MOCpages : Share your LEGO® creations
LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop MOCpages help
Welcome to the world's greatest LEGO fan community!
Explore cool creations, share your own, and have lots of fun together.  ~  It's all free!
Conversation »
inapropriet
Join to comment
This has alot of bad stuff in the main photo. I think it should be put on the PG.
Permalink
| September 26, 2011, 10:30 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Caleb S
This has alot of bad stuff in the main photo. I think it should be put on the PG.


I'd love to help you out Caleb but... no link?

Gimme a link and I'll check it.
Permalink
| September 26, 2011, 11:30 am
Quoting Chris Phipson

I'd love to help you out Caleb but... no link?

Gimme a link and I'll check it.

sorry, I can't belive I completely forgot that...
http://www.mocpages.com/moc.php/285570
Permalink
| September 26, 2011, 12:51 pm
I don't see a problem here.
True, it's a bit crude, but no-one forced you to click on it.

If we're going to go on about inappropriate content again, I want to point out that "inappropriate" is a personal thing, few people have exactly the same definitions of it, etcetera, and if you're going to try and get things deleted because you don't like the language involved, the next step is the deleting of anything remotely offensive.

Like these mocs:
http://mocpages.com/moc.php/86688
http://mocpages.com/moc.php/200347
http://mocpages.com/moc.php/20127
Permalink
| September 27, 2011, 10:39 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Caleb S
sorry, I can't belive I completely forgot that...
http://www.mocpages.com/moc.php/285570

Sorry Caleb, but that moc is ok. I know there's a bit of language in it (and for that I'm going to mark it as PG) but it doesn't need to be deleted.

If you run across this kind of thing in the future (with the bad language) my advice would be to "politely" (and that's the key, do it nicely and you'll get a positive reaction) ask the person to please put a PG rating on the moc.

Thanks!
~Chris.

Permalink
| September 27, 2011, 4:28 pm
I think this guy should be banned. He doesn't have PG or anything: http://www.mocpages.com/moc.php/121155
Permalink
| November 22, 2011, 2:17 pm
Quoting Lego Builders
He doesn't have PG or anything

Because he isn't active anymore and the Mocs were added before we got the PG filter. Although they should have it.

Permalink
| November 22, 2011, 2:29 pm
Quoting Lego Builders
I think this guy should be banned. He doesn't have PG or anything: http://www.mocpages.com/moc.php/121155


Good find. Looks like it was added before the PG filter though - I assume Mods can fix that, no reason to ban him.
Permalink
| November 22, 2011, 2:31 pm
Quoting Lego Builders
I think this guy should be banned. He doesn't have PG or anything: http://www.mocpages.com/moc.php/121155


Yeah he needs a PG but not a ban. It's controversial but also educational.

Permalink
| November 22, 2011, 2:50 pm
 Group admin 
It's been PG'd. Thanks for the heads up guys!
Permalink
| November 22, 2011, 3:25 pm
Uhm, this isn't about a MOC, but lately, there has been some inappropriate ads that have been around MOC pages. I am not sure if anyone has seen it, but if you have, you would know that he has a Roman theme to it. Should that be brought to attention?
Permalink
| December 16, 2011, 11:13 am
Quoting Achintya Prasad
Uhm, this isn't about a MOC, but lately, there has been some inappropriate ads that have been around MOC pages. I am not sure if anyone has seen it, but if you have, you would know that he has a Roman theme to it. Should that be brought to attention?

Could you perhaps give us a link to these claims?
Permalink
| December 16, 2011, 7:53 pm
Well, the problem is that it just randomly happens. I can't really pinpoint when or where the ad is. If it is still around.
Permalink
| December 16, 2011, 7:56 pm
 Group admin 

We've had concerns of this nature before - but the issue has been more a matter of an individual's definition of what's "inappropriate."

I've not seen the image, but let me say...while scantily clad figures may be a bit risque, they're allowed in the ads (just as women in bikini's are perfectly acceptable in a television commercial). Now, having said that, are we talking about something else that we should be concerned about?

