Studio lighting!

Egnops · 27-11-06 03:03:49

For future references, I won't be responding to anymore juvenile remarks made towards me. We'd prefer to focus more on the opinions of the more mature contributors. I'll continue posting questions and those of you who feel comfortable enough to respond as you have been doing privately, continue on. We appreciate your contributions and input.

Thank you.

blissed · 27-11-06 03:04:22

Pollarchills post may have started a personal conflict, but it may have been
best to email him and see if you could come to some agreement. To attack back is usually pretty pointless because you usually endup with a continuous conflict. Nothing here is worth getting annoyed about, I think you should both just chill out and enjoy the site.

.

Egnops · 27-11-06 03:15:36

Perhaps your advise would do well towards other chatters, PolarChill for example, when new members post something he doesn't agree with. To refrain from personal attacks, and simply email them privately so that he can come to some form of agreement.

I find it odd that didn't come to your mind when he made his "contribution".

From this point on, the post I made above goes into effect.

dyslexius · 27-11-06 03:19:55

richard wrote:

dyslexius wrote:
richard wrote:
Yes I removed a thread. The poster gave a list of things he wanted to see people doing in the videos, and the rest of the posts were justified flames. It was just a waste of space.
If that's your final word on the subject, I'm going to have to withdraw from the forum. That was not the only thread with ignorant, shortsighted "suggestions" and resultant flames, and the "waste of space" - claim is a cop out. Censorship gives me the willies.
--dyslexius
Censorship would be removing information which we don't agree with. This is editing and it's unfortunately necessary on forums like this or they become dominated by the noisiest, most ignorant and ego-centric posters.
I for one will be sorry to see you go, so soon.

What I'm very troubled by is a selectivity that appears arbitrary. Several posts within this very thread (Studio lighting!) that have been allowed to live are more objectionable than post #1 of the thread that was removed. No feelette would have taken that removed post seriously, so obviously out of touch with reality was its author. I re-read the "Appreciation-Rule," and several posts in this thread do not stand the test any better than the removed post.

--dyslexius

Egnops · 27-11-06 03:27:13

I have to ask, what is up with all the name calling?

Did we stumble upon a site for adults or school- yard bullies?

We've decided to pull this site from our study. There are far too many other sites with just as high quality performance and member participation as this, without the juvenile contributors this site seems to have.

For those who were above this type of foolishness, again we thank you for your contributions. I'm sorry your experience in these forums isn't as enjoyable as you'd like them to be, but there are other sites out there that do require "adults only". If you would like to continue contributing your opinions, feel free to email at the same address as before. Our deadline won't arrive for a few more weeks. Any information you would like to contribute will be remain confidential, as always.

Again, your contributions have been greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Last edited by Egnops (27-11-06 03:38:47)

blissed · 27-11-06 03:35:37

dyslexius wrote:

richard wrote:
dyslexius wrote:
If that's your final word on the subject, I'm going to have to withdraw from the forum. That was not the only thread with ignorant, shortsighted "suggestions" and resultant flames, and the "waste of space" - claim is a cop out. Censorship gives me the willies.
--dyslexius
Censorship would be removing information which we don't agree with. This is editing and it's unfortunately necessary on forums like this or they become dominated by the noisiest, most ignorant and ego-centric posters.
I for one will be sorry to see you go, so soon.
What I'm very troubled by is a selectivity that appears arbitrary. Several posts within this very thread (Studio lighting!) that have been allowed to live are more objectionable than post #1 of the thread that was removed. No feelette would have taken that removed post seriously, so obviously out of touch with reality was its author. I re-read the "Appreciation-Rule," and several posts in this thread do not stand the test any better than the removed post.
--dyslexius

I know how your feeling dyslexias but I ran a social forum for a while and admin was a lot more difficult than I thought. you have to make decisions quite quickly and nobodies perfect, so it may be that what you say is true and there are posts in this thread that are worse than the opener that got deleted, but if you remove a post from a thread that several people have already commented on you loose it's continuety and the other posts apear meaningless, a bit like editing out some parts of a conversation. People are sometimes outraged at the removal of material they haven't had a chance to see and have an opinion on but in the end I suppose you have to trust the mods opinion to some degree.

