If NSU Card Talk did not have an active Family Friendly policy with regard to removing images that are deemed not to be Family Friendly then I would never have started this thread. However, it does have such a policy which at present it only appears to apply to nudity or sexual images. If NSU cannot apply the policy equally to all material that is posted on its site, then it should drop the policy altogether and leave it entirely up to the people who visit the site which threads they choose to view.

Why is it proving so hard for people to understand that one simple point ?

The contents on Card Talk are already filtered by the post titles. If the title is "Killer Zombies of Allentown", would anyone be surprised to see actual images of killer zombies? If someone opens the thread, they're obviously interested in the subject. Why wouldn't the images be part of it?

As for children, that's where parental responsibility comes into play. Even if additional filters were put into place, what would prevent a child or anyone from clicking on those filters?

And I truly apologize if I've missed it, but could someone show me this "Family Friendly" description that Card Talk uses about itself? I've tried to find it and I must be missing it.

I cannot point you to the published policy, but if you scroll down the page from this link to where miket999 explains why he removed some images I posted:

http://nonsportupdate.infopop....717028006#7717028006

Mike's statement for those not wishing to look for it:

Hi everyone,

I had to remove the image from Kevin F's post. Sorry about that, but we have collectors of all ages visiting Card Talk.

Mike.

So nudity is removed to protect younger readers but not gore and horror which can be just as disturbing ?

Yes.

It seems like you're upset because images that you posted were deemed inappropriate while others were not. Whether we agree with it or not, American society currently says that nudity is not appropriate for children while violence, gore, etc are okay.

I personally think that the sketch cards are family friendly in my point of view . My kids play Resident Evil at the age of 9 and 10 and watch Walking Dead - Falling Skies. The images on them are 10 x worse then the cards . We all have different points of view such as church , curse words etc .

quote:

Originally posted by Kevin F:

So nudity is removed to protect younger readers but not gore and horror which can be just as disturbing ?

Well i agree with you there, i'm not too sure why nudity is seen as disturbing for kids but horror and gore is not, what about naked zombies? Are they ok? Who knows, strange world we live in.

This topic is almost as good of a read as that olympic swimmer thread from a month or so ago.

This is a no win situation here really. Up until maybe a little over a year ago, this was a non issue for gore & violence. But because the general popularity of horror (especially zombies/undead) has skyrocketed so does marketing trends/merchandise. Part of that has landed in the realm of trading cards. Walking Dead, Deadworld, Night of the Living Dead, etc. Why? Because the companies are striking while the zombie iron is RED hot.

But there's no precedence on this forum for handling such images. Nudity, however, there is. It's frowned upon and that has been that way long before people started collecting the T&A that dominates a lot of sketchcard sets today. Cardtalk very nicely limits it to no actual nudity. But bikinis, however small they may be, or other small parts of clothing/coverage pass most muster.

With how big of a monster (pun intended) the horror scene has become, how is Cardtalk, let alone anyone else, supposed to determine what of this genre is considered offensive or inappropriate? We've had zombies, vampires, mummies, etc in cinema to varying degress for well over 40 years. Suddenly because we're in a more graphic age than the old Boris Karloff years it needs to be censored? Like Stargaterules pointed out, kids are playing games such as Resident Evil, Mortal Kombat and others that are much worse than anything posted here as a product sample. And as "offensive" as some people may find images of zombies, or whatever, there is MUCH worse that can be found. And a lot of it is NOT in the USA either. Our news is so filtered is sad but that's another topic altogether lol

My 2 cents (maybe 4 after this long of a post), is that none of it offends me personally. Doesn't offend my wife either. May not be our cup of tea for our collections but that's our choice.

Julie hates Vampirella, I hate Twilight. We call it even. Now THERE'S an offensive topic. What's with the sparkles? Ugh.

Leave Cardtalk alone the way it is. Pay attention to the thread titles and if/when you want to read that topic if you have a young family member around. If you start rating or grading threads for age appropriateness then it's going to bring in the topic of nudity as well. Because you can't keep it blocked out if you start rating threads in my opinion. Which opens up a whole barrel of monkeys.

It's going to take awhile, but the fad of gore on trading cards will subside. It'll probably take 1 or 2 sets being released and not selling very well. But it'll lessen and then you can resume your regularly scheduled Cardtalk

where as nipples could poke you in the eye, going postal in a movie house is quite acceptable i know thats my view but come on, did not know resident evil etc were child friendly , i personally think they should be banned for glorifing evil, isn't the world screwed up enough just my 2 cents

100% agree John

quote:

Originally posted by Jake:
This topic is almost as good of a read as that olympic swimmer thread from a month or so ago.

Good points, everyone, including Kevin F.

It turns out that, zombie pictures notwithstanding, this a thread children could benefit from reading as it is an example of the respectful exchange of reasonable ideas as a group of people basically attempt to decide what is "decent", an argument that usually goes south very quickly, to the point where the words used in the discussion all can agree, are indecent, particularly when levelled at one another (usually anonymously, sadly).

Here, in a forum where you are basically a known person, and are therefore speaking on the record, I think more care is taken with words chosen and the discussion benefits greatly from that.

I quoted Jake's mentioning of the Olympic Swimmers incident of a month ago, because the same argument is being made here.

If Chief Brody (sorry, I can't spell the word Chief as "Cheif" anymore and never will again) found Olympic Swimmers in their speedoes indecent viewing for himself, an adult, that would mean he certainly would deem them inappropriate for children. That being the case, he was of the opinion that posts showing those cards (male swimmers) from the Olmypic Hopefuls set were not "family friendly" and as such, shouldn't have been allowed to be shown on the board. He was so offended by what are inarguably G RATED images that he even shredded one of the cards that vexed him so greatly.

His problem, in terms of the argument he was making, was that virtually no one else in any kind of progressive society (like the US and UK, where he is from) views athletes dressed in their uniforms as in any way sexually inappropriate, so his arguments were weak, bordering on homophobia, and more than that, just baffling, so they found no subscribers, and no one rallied to his defense against the incredulous onslaught of replies that greeted his point of view.

Kevin F, on the other hand, has a much stronger leg to stand on as I would imagine a great many parents wouldn't want their children, especially younger children, viewing such images as the posted Tim Shay zombie example. As a result many more people would, to varying degrees perhaps, concur that such images shouldn't be posted where children have access to seeing them.

Logistically, however, this is just impossible, particularly if the child is internet savvy, as tends to be the rule as opposed to the exception these days.

I love the idea of Utopia. It would be nice if the world would adapt to the needs of parents who simply want to raise their children in loving environment free of any unpleasantry. However the energy spent to make that happen is better directed helping the child and larger family unit to adapt to the world instead, in a way that does not compromise the values of what are important to that family.

It's just easier that way, and its asks no more of one person than any other. That is my concern when any prohibition is made.

Gonna shut down this thread for now as I think everyon's side has been said.
Adding icky stuff to things we need to monitor for will be something that needs thought over and decided by minds greater then ours In the meantime, feel free to 1. add a tag to thread if you think they might be worrisome and/or as parents, remember there are some cards about, esp. in this zombie obsessed generation that might scare the wee ones.