Permalink
| December 17, 2011, 5:59 am
I'm not sure about this, I'd be interested to know what the Mods think:

http://www.mocpages.com/home.php/68158

Does this count as freedom of expression and is therefore fine?

To me it's just a page to have a rant at other users of MOCpages, and as it has no LEGO on it at all, I'd argue it should be deleted (not just the rant, but the account too).

Please, to anyone who is reading this and is somehow linked to the extensive and boring back story about how this chap ended up with a page like this, DO NOT explain it, just do an objective 'Is this account appropriate for MOCpages or not?' - regardless of whose it is or how it got like this.

Thanks
Permalink
| December 17, 2011, 7:32 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Ape Fight
I'm not sure about this, I'd be interested to know what the Mods think:

http://www.mocpages.com/home.php/68158

Does this count as freedom of expression and is therefore fine?

To me it's just a page to have a rant at other users of MOCpages, and as it has no LEGO on it at all, I'd argue it should be deleted (not just the rant, but the account too).

Please, to anyone who is reading this and is somehow linked to the extensive and boring back story about how this chap ended up with a page like this, DO NOT explain it, just do an objective 'Is this account appropriate for MOCpages or not?' - regardless of whose it is or how it got like this.

Thanks


Meh... he's not hurting anyone (yet) and is not doing anything wrong. As this point I'd say just ignore him. If things start to escalate then we can see what what's going on. Till then... meh.
Permalink
| December 17, 2011, 8:27 am
Quoting Chris Phipson

Meh... he's not hurting anyone (yet) and is not doing anything wrong. As this point I'd say just ignore him. If things start to escalate then we can see what what's going on. Till then... meh.


Fair do's. Cheers Chris
Permalink
| December 17, 2011, 8:50 am
Quoting Achintya Prasad
Uhm, this isn't about a MOC, but lately, there has been some inappropriate ads that have been around MOC pages. I am not sure if anyone has seen it, but if you have, you would know that he has a Roman theme to it. Should that be brought to attention?

I know which add your talking about, it could be inappropriate for younger veiwers.

It has a picture of a scantily clad woman next to the words "One click for a Roman orgy."
Permalink
| December 17, 2011, 11:21 am
Alright, I see how you judge ads as good and bad. And lately, I haven't seen it, so I guess there isn't any harm done really. I just wanted to make sure, though.
Permalink
| December 17, 2011, 10:28 pm
Quoting Ru Corder
I know which add your talking about, it could be inappropriate for younger veiwers.

It has a picture of a scantily clad woman next to the words "One click for a Roman orgy."


I just saw your comment. Yep, that is the one.
Permalink
| December 17, 2011, 10:32 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Achintya Prasad
Alright, I see how you judge ads as good and bad. And lately, I haven't seen it, so I guess there isn't any harm done really. I just wanted to make sure, though.


Not a problem. If we all stay vigilant, it helps with every aspect of the site. Your input's appreciated!

Permalink
| December 18, 2011, 7:04 am
Quoting Mark Kelso

Not a problem. If we all stay vigilant, it helps with every aspect of the site. Your input's appreciated!

Thanks. Today I have seen the add a few times, but I can't add a link becuase I see it on the side of pages like:
Thanks for rating this creation
Add a lego creation.
But I will take your advise and ignore it. After all, it is funding an awesome website!
Permalink
| December 18, 2011, 12:54 pm
I REALLY think this needs a PG: http://www.mocpages.com/moc.php/37022

And another thing.....A PG isn't really useful if the main photo is already inappropriate and is visible without clicking into it. What do you guys think?
Permalink
| December 19, 2011, 8:07 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Lego Builders
I REALLY think this needs a PG: http://www.mocpages.com/moc.php/37022

And another thing.....A PG isn't really useful if the main photo is already inappropriate and is visible without clicking into it. What do you guys think?


Yeah that one's been around for a while. I think you're right, though, and I went ahead and flagged it as PG.

By the way, if a creation is flagged for Parental Guidance you won't see even the main pic - you'll just get the generic MOCpages image for a PG posting.

