This domain was not allowed to be added to coop, why? This is adult !!! Why adult - it's only wear shop. http://www.abaccarat.pl
Love the site, but it's not gonna be in the Coop... I suggest you wait until this is opened up... http://www.nichedynamics.com/chat/
Just a comment... the coop has an interesting conclusion on adult ads. Wonder would the coop accept health education site about human sexuality where we can see the p**** and p****
No. This question was brought up previously and those sites aren't accepted. Added - what is the p**** and p****
Exactly. That's why I say "an interesting conclusion on adult ads". Imagine a sex health educational site that is meant to teach teenagers about sex. It isn't allowed in the coop because it is perceived as 'adult'. [???]
yes, that would be adult also. - mine opinion - (My son is 15 and I wouldn't want him to go to just any sexhealth site to get info from since so many promote things that are opposite to our beliefs. My son learned what sex is without having to get all the other opinions on the subject.)
Debunked, Of course, if your son go to a sex health site and find some porno stuffs, that's adult... and very twisted. Sex education has been taught in the high schools. Please banned your son from going to schools b'coz it's your opinion
By the FCC's standards perhaps, but I would have to disagree, respectfully of course. I really did not see anything there out of this world. There are a few other sites out there (on this forum) that have some "panties" among other things.. I really see no difference between the two. Perhaps I just did not go deep enough into the site, but I really did not see anything "adult", ie., porn.. Anyway, when I think "adult" I think porn. Playboy? A magazine. Hustler? Porn. Even the publishers would likely agree with that assertion. Anyway.
I don't see anything about this site being is "porn". It's not even "R" rated if you ask me. It's just lingerie - like Victoria Secret. http://www.victoriassecret.com/ Do you consider Victoria Secret's site "porn"?
You can fuss over technicalities all you want. In the end it's shawn's decision. It's HIS network and it's not run by democracy. VS has a panty website, yes, but: 1) It is necessary to sell the product 2) It is not sexual exploitation (i.e. not for the opposite sex ) 3) She's closely related to Shawn. 4) Are you even sure she's IN the network, because I'm sure that's who you are talking about.
No fuss from me. I agree completely. It's Shawns coop, Shawns rules and Shawns call. I think everyone knows and respects that. And I was not knocking it, just making a point. I guess number 1 applies to the other site as well.. I guess it is "necessary to sell the product". And number two seems to apply. I am not really seeing where one is for the opposite sex. I guess I don't where women's lingere much being a male(but if you do, hey, that's just fine), so I am not sure on that one. On number 3 I really am not sure it would have much bearing on either. Finally number 4, I don't know. I never said she was, nor did I say it was a particular site/person and or persons. Personally I like the site you are talking about. It is quite tasteful and not necessarily what the title would imply. Anyway, hopefully we can keep from getting our panties (pun intended) in an uproar. I can see this thread will generate varying opinions based either in morality, or not, age plays a factor, no doubt those of us with kids view what is "border line" differently. That said, whatever opinion any of us has on the subject of what is, or is not acceptable it is (like you said) not up to us. Finally to clarify, do I think the site brought up in this thread is "adult" as per my definition(opinion) of what is "adult", ie., "porn" no. But do I think it belongs in the coop? I'd lean towards the no category. This is one of the nice things about the coop. The fact that it is clean of gambling, porn, and other useless crap, that if I really want to find, I can certainly do it looking in other places than a coop ad at the bottom of a site about McCoy Pottery. So in that sense you can perhaps see why I think I would lean towards it not being in the coop. While the links from the coop may not necessarily be relevant to the site/s they appear on, at least they are kept clean of anything "questionable".
Adult and Porn are two different things. Sites have to be suitable for all ages in all societies. Look at those pictures and you will see what I saw. I don't personally mind looking at it but the fundamental question is: Is this suitable for any person aged 1-99 from any major religion/culture from Vatican City to Rio de Janeiro from Amsterdam to Beijing, from London to Baghdad and beyond? If it shouldn't be seen by sub 18 or shouldn't be seen by certain societies/religions etc. then you should be able to judge your very self that you shouldn't even sign up for the Co-op. Just forget about your personal benefits for a second and opt for a safe Co-op environment.
Problem is that, there isn't a clear line between adult and porn for coop policy. But I can't imagine that someone say a sex education site for teenagers is an adult site. If it's the religion and culture that forbids decent sex education, that's bigotry. Personally, I don't like my America has a part of it. Anyway, not a big issue. It's Shawn's coop. I believe, he intentionally bans it to prevent meddling with grey area.
Why not change the requirement to exclude sites that have nudity if thats what you are after. It isn't a moral decision on the usefulness of the site. Its just saying, for the ease of review and so theres no opinion invloved - nudity is not allowed. Its a lot harder to argue with that. By the way, I'm not saying thats the way it should be...merely pointing out that that exclusion would solve the issue.