Puritans!!!

Though we might wonder why a nipple would be more objectionable at a workplace than gun porn. Still, if it messes up someone on their job, I can see the alerter's point.

most people can look on the web from time to time while they work, as long as they get their work done.

Your work doesn't give a crap if you're wasting your time surfing the web, but is going to have a hissy fit over a nursing baby? Gimme a break. Quit slacking off at work and then blaming potentially getting into trouble on other people.

and if you are on your break and want to surf, do it on your phone if your work is that stupid that you'll get flagged for baby and a breast. Sheeit.

I agree it is a sad commentary for our society, but I am certainly not arrogant enough to tell someone to risk losing their job lest I be unfairly burdened with typing four letters (NSFW).

YOUR problem you lose your job, not mine. I didn't even know WTF NSFW was until today. If your work is that bad, then stay the heck off the net while you are there, or get a data plan and do it from your phone. Jesus.

Now, who have I heard say something like that?

Never, but you think you are.

I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

I'm posting a picture of a kitten asleep in a car cupholder for no reason in particular.

But I doubt that the workplace would care, if s/he was on his own time, if the worker looked at a parenting site.

And that image could get me in trouble. Is it right? Of course not. However, it is awfully arrogant of someone to expect me to pay the price of their crusade.

my work firewall blocks all weapon sites. That being said, there wouldnt have been a problem with that picture

of nudity on their computer systems.

I'm not saying that is the correct policy for employers to take, especially for breast feeding, but it does expose a company to liability and can understand why a jury would vote to hide.

employee who knows the company's rules well enough to know they shouldn't be on DU in the first place while they are working?

People, if you're somewhere you shouldn't be on the Internet at work, don't blame a poster for posting something that might nail your ass! Gah!

For instance, I was with a state agency and we were allowed permission to be on the Internet. The only filters were specifically on pornographic or terroristic Websites. Employees are supposed to use discretion as to what Websites they visit, but were allowed to spend a reasonable amount of time on the Internet as long as their work was accomplished. Due to the specific circumstances of that job, there were various times when I had no tasks to accomplish while at work. It's one of the privileges allowed as a salaried employee since those people are frequently required to work overtime without compensation when the job demands increased. The employers realize that having a liberal policy towards using the Internet improves productivity; keeps employees from slipping away from work early by using Websites for shopping purposes; and allows employees to contact family members in an emergency--although I doubt DUMail would be used in that instance. The agency I worked for even allowed instant messaging on their computers.

Using the Internet doesn't necessarily mean that an employee is going to get nailed at work. However, having nudity displayed on a monitor screen can since anyone (customer, client or employee) could walk by and be offended by what is shown.

that is offended by it is the one with the problem, not the person reading the post.

However, some people are offended by nudity no matter the context involved and describing those people as having a "problem" is judgmental. They are allowed to have their values, just like you and I are allowed to hold our individual values--but values aren't "problems." I've been around breast-feeding mothers and nearly all of them showed discretion by using blankets or nursing rooms. There is also an issue of appropriateness and context involved, particularly since people as young as 13 are allowed to join this Website.

Simply put, the post was provocative and I can understand why a jury would hide it. I'm not certain how I would have voted because I respect that it is a natural biological function, but so are other functions such as urinating and defecating. Does anybody really want to see pictures of those actions on DU?

I suspect that jberryhill was intentionally trying to be over-the-top with that post but I am uncertain as to his motivations. I believe that if he had placed an NSFW warning on the thread title as requested then the controversy would have been averted.

no matter the context involved" are offended. Also, sooo, we're not supposed to be judgemental of people who are being...ahem...judgemental?

Perish the thought a 13 should see breastfeeding! The horror!

You may be right that an NSFW would have averted a hide. My very point has been that breastfeeding is now NSFW. That, to me, is just absurd.

Some people work in an environment where being on DU is not a problem, but a picture of a female breast is. Is that right? Sensible? Reasonable? No, of course not, but it is true nonetheless.

NSFW is patently ABSURD.

Its about what your boss and rules think. Do you wanna get a fellow DUer fired because of someone not putting a NSFW tag on a thread with exposed nipples?

Workplaces have rules against viewing nudity..

madonna breast feeding the infant Jesus was shown on the screen. Would that have been objectionable?

If they don't, how is that not sex discrimination in the workplace?

hostile work environment by displaying those photos. When the policies are not enforce equally then issue of sex discrimination becomes applicable.

I suspect that many women would be offended if I kept photos of topless women at work. In a similar vein, I suspect that if one of my female colleagues had placed a "beefcake" calendar in their cubicle then I would have the right to object. At that point, the HR department should begin an investigation and address everyone's concerns. It isn't professional to have those photos on display in most businesses.

having an image momentarily on a computer while someone's reading about breastfeeding during their own time?

