TN PICTURES, what IS acceptable?

Respostas

• ME

  Membro

  Sep 18, 2010

  [quote]Imho, here at TN, the owner (teamtrue1) is very laid back with regard to rules. His common sense approach is a breath of fresh air for many of us, and is in no small part, the reason for the explosive success of the site.     However, many new members are actually new to nudism, and are not aware of the age old battle with masses, and are even yet to learn about the naturist/nudist philosophy and etiquette. It is so true, that a picture speaks a thousand words, and here at TN (as with any website) pictures quickly and effectively, convey a message. The content of those pictures denotes what that message is.     If we are to promote our lifestyle, and protect it for the future, we HAVE to educate new members and at the same time ensure, that we do NOT give our misguided opponents, ANY ammunition to use against us. After all, the site IS called, TRUE nudists. We are effectively saying, "LOOK AT US!, this is what a nudist IS."     The problem is, that the majority do not understand this, and seek to post material that WILL damage our cause. The only way to prevent this, is to approve members pictures. This is very time consuming and therefore expensive, and  there lays the rub, as they say.     So what to do, give up? I think not. As the site membership grows, and therefore becomes more viable, TT has more resources to improve the site, and hopefully, will take my view, and start to clean the site up.     I propose that the rules regarding pictures be amended. The difficulty is that interpretation of any picture is often subjective, so in an effort to remove the obviously erotic and suggestive examples and at the same time speed up the approval process, I feel it IS necessary to accept a need to simplify the rules by implementing a blanket ban on partially clothed pictures. Obviously swimwear IS acceptable, but I feel that underwear, scantily clad shots, along with provocative poses, body part, erections and spread eagled shots, should be outlawed, as these definitely send out the wrong message.     In the mean time, IF members were to set their questionable pics to "friends only" or better still delete them, the look of the site, and therefore the MESSAGE we are sending out, could be easily and drastically improved.     To implement this, TT could make an announcement, and concerned members, rather than flagging, could send a message to qualifying profiles along the lines of, " Hi, just wanted to say, that I feel your picture(s) may not be in keeping with the naturist/nudist philosophy of this site, and therefore is not promoting the site in a positive light. Please either delete or mark as "friends only" Thank you."       Well that's how I feel, hope you do too.   If so, please show it, by joining this group.   Thanks.   Phil.   ps.   For Bulletin notifications on my groups activities, please send me a message and say "Hi, please friend me, so that I may receive you bulletins on your groups activities." I will then send YOU, a friend request.[/quote]  What TT has been and presently is doing so far is what is making true nudists respond by joining what they see just as it it now. Seeing that truenudists is number one the others who want to change it need to take a second look and see what the masses really like and take part in, as it is them who needs to change their ideas and learn here how to improve their thinking. If it is working don't fix it  Try To Think

  ReagirResponder
• PH

  