Permalink
| December 20, 2011, 8:38 am
Quoting Lego Builders
I REALLY think this needs a PG: http://www.mocpages.com/moc.php/37022

And another thing.....A PG isn't really useful if the main photo is already inappropriate and is visible without clicking into it. What do you guys think?

I think a Parental Guidance warning reduces the views a post gets by at least 75%, which makes it useless.


Myself, I go on the general assumption that people who see my name linked to something will decide "Oh, it's one of THAT guy's projects, it's probably not completely safe for a sensitive soul like me" and go somewhere else.

Haven't got any complaints yet, so it seems to be working.
Permalink
| December 20, 2011, 8:42 am
Quoting Mark Kelso
By the way, if a creation is flagged for Parental Guidance you won't see even the main pic - you'll just get the generic MOCpages image for a PG posting.


I don't remember any MOCpages image over the PG main photo, for MOCs that have already been flagged. Are they suppose to be there? Thanks for adding the PG!
Permalink
| December 20, 2011, 10:56 am
 Group moderator 
to the best of my knowledge, even on PG mocs an image is visible, this is why some people have been asked to discretely edit their preview picture to avoid causing offence even though younger mocers cannot view the other images.

if in doubt, select "other" on the uploader for the preview so there is NO image visible, that way no one can complain that the pg moc is still visible to non pg members.
Permalink
| December 20, 2011, 11:02 am
Quoting andros tempest
to the best of my knowledge, even on PG mocs an image is visible, this is why some people have been asked to discretely edit their preview picture to avoid causing offence even though younger mocers cannot view the other images.

if in doubt, select "other" on the uploader for the preview so there is NO image visible, that way no one can complain that the pg moc is still visible to non pg members.


Okay, thanks for the info.

Permalink
| December 20, 2011, 1:02 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Lego Builders

I don't remember any MOCpages image over the PG main photo, for MOCs that have already been flagged. Are they suppose to be there? Thanks for adding the PG!


No, sorry - I misinterpreted the reference in the conversation. You guys were refering to the preview one sees when browsing through the site, for example - which does show the image. Don't know if there's anything to be done about that or not, but I might bring it up in conversation with Sean at some point to get his thoughts.

Permalink
| December 20, 2011, 3:26 pm
Yeah, I haven't really ever seen the main image that has a PG blocked when I am cruising around the 'pages. However, I do think that it is a good idea to try to find a way to block the main pic. Because, I mean, there isn't a point in putting a block when you can still what is trying to be hidden. And,if it gets to it, MOCpages might want to consider a rating system of a MOC similiar that we see on movies, like G,PG,PG-13,R, and if I missed any.
Permalink
| December 20, 2011, 6:59 pm
Quoting andros tempest
to the best of my knowledge, even on PG mocs an image is visible, this is why some people have been asked to discretely edit their preview picture to avoid causing offence even though younger mocers cannot view the other images.

People put things on mocpages to get opinions.
People who don't see something won't have an opinion on it.
People don't see things that they don't click on.
People rarely click on mocs with that Parental Guidance thing attached, because it's such a pain to click through that form.
People NEVER click on mocs without an image.

There is no way on heaven or earth that you'd get more than five or six views on a moc that had both an R rating and no main picture.

And that is why almost no-one enables Parental Guidance on their mocs. The ones who DO tend to have enough fame to counteract the effects to a degree.
Permalink
| December 20, 2011, 10:52 pm
Quoting Areetsa C
I don't see a problem here.
True, it's a bit crude, but no-one forced you to click on it.

If we're going to go on about inappropriate content again, I want to point out that "inappropriate" is a personal thing, few people have exactly the same definitions of it, etcetera, and if you're going to try and get things deleted because you don't like the language involved, the next step is the deleting of anything remotely offensive.

Like these mocs:
http://mocpages.com/moc.php/86688
http://mocpages.com/moc.php/200347
http://mocpages.com/moc.php/20127

um how is the last one harmful.
Permalink
| December 20, 2011, 11:11 pm
Quoting Adam Weaver
um how is the last one harmful.

