Mountain Project or Porno Project?

A few days ago I finally got around to giving one star to a picture of a naked lady ice climbing on mountain project. By doing so, it no longer shows up in the "pictures of the moment" slide-show on the home page of mountain project. (Many thanks again to the maintainers of mountain project for providing this feature.)

And now here's another picture to which I'll be giving one star...

mountainproject.com/v/10637…

I don't really find the picture that offensive at all, but it's not safe for work, and I don't appreciate running into these kinds of pictures all the time. Do we really have to upload this kind of crap? Am I the only one who feels this way?

Let the flaming begin! :)

1. Maybe don't be on MP at work? Try working.
2. It's a woman's back. Seriously?
3. There is nothing sexual about either image.
4. Referring to either image as "porno" is simultaneously prude and perverted.

spencerparkin wrote: Am I the only one who feels this way? :)

Yes

Better remove this one too then...

mountainproject.com/v/new-c…

spence,
Haven't you tried this before? Just keep the F5 handy.

Agarciap wrote:Better remove this one too then... mountainproject.com/v/new-c…

haha +1. going to have to put on incognito mode for this one....

J mac wrote:1. Maybe don't be on MP at work? Try working. 2. It's a woman's back. Seriously? 3. There is nothing sexual about either image. 4. Referring to either image as "porno" is simultaneously prude and perverted.

You're way out of line on this dude, a woman not wearing a veil is clearly a witch. Burn the witch !
But seriously nail on the head for everything but the first point, because fuck work. I highly recommend taking all of ones poops and doing all of ones internet trolling while on the clock.

I'll just leave this here for spite;
youtube.com/watch?v=utm2zbi…

I agree. Let's start a link collection here of offending pictures, so we can, jer..., uh, one star off to them.

. I'll just leave this here for spite; /quote>

hahah that just made my morning.
'Remember we are climber that fuck, not fuckers who climb'

Holy shit I read this post and the went back to the homepage and the image he mentioned was there:

mountainproject.com/v/10664…

?????? How did that even happen LOL

Suggestion: Increase your pay grade such that you get an office and no one else can see your screen.

Nudity is not porn.

That being said, I Agree that many images on the site make the site not work appropriate.

spencerparkin wrote:A few days ago I finally got around to giving one star to a picture of a naked lady ice climbing on mountain project. By doing so, it no longer shows up in the "pictures of the moment" :)

Alright man I started by flaming you, and I shouldn't have because its a silly thing to do.
But in all honesty, someone iceclimbing naked is porno for you?
I haven't seen the picture but when you say to me "A picture of a woman iceclimbing naked" I want to see it, for the same reason that I would want to see it if you replaced "woman" with "man", because someone who iceclimbs naked is super badass and it sounds like a badass picture.
Also, women should probably be climbing in burkas. Because the internet is for children.
I sincerely hope that MP does not yield to a small group of puritan fanatics and create a system which, as you so pertinently outlined in your last post would cause a whole lot of real problems in order to resolve an imaginary one(thats not exactly what you said, but I'm paraphrasing with my "not batshit crazy" filter on).

Are national geographic reports on tribal peoples who have different ideas about what parts of their bodies are naturally imbued with sin and shame pornographic?
Are lingerie catalogues pornographic?
Is classic art pornographic?

I think the answer is pretty clear, when you are an adolescent in the height of puberty, just about everything is pornographic.

from merrian-websters;
pornography
noun por·nog·ra·phy \-fē\

: movies, pictures, magazines, etc., that show or describe naked people or sex in a very open and direct way in order to cause sexual excitement

If a naked woman climbing gets you hard; I just don't not what to tell you little buddy.

spencerparkin wrote: and I don't appreciate running into these kinds of pictures all the time.

What a load of crap, out of the thousands of pics on here you find 2 that you deem pornographic (which they are not). I'm sure you would also like them to change their name to Mormon Project, but that's not going to happen either.

Buck up and don't be such a prude. If your work is so uptight that those images flashing across the slideshow for a second would get you in trouble, I'd say get another job. As a boss, I would only be concerned if you were wasting time or somehow using them to harass a coworker. It would be about what you would be doing with the images, not that they were on the site; meaning if you were getting all excited about them and making your coworkers uncomfortable, then it would be a problem with you.

Come on, a tasteful and beautiful representation of apres climb having a bear and a dip (from the back with nothing showing) is "this kind of crap"?

spencerparkin wrote: Thanks, Super Fluke. I believe it's important and takes courage to stand up for some sense of morality in a society where those who do have become more and more the minority.

I find this self-righteous rhetoric offensive and very misguided.

"I think mountainproject.com should adhere to the arbitrary moral code of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"

...is another way of putting it

spencerparkin wrote:but it's not safe for work

Since when it is a requirement that internet sites be safe for work? This isn't your company database, it's a climbing website. There is no obligation to be on mountain project when you are at work. I guess I don't see the issue. If you find content of a website, whether it's mountain project or otherwise, offensive or unfit for a work environment, don't log on.

spencerparkin wrote: Thanks, Super Fluke. I believe it's important and takes courage to stand up for some sense of morality in a society where those who do have become more and more the minority.

Wow, that is just way the fuck out of line. YOUR definition of morality is not MY definition of morality. There is nothing morally wrong with depictions of the human body. There is absolutely nothing even vaguely objectionable to the two images you pointed out.

Now, I suppose you disagree with me, and that's precisely the point. YOUR MORALS are not MY MORALS. There are some universally held ethical standards, but a prudish reaction to the sight of skin is not one of them, any more than a violent reaction to portrayals of some alleged prophet are.

Claiming that YOUR moral standards means taht you are a minority and the majority fo the rest of us are IMMORAL is insulting, belittling, demeaning and violates Rule 1: Don't be an asshat.

Jamespio wrote: Wow, that is just way the fuck out of line. YOUR definition of morality is not MY definition of morality. There is nothing morally wrong with depictions of the human body. There is absolutely nothing even vaguely objectionable to the two images you pointed out. Now, I suppose you disagree with me, and that's precisely the point. YOUR MORALS are not MY MORALS. There are some universally held ethical standards, but a prudish reaction to the sight of skin is not one of them, any more than a violent reaction to portrayals of some alleged prophet are. Claiming that YOUR moral standards means taht you are a minority and the majority fo the rest of us are IMMORAL is insulting, belittling, demeaning and violates Rule 1: Don't be an asshat.

This is the voice of the secular inquisition.

J mac wrote:1. Maybe don't be on MP at work? Try working. 2. It's a woman's back. Seriously? 3. There is nothing sexual about either image. 4. Referring to either image as "porno" is simultaneously prude and perverted.

+4