  PhilfreeeukAutor original

  Sep 18, 2010

  [quote][quote]Imho, here at TN, the owner (teamtrue1) is very laid back with regard to rules. His common sense approach is a breath of fresh air for many of us, and is in no small part, the reason for the explosive success of the site.     However, many new members are actually new to nudism, and are not aware of the age old battle with masses, and are even yet to learn about the naturist/nudist philosophy and etiquette. It is so true, that a picture speaks a thousand words, and here at TN (as with any website) pictures quickly and effectively, convey a message. The content of those pictures denotes what that message is.     If we are to promote our lifestyle, and protect it for the future, we HAVE to educate new members and at the same time ensure, that we do NOT give our misguided opponents, ANY ammunition to use against us. After all, the site IS called, TRUE nudists. We are effectively saying, "LOOK AT US!, this is what a nudist IS."     The problem is, that the majority do not understand this, and seek to post material that WILL damage our cause. The only way to prevent this, is to approve members pictures. This is very time consuming and therefore expensive, and  there lays the rub, as they say.     So what to do, give up? I think not. As the site membership grows, and therefore becomes more viable, TT has more resources to improve the site, and hopefully, will take my view, and start to clean the site up.     I propose that the rules regarding pictures be amended. The difficulty is that interpretation of any picture is often subjective, so in an effort to remove the obviously erotic and suggestive examples and at the same time speed up the approval process, I feel it IS necessary to accept a need to simplify the rules by implementing a blanket ban on partially clothed pictures. Obviously swimwear IS acceptable, but I feel that underwear, scantily clad shots, along with provocative poses, body part, erections and spread eagled shots, should be outlawed, as these definitely send out the wrong message.     In the mean time, IF members were to set their questionable pics to "friends only" or better still delete them, the look of the site, and therefore the MESSAGE we are sending out, could be easily and drastically improved.     To implement this, TT could make an announcement, and concerned members, rather than flagging, could send a message to qualifying profiles along the lines of, " Hi, just wanted to say, that I feel your picture(s) may not be in keeping with the naturist/nudist philosophy of this site, and therefore is not promoting the site in a positive light. Please either delete or mark as "friends only" Thank you."       Well that's how I feel, hope you do too.   If so, please show it, by joining this group.   Thanks.   Phil.   ps.   For Bulletin notifications on my groups activities, please send me a message and say "Hi, please friend me, so that I may receive you bulletins on your groups activities." I will then send YOU, a friend request.[/quote]   What TT has been and presently is doing so far is what is making true nudists respond by joining what they see just as it it now. Seeing that truenudists is number one the others who want to change it need to take a second look and see what the masses really like and take part in, as it is them who needs to change their ideas and learn here how to improve their thinking. If it is working don't fix it  Try To Think[/quote]   Well I think I understood what you just said.     It seems to me that it all depends on what the goal is.     If it is to build a very successful and profitable web site, with no concern for any damage that it may be doing to the movement, then I'd say that the current philosophy is about right.     If however, it is still the same, (as I understand the original intention was) to create a web site that is a haven for "true" nudists, that aims to promote the Naturist/Nudist movement/Philosophy and lifestyle, in a way that will help it to become accepted in mainstream society, then clearly, there is still work to be done.

  ReagirResponder
• ME

  Membro

  Sep 18, 2010

  Perhaps/most likely the true and best position is somewhere between the two extremes Phill, we see a high success rate at drawing many new people to this TN website, and we see the success rate at websites that follow the guidelines that a few of you are trying to implement on this site. If you manage to make this site like the other less successful sites we will see a big loss in the long run, there is defiantly something here that extreme conservatives are missing.
  Look for the true balance that comes sometime from letting the reigns out a little and see where the peoples real thinking is moving towards, people have been making changes from the beginning of time, and their comes a time when the old fashon way of thinking needs to come up to speed. This is a great place to study that phenomena, it's best not to throw a wrench into the gears but to observe and learn. No one side here is any more right than the other.

  ReagirResponder
• ME

  Membro

  Sep 18, 2010

  Hey Phil, Sorry it took me soooo long to join this group.  Moderating hasbeen far more work and keepign me much busier than I expected.  And then there's the other project.
  
  You know I fully support the original intentions and ideals of TT1 and the TN site.
  
  Love you!
  XOXOXO
  Jen

  ReagirResponder
• PH

  

  PhilfreeeukAutor original

  Sep 18, 2010

  [quote]Hey Phil, Sorry it took me soooo long to join this group.  Moderating has been far more work and keeping me much busier than I expected.  And then there's the other project.   You know I fully support the original intentions and ideals of TT1 and the TN site.   Love you! XOXOXO Jen[/quote]     Thanks Jen, sure I knew, and I knew that you new that I knew that you knew I knew!   and yes, it was absolutely, well worth the wait!   Love you more!   XOXOXOXOXOXO   Phil.

