I am greatful for the right to use and just be on the site.
So how about it Mr. C. How about some imput. Alot of people would like to know if they can post some images that may need a more complex set of rules from you and the Mods.

kudos to the ppl who've stood up and be counted with their views. quick off-the-top-of-my-head points:
1) the issue of an over-18 admission gallery seems to be pretty pointless. what with too many ppl already with this site (a few thousand at last count?) and even more willing to lie. there is absolutely no conceivable way of filtering except through manual elimination.
2) i must say i'm really impressed by the standards set by this site so far, it's so easy to go pornographic with that many viewers on the web.
3) alot of what is said seems to be working on the premise that "if i have a questionable picture/graphic i have the responsibility of posting it up for the consideration of a designated panel." but anyone who tries to be cheeky can easily slip past or conveniently bypass this process, until someone brings it up to the mods. what level of trust are we giving the viewers/users of this site? essentially we're taking it on faith that the users themselves will know that the material being sent in is subjective and will know enough to regulate themselves by channelling it to the committee first. however, the problem lies in there being no certain line between art and lewdness isn't it? for censorship to be entirely successful it requires either full control ie. filtering all images or a cooperative crowd (which is hard to manage at its best).
4) another question wld be: how far does censorship go before it becomes censoring to individuals rather than the material given?

the most ideal situation would be if the entire community comes to an agreement of a level of acceptability but as it is it won't happen. there are some who will bother enough to discuss fluidly about this, and there will be some who are not even aware of this level of discussion. Filtering images would mean that our images get uploaded at a much slower rate and while some of us don't mind, there will be others who will criticise the efficiency and purpose of this website.

perhaps we first begin to work out exactly what are the standards we're looking for here, whether this website serves any moral purpose and why it was created in the first place. i'm sure Mr C. would have taken liberality into consideration when he first started out. it's hard to keep things in control under such a free-flowing system as the internet, when anyone can stumble in and move around; and near impossible to moderate effectively but it's possible with like-minded people who have a clear idea what they are looking out for and where they want things headed.
Remembering that this is the concern of fairly mature and adult members of the public concerning the juvenile (in the eyes of the law) i'd dare say the younger members wouldn't be too bothered about this whole issue since "everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial". how much are we gonna protect for the sake of our own sensibilities and not theirs? *mulls over thought*

I agree with you . I have said the whole time we need standerds to realy on. And they have to be decided on.

A very well thought out post edahs. I appreciate your contribution to this matter.

edahs: with regard to your point about posting images to the committee, I don't envisage it working that way.

Currently, when we post an image to the site it doesn't automatically appear - a mod has to see it, approve it and then put the image in the gallery. If this new style committee was set up for 'borderline' images only, then the mods would refer the work to them. If by some chance an image did slip past an over-enthusiastic mod, then it could still be retrospectively referred to committee.

So the ball hasnt been set in motion yet by a big Caedes finger?

I think that if caedes is going to set anything up, it will be after he transfers every thing to the new host site.

Ah, then fair doozey to him. Patience is a virtue

I think the legal responsability is not an easy thing to add with all the works that Caedes and firms just have to do with this nice site.But i know that we lost a big choice to add a lot of art more and for this i can understand a lot of concept that Clayton said.If anyone feel creative with fractal shot is the same to feel creative with nudity shot.I add only a consideration that the moust famous photographic gallery includes big names as Man Ray, Helmut Newton, Ommer Uwe and lot of more.The real question is how all us can help the administrator with this responsability .

I think if there is going to be a nude gallery only paying members should to post and view this area.

You mean Cadre members? An interesting possibility, but I'm not sure that making it restricted would be desireable - it might create too much of a mystery about the gallery and attract entirely the wrong kind of audience.

As I mentioned already, I also think that the word 'nude' should be avoided to prevent it being picked up on search engines, etc. Perhaps 'human body' or something similar could be used?

I guess this one’s going the way of the Dinosaur? Next stop Post purgatory!

So, is this discussion over? No special gallery dedicated to the human form? No members committee to help in the selection of images?

Yep guess so!
A moment of Silence please!

***moment of silence***

" "

BURP


sorry


continues moment of silence " "



How long is this silence gona last? Shall we go for a record?

Shhh..........

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

motioning for crash cart

Clear_----^--------- Clear_ ^--^^^----^-----^-^---------Clear_-------------------------------------------- Time.

7:55:38 pm

I have doubts, because I read these words from Caedes:
Another point: it’s easy to say, “Just make a gallery for people over 18”, but how can you
tell if someone’s over 18? Once we establish an over-18 gallery, it will be the site’s legal
obligation to “protect” those under 18 from objectionable material.


Earlier, Tracy wrote appropriately on the topic of censorship. I know this is a very
controversial topic for the serious artists here at Caedes, and know that rules like this can
be considered obsolete in the 21st century. But because many artists are free-spirited,
they may not fully understand restrictions imposed on their works by
subjective interpretations as found, for example, in the censorship of television.