It is offensive to me. Therefore it is inappropriate and should be banned.
Permalink
| December 20, 2011, 11:18 pm
Quoting Areetsa C
It is offensive to me. Therefore it is inappropriate and should be banned.

But that is just YOUR opinion, some people could like it, but not me. I don't really e
Permalink
| December 20, 2011, 11:45 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Areetsa C
Quoting andros tempest
to the best of my knowledge, even on PG mocs an image is visible, this is why some people have been asked to discretely edit their preview picture to avoid causing offence even though younger mocers cannot view the other images.

People put things on mocpages to get opinions.
People who don't see something won't have an opinion on it.
People don't see things that they don't click on.
People rarely click on mocs with that Parental Guidance thing attached, because it's such a pain to click through that form.
People NEVER click on mocs without an image.

There is no way on heaven or earth that you'd get more than five or six views on a moc that had both an R rating and no main picture.

And that is why almost no-one enables Parental Guidance on their mocs. The ones who DO tend to have enough fame to counteract the effects to a degree.


whether they do or they don't the pg filter exists for a reason. Anyone not prepared to use it when it IS appropriate, really shouldn't be here (in my honest opinion).

As for the question "where does it end?" the definition of inappropriate is set by the mods and admins, they have to enforce the rules. I yield to their definitions on this subject.

While it is true, it CAN be a subjective opinion, the rules aren't open to the reinterpretation of members, we don't get to decide what Mark and co will feel needs to be deleted or not - So I'm not about to debate their choices.

If YOU feel you get fewer views by having a PG filter that's your choice not to use it, but it isn't mine. I personally don't care how many views I get or whether my stuff is more popular than anyone else. So I really couldn't careless if other people find it an issue.

As for not having a preview pic reducing the number of views and putting people off. I agree it does, which is why I'd encourage people to use one when they can, but if they only have images intended for PG or above to hand, then it would be better to use non than have the mods insist on it being removed.

This is a suggestion to reduce inconvenience to both the admins and members, not to suit my personal preferences.

I'm not arguing against having mature content, I'm just saying we are on a website with immature people, it is APPROPRIATE to take that into consideration when choosing a preview image and whether to use the PG tag or not.



Permalink
| December 21, 2011, 3:23 am
Quoting S.T.S The Forgotten
But that is just YOUR opinion, some people could like it, but not me. I don't really e

rror 404 not found
Permalink
| December 21, 2011, 4:19 am
Quoting Stef Mos
rror 404 not found

.... I meant to type more than that.
Permalink
| December 21, 2011, 4:27 am
 Group admin 
A very small percentage of the community posts PG content to begin with. Then there are even fewer from that point who have a main pic that should be flagged.

I think the best thing to do, given that Sean's already spent a good bit of time creating the PG system, is to just let mods or admins know when you run across a main pic that has questionable content (like the one that started this conversation). We can then determine on an individual basis whether it needs to be eliminated, changed, or just left alone.

By the way, in the case of the biker chick, I'm tempted to say that it's okay...pushing it...but okay. I might see what Chris or Sean thinks, to get their opinions, but it's been around for quite a while, and for the time being I'll let it stay.

Permalink
| December 21, 2011, 8:04 am
Quoting S.T.S The Forgotten
.... I meant to type more than that.

Yet you did not do so. ILLOGICAL! ILLOGICAL! BEEP BOOP BEEP BEEP
Permalink
| December 21, 2011, 8:08 am
Other topics
Group Hacking Issue Updated today
Questionable Home Page Updated Sunday
Report non-Lego thread 16 Updated Saturday
student teen kid toy play lego child video game hobby blocks construction toy legos fun games



LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop MOCpages help


You Your home page | LEGO creations | Favorite builders
Activity Activity | Comments | Creations
Explore Explore | Recent | Groups
MOCpages is an unofficial, fan-created website. LEGO® and the brick configuration are property of The LEGO Group, which does not sponsor, own, or endorse this site.
©2002-2014 Sean Kenney Design Inc | Privacy policy | Terms of use