Home   |   Report a Bug/Comment/Suggestion   |   Help Witchbook Grow   |   My Account   |   HELP!
witchbook.net on Stumble Upon Witchbook.net on Twitter Witchook.net's Page on Facebook
  
 
Account
People Blogs Chat Media Polls Events Forums Answers Groups Sites Help & Support
  •  
 
 
News
02.02.2012 10:47    Comments: 14    Categories: Whoops!      Tags: poll  nudity  naked  

Dear people of Witchbook,

Here is something that has been bugging me for some time now.  But i'll start at the beginning, so please bear with me.

It was late one evening, and I was in the chat room with a few mods and members, when the topic of nudity on the site was brought up.  A few interesting ideas were tossed around, and it was suggested that I put up a poll to see what members thought would be the best way to handle Nudity on Witchbook.

It was never suggested that we would be opening up the site to more nudity, Nor was it stated that we would even actually change the site's policy regarding this.  However, a great number of our members saw my poll, and have lept into a frenzy, concerned that we may start allowing nudity.  I've recieved countless messages from panicing members worried that witchbook is about to become a porn site.

This tells me that I've got a problem here, and that problem was a simple trick of wording.  I asked "With witchbook being 18+, Where should we stand on Nudity?"  What I should have asked is "Now that Witchbook is 18+, If it was YOUR site, how woud you handle nudity?".

Simply put (and this is how I've responded to all the members messaging me about this), We cannot open our doors to nudity completely, without requiring proof of age beyond that of your birthdate.  This is Ontario (Canada) Law regarding Web Administration.  You may ask how other sites get away without asking for any age verification?  Some because they are in another country where such laws are different, and some because they simply don't know or care...until they get shut down.

So here is...
THE BOTTOM LINE

Witchbook's Current Policy is adequate for dealing with Nudity, But the only changes I WAS considering, were some tweaks into how we handle it, (Not what we handle).  Previously our policy simply stated that Nudity was not allowed.  But there are some minor things we have let slip, and there is also the precarious legal problem of ambiguity in the term "Nudity" (as an uncovered face can be considered nudity in one country, and another says a person with only a fig leaf and bra, is not nude).  So while the official policy has not and will not change, here is a Humanized wording of our policy on nudity to help it make sense.

Official Wording:

"Please choose carefully the information you post on Witchbook and that you provide to other Members. Any photographs posted by you may not contain nudity, violence, or offensive subject matter..."

So here is the Human Definition of what we MEAN by this.

  1. Witchbook Defines Nudity as a person displaying parts of their body that would be considered "Indecent Exposure" in a public place, by either Canadian or American legal standards.
  2. Images displaying breasts in a sexualy provocative, permisuous, or offensive way are deemed to be in violation of the Terms of Use.
  3. Images displaying genitals in any context are deemed to be in violation of the Terms of Use.
  4. A breast is considered exposed if any or all of the nipple or areola are exposed.  The surrounding breast however is not cause for concern.
  5. Cartoon, Computer Generated, or Hand-drawn art is bound by the same limitations as photography, except that - provided it is non-sexual, and religious/spiritual in nature - breasts are allowed. (but still, no genitals).
  6. It is accepted that Witchbook Moderators and Admin do not actively hunt around the site, looking for offenders.  Offending content may still make it onto the system, and will be dealt with as it is reported.
  7. Private images are not subject to these restrictions, so long as they remain private, or are shared exclusively with people who have already approved their level of exposure and context.
  8. Private images are defined as images who's album/image privacy settings do not allow the public, registered members, or friends to view them, but only specific members who they have been shared with.  (Meaning if someone complains, you GAVE them the ability to do so)
  9. Content uploaded to Witchbook is subject to Moderation by the Moderators and Admin.
  10. ALL content uploaded by anyone, to anywhere on Witchbook, may be viewed by the administrator at any time.

There we go, I hope that can clear up any confusion.  But in case it doesn't, here are some examples of what is OK, and what is not.

  • You upload a photo where you are wearing a thong, and a bra, but nothing else.  This is technically OK, as the "Naughty bits" are covered, however this is strongly frowned upon.
  • You upload a photo where you are wearing cargo pants, a thick belt, tube-top, several necklaces, and a funny hat.  Your breasts however, are exposed, and this is considered a violation.
  • You upload a photo where you are topless, but your arm covers your breasts.  This is a tricky situation, because this photo is now subject to the "Is it sexual in nature" rule.  If it's a beauty pose, then no it is not a problem.  If it's a "Hey look, I have boobs" pose, then it's a violation.
  • You upload a pic where you are standing naked in your Kitchen, with nothing but a Coffee Cup between the camera and your genitals.  While most men have no breasts to be concerned about in a photo, Covering your naughty bits in a coffee cup is a very crude and inneffective method, and would be considered a borderline infraction.
  • You upload a pic of "The Goddess", and her breasts are exposed.  So long as attention isn't being drawn to her breasts (ie: it's not obvious that the purpose of the photo is to show breasts), then it's ok.
  • You upload a pic of you standing fully clothed next to your altar setup.  Nice photo!  5 points :).
  • You upload a pic of Bert & Ernie from Seasame street.  What's that got to do with this now?
  • You upload a pic of some anime porn.  That's an instant ban right there.
  • You upload a pic of James Richard "Rick" Perry.  Why?   Just...Why?
  • You upload a pic of some various household items carefully arranged to look like a penis.  Come on, did you think we wouldn't notice?