.

Last edited by blissed (27-11-06 03:36:24)

blissed · 27-11-06 03:56:04

Egnops wrote:

We've decided to pull this site from our study. There are far too many other sites with just as high quality performance and member participation as this, without the juvenile contributors this site seems to have..

Laugh out fucking loud you all had a meeting just now did you Try the Abby winters forum you'll be amongst friends, you won't find any juvenile respondents there

.

gala · 27-11-06 06:08:57

yikes.

i sure am disappointed that we aren't mature enough to be 'researched.'

maybe we need the incense of adulthood to cover the stank of our childish bullshit. i've been burning californian juniper in my toilet and it's worked wonders.

msnevil · 27-11-06 07:46:59

Or perhaps how many licks does it take to get to the center of the ...

LMAO! at your earlier comment. I guess we all are researcher's.

blissed wrote:

Does your research involve you wanking at all. Lol

msnevil · 27-11-06 08:08:31

Kidding aside, Like You I once ran a forum\e-group. Which some of the members here participated in. A certain member banned here caused trouble there about "anal" and "squirting" vids. And it caused all sorts of trouble. I don't know how many threads I deleted over a stupid flame war.

When I was a moderator, I really couldn't express myself in my usual. "Juvenile" manner. I usually had a hands off approach to forum topics, and tried to stay neutral at all times. (But so many times, I wanted to tell somebody to piss off.)

Personly, I think blissed should be a moderator here as well. The character assassination and name calling serve's no purpose here at all. And from what I have seen. Blissed is pretty good at remaining his cool, and is generally liked by all the members here.

With him and Elfman, as moderators. The administrative staff don't have to be accused of censoring others, or other personal issues. And they can have more time doing what they do best. ie The vids.

blissed wrote:

I know how your feeling dyslexias but I ran a social forum for a while and admin was a lot more difficult than I thought. you have to make decisions quite quickly and nobodies perfect, so it may be that what you say is true and there are posts in this thread that are worse than the opener that got deleted, but if you remove a post from a thread that several people have already commented on you loose it's continuety and the other posts apear meaningless, a bit like editing out some parts of a conversation. People are sometimes outraged at the removal of material they haven't had a chance to see and have an opinion on but in the end I suppose you have to trust the mods opinion to some degree.
.

polarchill · 27-11-06 10:18:59

blissed wrote:

Egnops wrote:
We've decided to pull this site from our study. There are far too many other sites with just as high quality performance and member participation as this, without the juvenile contributors this site seems to have..
Laugh out fucking loud you all had a meeting just now did you

Um . . . yeah, I'm similarly impressed by the amazing efficiency of his little research group on this Sunday afternoon. I'm imagining some type of vote involving a houseplant, two teddy bears, and three voices in someone's head.

Egnops · 27-11-06 11:44:35

The work week of my colleague and I, who happen to supervise this particular study, begins on Sunday and ends on Thursday. If you knew as much about research as you try to imply, you'd know it punches no time clock.

Your ignorance knows no bounds.

blissed · 27-11-06 12:15:39

Oh yes of course it does I think it's really nice of you to give your house plants and teddy bears friday and sat off. I just talk to mine, their my best friends

.

Last edited by blissed (27-11-06 12:32:22)

blissed · 27-11-06 13:09:01

msnevil wrote:

When I was a moderator, I really couldn't express myself in my usual. "Juvenile" manner......Personly, I think blissed should be a moderator

Thanks for volenteering me for that msn

.

richard · 27-11-06 13:20:18

dyslexius wrote:

What I'm very troubled by is a selectivity that appears arbitrary. Several posts within this very thread (Studio lighting!) that have been allowed to live are more objectionable than post #1 of the thread that was removed. No feelette would have taken that removed post seriously, so obviously out of touch with reality was its author. I re-read the "Appreciation-Rule," and several posts in this thread do not stand the test any better than the removed post.
--dyslexius

The deleted thread/post wasn't bona fide. It was a troll.

gala · 27-11-06 17:43:10

you harlot.

msnevil · 27-11-06 19:42:33

Don't mention it. I even suggested that they give you a Camcorder to record yourself. But I heard rumors that Richard mentioned that his Desk doesn't need more support. So I gave up the idea.

