How about this?

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

I propose the following rule, which I put in the comments section on the post concerning dykeprincess's posting of the poster for the clothing drive.

We are a community and it is not unreasonable to have rules. I think ALL pictures, regardless, should be placed behind a cut. Those that could be considered non-workfriendly should have something outside the cut indicating it as such. Anyone who violates this gets a warning. A second violation and that person gets banned, which hopefully wouldn't ever happen. We are all adults here.

And just a sidenote- I had set up a community before- somervillemass. Feel free to join.

Comments

[talonvaki.livejournal.com]

I second this...it's standard protocol in the two other communities I belong to...

[neitherday.livejournal.com]

I don't agree with this proposed rule. Excessive enforcement of <lj-cut> is annoying. Small pictures are okay, and will remain so. Large pictures are a different story. However, that was not the complaint with the image in question. I stand by my decision to let the post stay as is.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure how it's excessive if it is a blanket rule. Then there is no judgement involved whatsoever. If it's an image, it goes behind the cut, end of story. People can then choose not to open the image. Clearly there are a number of differing opinions as to what is appropriate- this puts an end to that.

[neitherday.livejournal.com]

It is excessive, because it targets every image. It is annoying, because one then has to click on every other post to read them. Look back at the posts in this community. A good number of them contain uncut images. I'm glad their uncut, I don't have to open another window or use the backbutton to look at them. If you don't want to see them, use image placeholders.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

Fair enough.

[protogeek.livejournal.com]

I second this

[hauntmeister.livejournal.com]

Interestingly, of the last 60 postings in the community, only four of them have had images. Two were announcements of an event and received no comments at all, and the other two received comments which were in some way (although not exclusively) negative.

It seems as though images generally are not used here, and when they are, the community does not receive the postings very well.

The comparative lack of images can be used as support by both sides. Those opposed to using cuts to hide images can claim, "it doesn't happen very often! What's the problem?" While those preferring to have the images cut can reply, "What's the problem with clicking to see the image? It doesn't happen very often!"

[hauntmeister.livejournal.com]

Look back at the posts in this community. A good number of them contain uncut images.

In fact, I just did. It was 4 out of 60, which (at just under 7%) I personally consider to be a fairly small number.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

The fact that it does happen should be what matters, as should the fact that it causes problems for some members of the community. What this means is that some members simply won't check out the community while at work.

[being-homeless.livejournal.com]

I agree. for the exact same reasons. I'm on dial-up and it's faster to let the image load and see it on my friends page then to have to wait for LJ cuts to load.

[marmota.livejournal.com]

I think ALL pictures, regardless, should be placed behind a cut. Those that could be considered non-workfriendly should have something outside the cut indicating it as such. Anyone who violates this gets a warning. A second violation and that person gets banned, which hopefully wouldn't ever happen. We are all adults here.

Except you, apparently. How about banning your own authoritarian ass for trying to tell the rest of us what to do?

[ah42.livejournal.com]

We are all adults here.

Yeah, we are. So just drop it.

[cnoocy]

I actually don't think that "I propose the following rule" is a particularly authoritarian thing to say. It's offering a possible rule to be accepted by the community or not.

[mattlistener.livejournal.com]

I share your opinion and support your judgment.

[on-reserve.livejournal.com]

I'm sure it's no surprise that I agree with you and I appreciate your letting my original post stand. Part of the reason I didn't cut it is that I made the image into a clickable link; I didn't want that behind a cut otherwise people might not have been likely to click it.

I also agree that having to click over every time someone posts an image to see if it was something that I needed to see (i.e. something that was critical to the announcement) gets to be a pain when I'm trying to catch up on lots of posts.

Furthermore I think it's tacky to propose authoritarian (the act of proposing was not but the text of the proposal was) policy when we have a perfectly capable moderator to set policy and then slip in a promo for *your* community as a way to say "if you're with me, ditch *this* community."

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

You consider a proposal authoritarian? Ah, the joys of community.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

I think the rhetoric has gotten a bit overblown here.

We are a community. Someone commented that your post was inappropriate for work. You might not agree, but this person clearly did. A debate ensued, policies were questioned, alternatives offered, and the rules clearly set down. Some are not happy with this but they can choose to accept it or go elsewhere. For those who do, I offered my community as an alternative. And lest you think this is a case of taking my ball and going elsewhere because I wasn't happy, look closely at when I set up the community. I did this long before this issue came up.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

I feel as if posting a single image isn't too big of a deal- and threatening to ban a repeated offender seems a bit extreme.

It's not a big deal unless it goes against the rules (which has since been determined that it does not). But if it had, you cannot have rules without penalties for breaking them, and here in LJ world we are rather limited as to what we can do. It's not like we can go by their house and TP their dog, cat, or roommate....

[on-reserve.livejournal.com]

i'm not questioning when you set your community up only that I think the promo'ing was a bit tacky. I'm allowed that opinion even if you disagree with it.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

touche'

tacky, perhaps, but relevent.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

My proposed rule wouldn't seem so petty if you worked in a place like a brokerage firm that frowned upon their employees viewing images of scantily-clad bodies while on company time. Which, as you might recall, was pretty much the initial complaint here.

This is all a moot point since it was decided to post anything. I am curious though how you would handle someone who broke community rules?

[marmota.livejournal.com]

Actually, that was pretty snarky of me. I apologise for the inflammatory phrasing. What I found authoritarian was the attempt to open a potentially meaningful dialogue by threatening to ban people who didn't comply. Did wonders for any sense of warm community spirit I had, I tell ya.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

I appreciate the apology.

My reasoning behind proposing the ban was this. First, someone gets warned. Then, if they do it a second time, then they get banned. I mean, what good is a community and rules if there are no teeth behind them? I was merely floating a proposal and frankly I was a bit stunned by the reaction it got. Yoiks!