Hopefully that clears this up.  But, you might ask, why DID I launch that poll, if I wasn't going to actually change what the site allows?

Simply, because I wanted to see what suggestions people would come up with in the comments.  I wanted to see if anyone actually had an idea that would satisfy the US/CAN legal system, while better pleasing members.  We've gotten a somewhat even spread of votes too, while it was weighted a bit on the side of "Allow Tasteful Nudity" option.  The problem is that the US and Canadian Legal system only allow nudity in forms of religious expression, and Art.  And even then, their definitions of it are different.  So much so, that it would be a 100 point list of conditions and contexts that You (the members), The moderators, and Myself would have to adhere to to make it legal.  Then there's also the fact that anyone who mis-interprets this, could land us in some hot water, that we would have to hire a lawyer to dig us back out of.

Remember, just because it can be legal, doesn't mean it won't land you an expensive court battle.

So that's it, For those who have commented or messaged me, with worried of witchbook becoming a nude site, Thank you for your concern, it has actually made me happy to see that enough people cared about the site, to worry.  Even if it was annoying to realize that I'd worded the poll so badly.

It was also Epically pleasing to see people actually coming to me for a change.  There's another epidemic problem where people seem to think I'm too busy, or important for them to come talk to me when there's a problem... I'm really not.

Regards,
DigitalMagick
Administrator.

 
Comments
Order by: 
Per page: 
 
  •  mackks wrote 95 Days Ago (neutral) 
     
    0
    its sad that the human form isnt accepted no matter what he/she is or isnt wearing animals have it better than humans and are accepted no matter what...the comment posted by you about the use of the coffee cup was dirrected at me and feel that your opinion is of no concern if i wanted your opinion i would have asked you to be my friend and would have listened to it just do your job on the site and keep your opinions to yourself in the future....BB
     
       
     
    -1 point
     
  •  RevJonathonSLowe wrote 106 Days Ago (neutral) 
     
    0
    Salut, Thunder. We meet again, haha.

    As for Nudity on the site: Pagans should not view nudity in a shameful way, nor should sex be a taboo. One of the greatest biblical differences between bible religions and Paganism is that Pagans do not suffer from the sin of viewing the naked body as something to hide. Sex is a ritual and the body was also the first altar which we had in order to pay homage to Deity. So it does come as a slight disappointment that (seemingly) several members of a Pagan network community thought it a concerning issue that nudity be shown.

    Agreed, it is best shown in a tasteful art form not meant for sexual lewdness, however one must also take into account the maturity of all involved in such a situation. This would not be an issue of concern if we could all trust one another to be adult in the situation and simply view the naked form as a work of art in and of itself. It is unfortunate to live in a world of mistrust even among places meant to form a solid community. Perhaps this type of reaction is something to think on for the future?

    I do agree that tasteful nudity should be permitted in a religious fashion, and I also agree that guidelines must be followed in order to protect not only this site from troublemakers, but also to protect the integrity of those who would participate in the sharing of such beauty. No matter where you go, somebody will always abuse the system, and I would never want someone to get hurt in any way, not even by reputation.

    I see the points on both sides, I just feel some people should have been less critical of the situation.
     
       
     
    0 points
     
  •  Azmaria wrote 109 Days Ago (neutral) 
     
    0
    LoL I thought we were talking about art in the poll. Shows how much I pay attention right?
     
       
     
     
    3 points
     
  •  Azalea_Rowan wrote 110 Days Ago (neutral) 
     
    0
    I have nothing mature to say so I'm going to refrain from commenting until the giggles are gone.
     
       
     
     
    3 points
     
  •  gulediskanahi wrote 110 Days Ago (neutral) 
     
    0
    Thanks for the update, home skillet! While nudity can be a beautiful thing, it's not worth going destitute for!
     
       
     
     
    4 points
     
  •  Deiseil wrote 110 Days Ago (neutral) 
     
    0
    Whew! Glad that's over. By the way...The GODDESS usually is depicted without nips....should be safe there I'm thinking. ;)
     
       
     
    3 points
     
  •  Dancing_Happens wrote 110 Days Ago (neutral) 
     
    0
    I think it was Epic of YOU to post the POLL and get People off their complacency and make them THINK for a few minutes about what they DO care about on WB!!! And I am one of those votes for "Tasteful Nudity". But if I don't get to taste it myself, how will you know it's good nudity or bad?! Hee hee hee!!!
     
       
     
    6 points
     
  •  Scyn wrote 110 Days Ago (neutral) 
     
    0
    I wouldn't say it was worded "so badly". I like that you polled about it. Thanks to all who commented. hehe...sorry it caused a bit of a frenzy. Glad to see it's all decided and sorted.
     
       
     
     
    5 points
     
  •  ThunderHorse wrote 111 Days Ago (neutral) 
     
    0
    lol - **chuckles**
     
       
     
     
    4 points
     
Actions
Shadows of the Shades

© 2010-2012 Witchbook™ (witchbook.net).