Still fuzzy Bunny wanking has a ring to it.

blissed wrote:

Thanks for volenteering me for that msn
.

dyslexius · 27-11-06 21:31:56

Liandra wrote:

...I think I'll just go back to my reserach team that consists of my vibrator, a tube of lube and the bed side light...we're working on a project called "if I wank all night will i trip over my distended and darkened labia walking to the bathroom in the morning and crack my head open" I'm hoping not because I have a hot date on Wednesday night where I plan to challenge the theory again but with real sex

Liandra, if Richard can put up with the likes of you, down deep inside he's obviously more tolerant and fair-minded than I thought.

--dyslexius

Last edited by dyslexius (27-11-06 21:33:54)

polarchill · 27-11-06 21:42:42

Liandra wrote:

Woah Nelly! What an entertaining read this thread has been. Enraging and yet delightful and occaisionally fucking hilarious (Polarchill and ISMoffice are now officially on my favourite people list...which Max is obviously already on).

You make me blush. Fortunately, my insurance company informs me I'm allowed to speak to you, even if I shouldn't watch your next video.

Liandra wrote:

Anyhoo It's all too much for me... I think I'll just go back to my reserach team that consists of my vibrator, a tube of lube and the bed side light...we're working on a project called "if I wank all night will i trip over my distended and darkened labia walking to the bathroom in the morning and crack my head open" I'm hoping not because I have a hot date on Wednesday night where I plan to challenge the theory again but with real sex

Real sex? Scary stuff, that. Good luck, soldier, I'm behind you all the way . . . Oh, and my attorney informs me I should mention that in this case "behind you all the way" is just an expression.

Arielle · 28-11-06 01:53:46

Wow. I go away for the weekend and spend Monday actually working and look what happens.

Thankfully Liandra is fighting the good fight, with the aid of her vibrator. The world is in safe (if slippery) hands. I'm keen to hear results of your colour and size study and while you are at it please find out if nasty witches with their satanic herbal remedies float when you throw them in the river.

I think I need to sew up some capes with matching unitards. Ideas for designs welcome.

blissed · 28-11-06 19:11:18

Arielle (aka ISM_Office) wrote:

The world is in safe (if slippery) hands.

Lol

.

Gertrud1 · 22-01-07 06:30:34

I haven't read all the comments in this thread, which I know is naughty of me, but I want to pipe up as a WOMAN and agree that I think it's too dark. Perhaps if these clips were projected on a big screen in a dark movie theater, it wouldn't be such a struggle. But when you're watching on a small screen, it can be hard especially for those of us old "four eyes" in the group. I am surprised that some of the posters were so critical of the original comment, a bit blunt though it was. I didn't think we was saying he wants a big juicy beaver shot nor did he say he wants a floodlight on anything. Let's not jump to conclusions or get defensive people. He might have sounded a little bossy, but let's not assume he's Joe Schmoe porn consumer who just wants his parts with neon labels so he knows what they are. He said he wants to see the faces, the arms, the tummies (aw cute) as well as the "girly bits! It's a bit of a funny cake and eat it too reaction to shame some one for expressing the desire to see what is already being offered up quite explicitly for voyeurism. And I agree, sometimes it's just really hard to see in that dark shadowy studio, and when there is more natural lighting in the home made videos I get a much clearer sense of the woman's experience because I can see her face better, and consequently her nether regions better too. I do, however, wonder if one motivation for the dim lighting is an attempt at offering a shred of modesty to the shyer contributors? But if so, aren't we already seeing pretty much whatever they want us to see? I mean, what are we afraid of? Why not see a little more clearly, these ladies all have wonderful things to show us, I'd like to see without straining my eyes. Okay now I will shut up and read the rest of the comments, perhaps this got resolved harmoniously already and I don't even know it.