  ReagirResponder
• CH

  

  Cheri_Donna

  Sep 18, 2010

  I came across one that had her holding him and him holding a breast.  Photos like that are totally wrong for this site.  I did let them know about it before flagging.  I did post the link on your thread, Phil

  ReagirResponder
• JA

  

  JackNeilson

  Sep 19, 2010

  [quote]I came across one that had her holding him and him holding a breast.  Photos like that are totally wrong for this site.  I did let them know about it before flagging.  I did post the link on your thread, Phil[/quote]  That one has been deleted and the profile text has been changed to come into accordance with TN values. Thanks Cheri as it was probably your p.m. that caused them to change it. As a general rule except when a picture is blatant I usually p.m. the person and have found that in many cases that is effective and that the posters, often new members, did not know it was inappropriate. If no action is taken after a reasonable time (yes, I do check to ensure that my p.m. was read) I will then flag it and report it in the certified flagging thread. A friend (actually the manager of the nudist club to which I belong) and long-time nudist joined TN on my recommendation and on her second visit to the site was greeted by a very inappropriate picture on the home page. She has not and will not visit TN again.  I can imagine a newbie in that situation either leaving without joining or if joining the site thinking that pictures such as that are appropriate. Pictures do indeed have an effect on how a site is viewed.

  ReagirResponder
• GE

  

  Gerry-4

  Sep 20, 2010

  I'll play Devil's Advocate a bit.   When I received a certain edition of theWorld Guide To Nude Beaches and Recreation(not the first edition, because the cover saidExpanded and Updated), there was one picture of a man standing behind a woman and reaching around to put his hands on her breasts. He wasn't "cupping" them. It was more like he was "hiding" them. The looks on their faces showed it was more of a "joke" than a serious photo. They just happened to be having a fun day at the beach and joking around.   It was decided that this was acceptable for publication in theWorld Guide. Am I to understand it would not be accepted here?

  ReagirResponder
• GE

  

  Gerry-4

  Sep 20, 2010

  [quote](Snip).   However, many new members are actually new to nudism, and are not aware of the age old battle with the masses, and are even yet to learn about the naturist/nudist philosophy and etiquette. (Snip).     If we are to promote our lifestyle, and protect it for the future, we HAVE to educate new members and at the same time ensure, that we do NOT give our misguided opponents, ANY ammunition to use against us. (Snip).        The problem is, that the majority do not understand this, (...)    (Snip) [/quote]  [quote]I feel it IS necessary to accept a need to simplify the rules by implementing a blanket ban on partially clothed pictures. Obviously swimwear IS acceptable, but I feel that underwear, scantily clad shots, along with provocative poses, body part, erections and spread eagled shots, should be outlawed, as these definitely send out the wrong message.    In the mean time, IF members were to set their questionable pics to "friends only" or better still delete them, the look of the site, and therefore the MESSAGE we are sending out, could be easily and drastically improved.[/quote]   Phil, I agree with you. For the most part, you're bang on.  Often, the problem isn't so much that people can't read the rules. Instead, they see what's going on with other profiles and make their own profiles "conform" to what they have seen. This includes some of the "featured nudists" on the front page.   So even though we're not supposed to see spread eagle shots or erection shots, they will continue to appear on newbies' profiles as long as supposed "veterans" do that themselves. It's a sort of "Why ticket me for speeding all the time when my neighbour speeds to much higher speeds and much more often than I do?" Just because others speed, that doesn't make it acceptable.   All the same, some newbies who have yet to make the distinction between nudity and sex could be understandably confused and wonder why we're coming down so hard on them. It can be a mystery to them as to how we can be so broadminded about many things, including nudity, but apparently not so broadminded when it comes to sex. From their point of view, we're just too darned uptight.   Eventually, some finally "get it" and come around to our way of thinking. They understand that we can run the entire spectrum of attitudes on sex, but keep our erotic proclivities in check when in mixed company. They also understand that showing restraint is needed in order to portray a positive public image.   Part of that image is what is reflected here, and it's not always good. We don't want to look uptight. But we can't seem to be the total opposite either. And since I've never understood the purpose of "undies shots" when it would be so much easier to either be fully dressed or fully undressed, I would support a rule in this respect.

