what constitutes hardcore on the index page?

[RedCherry]

We had a submission to one of our link lists that MadHatter rejected due to an banner we felt was hardcore. The submittee said its not. Figured I'd ask what do you think? view banner

I figure a guy that has a cock between a chick's tits might not involve penetration, but it is also something I wouldn't want a minor to see either.

[ponygirl]

Originally Posted by RedCherry

We had a submission to one of our link lists that MadHatter rejected due to an banner we felt was hardcore. The submittee said its not. Figured I'd ask what do you think? view banner

I figure a guy that has a cock between a chick's tits might not involve penetration, but it is also something I wouldn't want a minor to see either.

I don't decline for hardcore on the index as long as it's not too outrageous, but I would probably call that hardcore, even without penetration. My take is that any sexual contact involving genitals is hardcore.

[MrYum]

A banner like that is one that would have me scratching my head a bit too. Normally, I use the old 'penetration or cumshots' standard. Would make the decision tough if the rest of the site were clean.

Assuming the site was right otherwise, I'd probably let it go...especially since the graphics on that banner aren't exactly crisp and clear.

[Useless]

I've considered requiring hardcore images on the index of free sites submitted to Earl. Thought that would be an interesting and honest spin.

I'm a little confused as to why you are worried about minors coming from your porn site seeing porn on another which you link to.

[Cleo]

I sell porn so you can have porn on all your pages including porn on your entrance page.

[plateman]

how can a LL that links to pay links with most tours are hardcore, say hey free site builders, no hardcore banners or images on your index that is on a LL page that links to hardcore pay links...

unless you only link to softcore tours or have the hardcore tours on a password protected category page....

[RedCherry]

Ok allowing it makes sense, but why have I always heard, never allow any hardcore on an index page? Or is this more for base domain index pages, not domain.com/someotherfolder/ type indexes?

[Cleo]

I think if you build a promo site with a title something like Hot Nasty Sluts Having Hot Creamy Jizzim Ejaculated Into All Their Blood Rich Inflamed Orifices then it really doesn't matter how hardcore a pic may be on any of its pages.

[japamor]

Hey Red Cherry
Nothng to do with the subject under discussion but I love your avatar!

[pornhitzman]

Originally Posted by plateman

how can a LL that links to pay links with most tours are hardcore, say hey free site builders, no hardcore banners or images on your index that is on a LL page that links to hardcore pay links...

unless you only link to softcore tours or have the hardcore tours on a password protected category page....

I totally agree with you plateman. This rule is just strange. If we want to protect kids from viewing adult sites, then we can label our sites with RTA or ICRA or some other label. I actually labeled my sites with RTA today and I think that´s a good step to take and all LLs and adult sites should be labeled.

I found this on the RTA FAQ page: "If I label and my competitors don’t, won’t they have an advantage?
Only if they’re selling to minors, which is illegal! Adult companies are only interested in selling adult entertainment to adults. Therefore there is simply no business advantage to not labeling, and no business disadvantage to using RTA. In fact, ASACP plans to work with search engines and ISPs to try and make site labeling a business advantage."

That´s all we can do. Hardcore banners or not won´t make any differece if they already are surfing our sites and are one click away from the content.

[Mr Exotic]

On my link list I dont decline for hardcore on the warning page, but on my personal free sites I do go out of my way not to put hardcore images on my warning pages.

For one, obviously there are link lists that do decline, and I guess in my mind I am at least making an effort to keep minors from seeing hardcore images on my server.

[MrYum]

Originally Posted by Mr Exotic

On my link list I dont decline for hardcore on the warning page, but on my personal free sites I do go out of my way not to put hardcore images on my warning pages.

For one, obviously there are link lists that do decline, and I guess in my mind I am at least making an effort to keep minors from seeing hardcore images on my server.

While I do decline for it, my personal approach on free sites has always been like yours...just seems a simple effort to make.

However, upon further review...perhaps that rule has outlived its usefulness. The logical arguments posted here are frankly better than any argument I can come up with to keep the rule in place.

I'll be pulling that rule down later today

[RedCherry]

Originally Posted by MrYum

While I do decline for it, my personal approach on free sites has always been like yours...just seems a simple effort to make.

However, upon further review...perhaps that rule has outlived its usefulness. The logical arguments posted here are frankly better than any argument I can come up with to keep the rule in place.

I'll be pulling that rule down later today

MadHatter and I had a long discussion, and we decided that if anyone submitted a base url domain to us, no hardcore. But everyone has made valid arguments on sub folders, and we will be removing the no hardcore rule also on all our LLs today. Personally though, I'd probably still build free sites without hardcore on the index. And I label all my sites now with icra and rta.

Japmore, MadHatter found that graphic, and wow does that fit me at times, lol. Thanks for the compliment.

[Licker4U]

Originally Posted by MrYum

I'll be pulling that rule down later today

YEEEEHAAAAAWWW!!

I'll still keep hardcore off my index pages but with all the rules floating around it's nice to see one coming down

Now, if we can just get back to using little JS's we can really make pages look nice!

[Preacher]

What's this?

This is like the second time in maybe a week that a linklist or tow has modified a rule based soley on a constructive discussion. It's almost sounding like linklist owners are becoming reasonable!

(that was heavy on the sarcasm if anyone needed that explained)

[stuveltje]

i dont decline for hardcore banners on the index pages of free sites, but if you have that rule, yes i would decline the site because of that banner, and minors will see porn on the net, forched or not, yesterday they mentioned here in holland that 60% of the kids in holland between age 10 to 16 are confronted with porn on the net everyday....doesnt matter if they realy click to on a link to a pornsite, the most worried thing is if they look for a non adult link and they click it and they do get a porn site... example, my sons school stimulate that kids work with computers on a young age, so my son and his friends where looking for spaceshuttle pics on the net, they found a site, saw a pic and clicked it...yeah they got some spaceshuttles there....a woman with some big spaceshuttles

[MrYum]

Originally Posted by Licker4U

YEEEEHAAAAAWWW!!

I'll still keep hardcore off my index pages but with all the rules floating around it's nice to see one coming down

Now, if we can just get back to using little JS's we can really make pages look nice!

I wouldn't count on seeing js come back anytime soon. Speaking for myself, I'm not fluent enough in js to be able to quickly scan the code and ascertain wtf it's supposed to do.

Originally Posted by Preacher

What's this?

This is like the second time in maybe a week that a linklist or tow has modified a rule based soley on a constructive discussion. It's almost sounding like linklist owners are becoming reasonable!

(that was heavy on the sarcasm if anyone needed that explained)

Hey Preacher! Walk into this

Originally Posted by stuveltje

a woman with some big spaceshuttles

LOL! That's Classic!