Last edited by Gertrud1 (22-01-07 06:37:59)

Gertrud1 · 22-01-07 06:56:59

Monkey13 wrote:

By the way, one merit of keeping vagina, etc. in shadow is that the viewers are saved from seeing what seem to me to be the signs of sluttiness/whorishness of the models, such as their darkened vagina lips (sign of overfucking and overmasturbating?) and ugly tattoos.

Okay now I suddenly am in the put a flood light on the pussy!!! camp because this monkey guy obviously needs an anatomy lesson. Monkeyboy, do you know that people's skin tones vary? Do you know that some people have brown eyes and some people have blue eyes? Have you ever put your face up close to a woman's vulva with your eyes open? Do you even know what a vulva is? A vagina actually does not have lips, it is a hole. A vulva has lips, two sets in fact, why don't you get in wikipedia or something. And they can be pink, they can be red, they can be purple. And masturbation does not kill kittens.

and why doesn't mine get the neat box around the quote like everyone else's??

And I just realized exactly how OLD this thread is, I feel a little like I showed up six months late to the birthday party.

But can I also say, that my above comment isn't supposed to be about saying what would give me a bigger (girl) boner, but I think it really making a legitimate point about (non boner related) user friendliness? I mean I want to see these women because they are showing up, they are showing themselves to us, so I think actually the respectful things is to shine a light on that choice, but maybe the rest of you all just have much better eye sight than me, but I had my vision checked recently and I am wearing my glasses....

Last edited by Gertrud1 (22-01-07 07:11:00)

richard · 22-01-07 07:16:06

I don't think you'll hear a peep out of Monkey Boy, we gave him a bunch of bananas and sent him to meditation camp.

The_Elfman · 22-01-07 14:19:32

Gertrud1 wrote:

and why doesn't mine get the neat box around the quote like everyone else's??

I've done it for you Gertrud1. If you want to find out how to do this click [img] tag: below the text box. If you need any further help in using the forum please feel free to email me. I'm always at your service.

#101 27-11-06 03:03:49

Re: Studio lighting!

#102 27-11-06 03:04:22

Re: Studio lighting!

#103 27-11-06 03:15:36

Re: Studio lighting!

#104 27-11-06 03:19:55

Re: Studio lighting!

#105 27-11-06 03:27:13

Re: Studio lighting!

#106 27-11-06 03:35:37

Re: Studio lighting!

#107 27-11-06 03:56:04

Re: Studio lighting!

#108 27-11-06 06:08:57

Re: Studio lighting!

#109 27-11-06 07:46:59

Re: Studio lighting!

#110 27-11-06 08:08:31

Re: Studio lighting!

#111 27-11-06 10:18:59

Re: Studio lighting!

#112 27-11-06 11:44:35

Re: Studio lighting!

#113 27-11-06 12:15:39

Re: Studio lighting!

#114 27-11-06 13:09:01

Re: Studio lighting!

#115 27-11-06 13:20:18

Re: Studio lighting!

#116 27-11-06 17:43:10

Re: Studio lighting!

#117 27-11-06 19:42:33

Re: Studio lighting!

#118 27-11-06 21:31:56

Re: Studio lighting!

#119 27-11-06 21:42:42

Re: Studio lighting!

#120 28-11-06 01:53:46

Re: Studio lighting!

#121 28-11-06 19:11:18

Re: Studio lighting!

#122 22-01-07 06:30:34

Re: Studio lighting!

#123 22-01-07 06:56:59

Re: Studio lighting!

#124 22-01-07 07:16:06

Re: Studio lighting!

#125 22-01-07 14:19:32

Re: Studio lighting!

Board footer