  ReagirResponder
• PH

  

  PhilfreeeukAutor original

  Sep 21, 2010

  Thanks Gerry, I could not have put it better myself.   This site was created for "truenudists" Unsurprisingly, as it is accessible to the WORLD, there are a huge number of "civilians" wanting to join up for a variety of their own reasons, that are not necessarily or exclusively, in compliance with the accepted Nudist Philosophy.   In the absence of effective moderation, we are (not surprisingly) in an ever diminishing minority here.   The bottom line is, what does the owner want from his site? If it is to provide a safe haven for traditional nudist and promote the accepted Nudist Philosophy, will he be able to muster the recourses needed to maintain the standard?        Time will tell.     I'm not going to hold my breath.     Thankfully, there is a plan B.

  ReagirResponder
• PH

  

  PhilfreeeukAutor original

  Sep 21, 2010

  [quote]I'll play Devil's Advocate a bit.   When I received a certain edition of theWorld Guide To Nude Beaches and Recreation(not the first edition, because the cover saidExpanded and Updated), there was one picture of a man standing behind a woman and reaching around to put his hands on her breasts. He wasn't "cupping" them. It was more like he was "hiding" them. The looks on their faces showed it was more of a "joke" than a serious photo. They just happened to be having a fun day at the beach and joking around.   It was decided that this was acceptable for publication in theWorld Guide. Am I to understand it would not be accepted here?[/quote]    I would hope Gerry,  that with anything that obvious, common sense would prevail.   Phil.

  ReagirResponder
• RE

  

  renebbare

  Apr 20, 2011

  And just where do you see the middle ground PP? We are all open to suggestions and debate.

  ReagirResponder
• ME

  Membro

  Apr 29, 2011

  Y'all might just find the following interesting.  This is what the younger and future generation of nudists thinks of TN.YNAI Forum threadI so wish I could disagree with them, but I'm sad to say I can't.  The ideals of TT1 are great, the rules and guidelines are all here, but when they are not enforced or implemented ...   When we first discovered TN - 2 years and 7 months ago - it was a breath of fresh air after all the other sites we had joined.  It was a haven. As it slowly erodes due to lack of enforcement of it's own TOS, rules, guidelines...the air is becoming stale, the haven is less and less. So sad.   Jen

  ReagirResponder
• OL

  

  ollygrumps

  Nov 4, 2014

  They are very strict on the rule that you must show your face if you show your genitals. As a man you are not really nude without showing your genitals - unless it's a rear view or something in the photo hides them.
  You might get away with something like this
  

  ReagirResponder
• ME

  Membro

  Nov 4, 2014

  From what we understand, TN does not want a bunch of headless shots.  We blur our faces and others have put a box or circle over their faces to protect their identity.  That being said, try to understand the underlying issue:  TN doesn't want a whole bunch of photos that are headless and appear as if people only want to show off their nude torso and private parts i.e. just breasts, crotch shots or penises.
  TN is interested in seeing people as whole or in an environment as a nudist vs. just seeing selfies from the neck down with no other subject(s) to the photos.
  
  

  ReagirResponder
• BE

  

  berky1966

  Jan 11, 2018

  I"m glad you mentioned what you typed. This is one of the earliest pet peeves I have about this site. Way too many pictures I would classify more fitting for a porno hook up site. I flag them for abuse but nothing never changes.

  ReagirResponder
• BE

  

  berky1966

  Jan 11, 2018

  I disagree with that philosophy. Some people need to keep their face out of the picture for various reasons. If you work with the general public where what you do outside the workplace is out of the mainstream it reflects poorly on the clientele. Besides the internet is forever. Once you post something it never truly goes away, so I choose not to post my face.

  ReagirResponder