Now, I know that we in Italy certainly have our faults, which is why I would like
to speak directly to all of you here at Caedes.
Considering that there are any number of easily accessed adult websites that would
release you from any legal responsibility, if you’re still worried that is not enough
protection for minors, there are plenty of free programs such as NetNanny that to help
protect their children for Internet access. I’d like to hear your opinions, as I am speak-
-ing very freely. Especially to you, Caedes: as creator and operator of this wonderful
site, do you prefer that we continue with censorship as it is, or should we establish
some sort of moral standard to allow for these kinds of photos while protecting you from
any liability which might be of concern to you?

Please understand this is not personal, Caedes. Believe me, I am only trying to clarify
my position on this topic and hope to understand what you really think.


For the rest of you members, here’s another question to consider: when someone brings
up the topic of a nude gallery, immediately the seamy underworld of sex comes to mind.
But if I upload images that reflect controversial political or social issues, or delve into
matters of world peace, how then is the community to judge on a moral basis?

Or are we and the next generations just going to stick our heads in the sand, like ostriches?

Some interesting points, Pier.

I think it is unfortunately impossible to divorce the issue of nudity from the issue of sex/pornography. If we agree that nude images are appropriate on the site then there will always be those visitors to the site who may object to the content.

As the site owner, Caedes is legitimately concerned about any possible legal repercussions of nude imagery. Personally I think that any attempt to restrict under-18 access to certain galleries would actually attract exactly the kind of attention we are hoping to avoid.

In principle of course, visitors should be high-minded enough not to complain about tasteful nude images and parents/guardians should indeed be aware of what sites their young charges are visiting. The reality though is of course much more messy, and that is why this debate is taking place.

I respect what you have written most recently, Mathew, as well as your comments of
3/31/04, but I consider your negative perspectives [on sensuality] much too conservative.
Do you honestly believe that Man Ray, Helmut Newton, Ommer Uwe are pornographers? Can you not separate the
the issue of nudity from pornography, or do you misunderstand the artists’ perception?
Do you really believe that a true artist works only in fractals or general photography?

I’m not as fanatical as your Bertrand Russell said, but I’d still like to find the freedom of
expression so as to share my emotions in spite of the conservative culture you represent.

I've been following this thread for quite some time, and guess it's time that I ad my 2c. The Internet by it's very nature provides for many problems due to it being a global medium and accessible to everyone. The main problem with nudity (even when tastefully done) on this site in specific is a problem due to just that fact. Anyone can access the site.

Now I agree, that nudity in art is nowhere near to pornography, but there is a very fine line. The problem however is not if it's pornography or not, but the accessibility of it, and if it could offend someone or not.

In general if you go to a art/photographic exhibit it's more or less adults that will attend, and they will know what to expect (knowing the artist etc.). With a website however, you cater to a much broader audience... people of all ages, religions etc.

If Caedes was to host photo's with nudity in them, he might be liable to law suits (sp!). What might be art in one culture might be porn in another.

As far as I'm concerned Caedes.net really doesn't need to have nudity on the site. If you feel that you want to express your artistic impressions etc in the form of nudity, create your own website, with a more focussed audience, but you might still be liable to law suits so take that into consideration.

It's Alive ' It's Alive. As he said with his hand lever. HE'HE'HE'Ha'Ha'HA'........................

WOW! a bit of silence to think about what we have said and syddenly some pops up and makes a nice long speech! Hehehe, nice to hear from you Brasiu! I think we are probably going to keep Caedes as it is for the time being?Right?

Another pause for thought?


No?


Ok then.

"Silent"

Crusader has summed up exactly what I was trying to say. The issue is not that nudity is intrinsically linked to pornography. Rather, the problem is that there are some narrow-minded people that will always connect the two.

If we have nude images on the site, we have to accept the potential risk involved: namely, that some conservative minded person will take offence at an image that most others would find acceptable. Because of that we have to think very carefully about the implications and about what we could do to safeguard the site. As always, freedom is tempered by ugly reality and practicality.

As for being a conservative, well, it's the first time I've ever been accused of that. Clearly you don't know me very well at all, Pier.

Ok i beg you pardon Matthew Caedes.net is good like this.

:-)

Hmmm... being conservative seems to be a negative thing here. ;-) I would agree that being too conservative is not good, but so is being too progressive or whatever the opposite left is called. There's a balance in the middle.

Einstein was progressive! So were Tesla, Vangoh, Thomas Jefferson, Leonardo, and Keppler. A long with every other genius in the world’ that dared to make a difference. Shell I go on.

I am not saying progress is bad, but when you take progressivism to the extreme where it becomes an end in itself... that's too far. You have no sense of direction except away from the past. I wouldn't go so far to say that every genius that ever lived was progressive, in a certain sense. It depends on what you think the word means. There have been geniuses that most people wouldn't necessarily call "progressive" either. St. Thomas Aquinas, C.S. Lewis, Plato, etc.

