b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 5895771 (Thread)

# Seriously?
Are you saying you think that's nsfw?
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:20, archived)
# yes
I think it is the pose and arse but really

please link
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:21, archived)
# The request is terribly picky.
Surely you can hide it for 10-30 minutes until it's knocked off the page?
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:25, archived)
# frankly it is NSFW
I have to abide by the IT policy here
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:33, archived)
# Does your IT policy
allow you to spend hours on B3TA?

Frankly, compared to half of the stuff on here, that is really safe.

(It is also bloody great!)
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:35, archived)
# Really? Nothing even remotely sexually provocative?
Can you even go on news sites with that kind of policy?
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:38, archived)
# this is the policy
According to the Security Policy of Wacker Chemie AG access to the following categories is restricted:
Gemaess den Sicherheitsrichtlinien der Wacker Chemie AG ist der Zugriff zu folgenden Kategorien nicht gestattet:

Adult Content, Sex,
Drugs
Gambling
Games
Illegal/Questionable
Hacking, Proxy Avoidance Systems
Militancy/Extremist
Racism/Hate
Tasteless
Violence
Custom Blacklist

For your information:
Barred web page:
Category of the page:
Your IP address:
Your user ID:



If you think blocking of this page is incorrect, please contact the User Help Desk.
Falls diese Zugriffsverweigerung faelschlicherweise erfolgt, wenden Sie sich bitte an den User Help Desk.

If you have any questions concerning information security, please contact
Wenn Sie Fragen zur Informationssicherheit allgemein haben, wenden Sie sich bitte an
Josef Wiesmueller, Phone (head quarter munich) -1592.

If you have technical questions concerning internet access, please contact
Wenn Sie technische Fragen zum Internet-Zugang haben, wenden Sie sich bitte an
Thomas Schmidbauer, Phone (head quarter munich) -1272.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:49, archived)
# Nothing there covers this picture.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:52, archived)
# I agree
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:56, archived)
# Me
too.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 10:32, archived)
#
Racism/Hate
Tasteless
Violence


What the hell are you doing on B3ta?
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:01, archived)
# ^ this
ha ha ha
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:15, archived)
# if you
look it is a german company and this is a UK site

and frankly if they blocked b3ta then I would be out the door
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:32, archived)
# That's no reason to impose one company's IT policy onto b3ta.
Images are modified if people try and post porn, if your company is too strict then don't look.

I really doubt mofaha was trying to push the boundaries with this picture.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:37, archived)
# I fully agree
but I don't want to get in trouble
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:41, archived)
# The best thing to do if you're worried about getting in trouble is work harder.
Work so hard they have no comeback if they get pissed off that you spend so much time on the internet.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:43, archived)
# You know
I'm very sensitive to the issue, and I really don't want to be a dick, but people dress like that at the mall. I don't think there's any way it could be mistaken for pornography. Unless there are other complaints or a mod hides it, I'm disinclined to link it. If you really think it's too much you're welcome to put me on ignore until it's gone. Please understand that I'm not offended and I don't have an issue with you. I hope you feel the same way.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:27, archived)
# alright
I just be careful not to hit the 'top' button

EDIT: I know but the fact it is on the computer makes it more likely to be pornography

but it is OK chap
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:38, archived)
# "the fact it is on the computer makes it more likely to be pornography"
eh?

So something that is in print is less likely to be pr0n?

This makes absolutely no sense.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:17, archived)
# that is the reason
I was given my colleague who thought it was too racy
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:56, archived)
# probably true though
:-)
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 10:31, archived)
# My goodness
you are as reasonable as you are talented - hats off to you.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 10:41, archived)
# NSFW shouldn't have to accommodate individual workplaces.
If it looked like porn, it'd be NSFW. But it doesn't.

If he links it, he's doing so purely out of niceness.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:28, archived)
# wtf?
Who could be offended by this? Do you wear blinkers in the street?
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:28, archived)
# sexy ladies are not nsfw
despite how fwaptasticly sexy they may be.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:30, archived)
# What if you have sexy ladies at work?




not that I do... :(
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:35, archived)
# that is just not safe for productivity
but that is the cross we must bare
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:36, archived)
# Sexy Ladies are essential for (re)productivity
I find.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:39, archived)
# You obviously have
not been to Cambourne. Fucking hideous and still breeding at an alarming rate.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:43, archived)
# I used to work
at Camborne High School. It was fucking horrible.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:49, archived)
# You flirt with them, buddy!
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:15, archived)
# is The Sun
not safe for work?
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:35, archived)
# The Sun
isn't safe anywhere.

Personally, as a woman I get fucked off having to sit opposite men on the train looking at Page 3. I'm sure you wouldn't be that happy if everywhere you went women were looking at pictures of men with rippling torsos and massive cocks. Its just a little uncomfortable.

Don't get me wrong, I'm totally fine with porn, i just don't see why news papers should have soft porn in them.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 7:58, archived)
# Im not pro The Sun
just aware that its all over the place especially places of work, just pointing out the double standards (no pun intended)
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:02, archived)
# I think part of the problem is that
a picture like that is very noticeable on your monitor. Its very obviously not work. Not only is it not work but its a woman's arse, basically. It might not be porn, but if your boss is walking past s/he probably wont stop and say 'ooh! Nice vectors, wow. I wish i could do vectors like that, how splended!'.
It would more likely be 'get on with the damn work you're paid for' or 'honey, you're sacked'.

I don't have a massive problem with this image in particular (well, any more than i have problems with all images that just turn women into objects), but i can see his point. Having said that, if things are that bad, look at b3ta without the pictures, or, worse, actualy do some work.

Or is that just ridiculous?
Yeah, ok, that is just stupid


(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:12, archived)
# I would have disagreed with you a few months ago
but I have recently been trapped in an office (200+) employees where I was one of three straight men. There were filthy pinups everywhere, and I have to admit that it made me feel uncomfortable when I was trying to have a serious discussion while other people were looking at gay porn.

I'm not really sure what point I was trying to make here.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:20, archived)
# where do you work?
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:53, archived)
# That was my last job, in Sydney.
I'm self employed at the moment, but things are drying up so I think I'm going to have to be a corporate whore for a few more months. Oh well.
(, Fri 5 May 2006, 8:56, archived)