Overzealous moderation

[navpros]

NOT a good idea, I must say. If it is a policy to accompany every forum action with an e-mail or PM, we should treat every member the same, and not just some so-called "established" domainers.

My reason for saying "established" is because we all know that their are those who will abuse forum policy because they either have not read the guidelines or they simply have no regard for them. If I were to post the domain suckmyxxxx.com in the sales forum I do not think an email to me explaining WHY it was moved/removed would be needed. Common sense is used in this case. Just an example. That is why NOT every move/edit should be accompanied by an email. I guess I didn't exactly word it that way, but that is the point I was trying to get across. Sorry for not being more clear and thanks for bringing it to my attention.

 

[bidawinner]

Ok My first inclination was to side with Tops on this..in fact I PM him that.. Hotgirls is not an adult name iimo and I was voting that way in our Mod discussion..

BUT ...I did not completely read what the issue was..that the name points to an Adult website... that right their flush's any idea that somehow it isnt an adult name..

Sorry Tops.. but nothing vague about it..

 

[navpros]

Adult or not adult?

Adult. I figured that was why you moved it anyway. However, if it were not for the content, where would the name belong? I am interested to know if you, Mr Webname, would still consider the name to be adult or not. Want the general council to put it to a vote? :wink: I like the sound of that.....DNF COUNCIL.

 

[Mr Webname]

Adult. I figured that was why you moved it anyway. However, if it were not for the content, where would the name belong? I am interested to know if you, Mr Webname, would still consider the name to be adult or not. Want the general council to put it to a vote? :wink: I like the sound of that.....DNF COUNCIL.

The issue was the name as listed not what might have been

 

[navpros]

The issue was the name as listed not what might have been

Can you be a bit more clear? So your issue was with the name itself and not the content of the site? Just trying to determine the facts. I assumed you moved it due to the content of the site, and just above you did post the "warning" quote from the site itself, so this strengthened my theory.....errrr....in my opinion.

 

[Mr Webname]

A name leading to an adult site will always be an adult name - other names are decided as is - naturally it is likely that individuals will vary in views dependant on location, understanding and language.

 

[navpros]

A name leading to an adult site will always be an adult name - other names are decided as is - naturally it is likely that individuals will vary in views dependant on location, understanding and language.

Fair enough.

 

[David G]

A name leading to an adult site will always be an adult name - other names are decided as is - naturally it is likely that individuals will vary in views dependant on location, understanding and language.

I agree but why not apply the standard to everyone, for example, nothing seems to have been done about this one even though it was a known issue, and the porn site it led to was incredibly bad even locking up my computer and forcing a reboot!

http://www.dnforum.com/showthread.php?t=54496

 

[izoot]

All my point is be a bit less critical and maybe go as far as if you are posting a name that could have double meaning make sure it is redirected to a site other than adult when posting for sale. That way there is no risk of exposure to anyone that would be offended. Then point to whatever if the name doesn't sell or if you sell, then it doesn't apply.

Dandy raises an important question, is the problem with the name or the site content or both? I could understand if it is a live link to an adult site...but if its just a non active name and the name isn't blantantly adult ... whats the harm?

 

[aptimass]

I find it a bit hard to believe that anyone that has a domain that points to adult content would raise an issue when the post get's moved.

When I first read the post, I kinda figured that the domain had an adult theme and likely should have been moved. When I noticed that it linked to an adult site, I thought it downright silly that someone would say a moderator was overzealous for moving it.

Seems to me that there may be a vendetta somewhere, but this time it isn't Mr Webname.

 

[NameTower]

whitehouse.com = adult name?

used for an adult site, its not an adult name.

 

[David G]

whitehouse.com = adult name? used for an adult site, its not an adult name.

The basis would be best used if it really leads to an adult site if a non-obvious name. See my earlier post about that, but nothing seems to have been done about it, even after a complaint was filed and I wasted time visiting an adult site I would never visit if known, and locked up my computer too. It needs to be applied to all.

 

[Ed30]

It's not the mods who are over-zealous, it's the stupid rule. Anyone under 18 can access the adult sales section if they change their age anyway. Put the adult sales back in the normal sales thread and have an age verification rule on registration. Penalising those with adult names is unfair and detrimental to those members and their sales/deals.

 

[NameTower]

So Kick out the minors?

 

[puravida]

Hmm... lot of discrepancy here on this.

Not that anyone cares, but here's my 2-cents...

I agree with Topnames in that "hotgirls.tv" is not automatically "adult" --and that based on the merit of the name alone should not be moved.

I also agree with Topnames that for many of us, this is a business and "opinions" have to be carefully weighed so as not to harm that business.

However, in this case, I also agree with Mr. Webname in that this name (leading to "adult" content) should be considered "adult". Put up a makeup site, and I'll back the argument 100% that it should be allowed.

Further, nametower makes an excellent point about whitehouse.com that just makes the whole point blindingly clear.

And, cutting out minors like nametower can once again be a detriment to that business element --as I have seen him become a dominant force in the domain name trade/sell/buy game.

Regards,

Wesley

 

[NameTower]

If it means anything I've had dealings with adults who have done things you would not believe if I told you.

Age is not important in any regard to this business.

Thanks for the kind words Wesley.

 

[Anthony Ng]

Anyone under 18 can access the adult sales section if they change their age anyway.

Nope. I don't think that was, is and will be the case. You are basically saying that anybody can go to a gas station, take the money and walk away.

Put the adult sales back in the normal sales thread and have an age verification rule on registration.

If you mean using some kind of credit card based age verification, I can tell you out right that our membership will drop SIGNIFICANTLY in a very short timespan; and that is not good to our fellow members who actually need just the opposite - a wider base of potential buyers.

 

[Ed30]

So Kick out the minors?

No, I'm saying that anyone under 18 should not be viewing adult material on this site. Now whether someone under 18 is active in the adult domains/websites business - this site has no control over that, but it needs to cover itself ie using the age verification thing when viewing the adult sales thread. BUT the age verification for the adult section is useless as anyone can change their age within 30 seconds.
I have alot of respect for the members here (including yourself) who are under 18 and doing well in the domain industry. I think, generally, a separate adult sales section only encourages youngsters to go there and change their age - it's forbidden fruit. Early last year I pushed Namepopper for an adult section, but not an adult sales thread.
I say again - age verifcation on membership - lie if you want (I don't agree with it but that's the way of the world), but it covers the forum's back.

 

[Ed30]

Nameslave - I'm not saying cc verification - just the slack age verification that you are using now. I do not wish to see a drop in members - but I don't want minors viewing porn either - on the internet though - that is unavoidable - the same goes for this site.
There is a happy medium which is hard to find.

 

[Anthony Ng]

...cutting out minors like nametower can once again be a detriment to that business element ...

We all know that physical age is not always (and very often not) proportional to mental development. However, it is still widely used as a benchmark for legalizing activities from driving to drinking or even sex. I have no problem AT ALL with e.g. Jordon (NameTower) on a personal basis, but if we were to rid DNForum of minors, trust me, it won't do much harm to our membership collectively in terms of business. (And Jordon, I'll wait for you in the future! [/Joke])