Yes I agree on some of what you say. In a way you could say Hitler was a progressive genius’ he defiantly was charismatic. Put yet his fanaticisms destroyed his goal of European unification of the Arian race. If he did not persecuted the Jews. He may have pulled it off. Thankfully he didn’t succeed. I think you would agree? But with out the writings of H.G Wells, Tolken and other great writers who promoted great progress and imagination we may never had gone to the moon or step out on to it's soil. I agree that certain forums are not the correct place for certain forms of expression. But must I remind of the woman who a few years back who tried to break off the penis of the statue of David. Because she thought it was profane and disgusting. I hate pornography and what it does to today’s children. It teaches them that a woman is an object, and something to be used as an object of abuse; and young girls learn to us their body as a form of trade. This has been prevalent in society in one form as another thru out history. The human body is a unique structure and in my eyes is one of the most amassing things to observe and to cherish on this planet. I feel that it possible to express the human form in a safe and flattering manor that is not offensive. The amassing shape of a womans body has been depicted ever since mankind learned to draw and to carve in stone.
The shape of the Male form as been excepted do to the male ego allowing it’s depiction as a symbol of power and strength for eons’ but we still look at the female form in some way of discussed or as profane. Pornography has its place in society in some form or another I guess. Possibly for the person, who can’t seem to engage in some form of normal human contact, or the lack of a normal relationship? But when it degreases the human species down to the animal primordial since or should I say the” Id”. It’s lost my respect and approval.
Human beings demand change’ we demand freedom and the right to express our self’s.
We are not as sheep to, be lead of a cliff ,because some herder say’s that is the only route to water. We are not as in nature’ an animal that only accepts his environment as nature has given it to survive. We demand progression not digression, as some of the political and bureaucratic leaders would prefer. We demand the right to think and decide our own fates. No matter how hard that it may seem to achieve. Or except.

Next Rebuttal?

No need for rebuttal, you basically agreed with me and then moved on to the topic of nudity/pornography. As for the nudity/pornography debate, for the most part I agree with you. The human body is an amazingly beautiful and awesome thing to behold. The problem with showing a naked body is that we humans have a lower inclination to stop seeing the intrinsic value of the person as a person, and be distracted by their physical beuaty (or worse the selfish satisfaction of eroticism). Looking at the awesome beauty of the naked body can lead people to forget the person inside, and that's where the danger is. This is why sometimes it isn't worth letting some artist express himself through nudity, because the harmful effects it can have on others, you must be sure that the approriate audience sees the work for whom it was intended. That is why we have censorship in the first place.

Human beings do not demand change. Change is not a choice, it happens. There is nothing anyone can do to "not change". We also have the right to determine our own fates and no one can take that away from anyone. It is the dignity of the human person to decide with their will what they will embrace or not embrace. If we did not have this will, we would be totally helpless in the face of our passions.

One more thing... Pornography has *no* place in civilization. Just as murder, theft, or any other violation and degradation of the dignity and intrinsic value of the human person.

Good stuff... =)

Well put Mathew I agree fully with you, Except on one thing. Humans do demand change.
They see the possibilty of a grander futuer and learn to fight for it. That is how teh USA came about and along with any other culture that has demanded the right to freedom and the right to choice.
But well put.

Yes, I see what you are saying. I was thinking in more philosophical terms that with the movement of time change occurs, because nothing created is static. You were thinking in social terms, and I agree with you there. People do demand changes in their societies and such.

You got it dude. Then otherwise we agree. And yes change is a constant, As in time, space and life, all form of evolution accrue. Do to necessity.

Conservative to me is a negative term - it's just the way I think. Some people are afraid of change, they cling to familiarity. However, as you say, Matthew, too much progress can be a bad thing - change for the sake of change. I agree that there has to be a happy medium, but, as always, people will diasagree quite where to draw the line.

But of which TV Censorship rules are we talking? About the US television rules?

Couse I remember a huge scandal with Janet Jackson flash on her breast few months ago.Two seconds of bare flesh and America is beside itself with indignation and outrage. After that the CBS transmitted on a five or 10-second delay and US newspapers have reported that the network was been under pressure to ensure that Jackson and Timberlake do not appear in other big live event.
Today i have read US concern over war dead photos.
Critics say the rule is designed to cover up the human cost of war.
Defence officials insist it is in the interests of bereaved families.
Personal I think was a politic Censorship to the photographs, this restricting access to the photographs was an attempt at damage limitation by the Bush administration, which is under pressure over its policy of invading and occupying Iraq.

Anyway the controversial fact was happened yesterday when ever the CBS decide after 7 years to show the not revealed pictures, taken moments after the Paris car crash in which Diana died.One of the pictures taken by paparazzi photographers at the scene - included in the official crash report - showed her head in the car.
Diana was "instantly recognisable" from a picture of the side of her head.
CBS in this case obviously doesn't care about the appalling effect of showing images of murder victims. They simply want to cash in on the tragedy.

So about from which Censorship we have to defend ourself?
The television Censorship most of the time follows exploitable choice for personal interests, as in Italy too.
I think that here in Caedes.net the tv Censorship rules have no sense, but we have only to decide what post on the grounds of taste and decency and to preserve the freedom of artists.