And it is okay for a juror to do likewise.

Shouldn't you be working, and not cruising DU? Just sayin'.

People do need a break from the tedium of work.

Unfortunately, most of us are not fortunate to work from home. I work in human resources and from my fellow HR professionals. a great number of companies keep logs of what people access on their work computers, and will use it against an employee if necessary. Big brother watches, remember. I left a company when the owner insisted on seeing that report every day.

It is a courtesy to mark something as NSFW when it involves nudity of any kind, even if it is the most natural situation in the world. I, too, think the prudish nature of the general population in the US is old-fashioned. But if a post like this cost one DU'er a job, or even a reprimand, would that be worth it?

Snark is appropriate at times but not this time.

And we are talking about a major corporation. They trust us to get our work done and not abuse the privilege. They have no choice if want to attract top talent.

I think the alerter needs to reconsider those signs in the copy room that say "All electronic activity is monitored."

just get back to frigging WORK and stop looking at DU. No wonder productivity in this country is down!

My only objection is that the thread shouldn't be in GD.

I wouldn't "jury hide" that post--I would support a shut-down for being OFF TOPIC/No Guns in GD.

But you last line has me ROTFL!

Obviously he was there to settle some score.

More than a few have struck me down.

getting them pierced.

My friend had her nipple pierced and it became infected. She regretted making that decision.

For something. Not sure what.

'Wait Vanessa, I can explain. You see, I was looking for Dr. Evil when the Fembots came out and smoke started coming out of their jomblies. So I started to work my mojo, to counter their mojo; we got cross-mojulation, and their heads started exploding.'

...of this site's name has been, for years.

...now I'm gonna get flagged at work. Asshole."

This person is calling jberryhill an asshole while stealing company resources and admittedly breaking the rules! I would ask who the asshole really is, but that would get my post hidden.

...at work."

But I guess the title makes people "feel cool."

On edit: Though the idea of a nursing baby pic being something you'd be "caught" for anyway, just further speaks to this country's deep sickness, even as manifested here.

I was mortified beyond belief, I don't know if I'll be able to get back to work after that kind of shock.

I really did enjoy the pluralization of Jesus into Jesi a little further down in the threads.

from the badness of the world. This is supposed to be a site for "politically liberal" posters.

...whenever and however they can.

would include some compassion for a person who needs to keep his job.

person would open it with someone looking over their shoulder at a job where a glimpse of a baby and mother's breast would get them fired is going too far. It looks like an excuse for the self-righteous to lock/hide/ban.

2. other people who post things that might get people flagged at work, should say so. it's the nice thing to do, and this is still a community.

do you have a cell phone?

doesn't mean it's invisible to IT.

underground version and would like it to go back to that.

was an escape from and protest of Bush. Now it is more a promotion of Democrats, right or wrong. Not that I have anything against Democrats of course since I vote for them but some of the rinse-repeat conversations have become tiresome.

toward people who work for a living? There is nothing underground about a nipple. The fact is some workplaces have readers on computers that flag certain types of images and sites. I wasn't the alerter, and I don't give a shit about the nipple, but I'm not so obtuse that I can't figure out it can cause trouble for some people. Would it kill you to think about someone else's situation?

Get a clue -this site's purpose is to make Skinner money.

don't have much familiarity with modern-day workplaces.

built your goddamned "modern-day workplace". Am I supposed to be familiar with your "modern-day workplace" AFTER I've been there, built it, and left it to occupy to go build La Lioness Priyanka's "modern-day workplace"?

to figure out not everyone works by the hour and that companies are concerned with the sort of sites their employees view, particularly when you have an alerter telling you as much.

I'm allowed to browse the internet during breaks (like now), but there are restrictions on what I am allowed to see. It's not the rocket science some posters are making it out to be.

Are we supposed to run around with our hands waving in the air or not. I can never quite get the protocol of fauxrage.

standard internet manners. Lots of employers are very strict about what is and isn't kosher. It's adding 4 letters to an OP,it's not that hard.

Post something and take your chances with a jury of your peers. Standards are kind of all over the place. Your META thread here will probably stand. Don't take these things so personal.

Not the first time I misinterpret something, won't be the last.

Breastfeeding is a natural thing between a mother and child. I don't find the pictures offensive at all.
However a warning should have accompanied the OP in the title (NSFW) to respect those who may be working.

I'm off today, I didn't need the NSFW warning. I will have to admit, that for me personally, what I did find objectionable was that sort of "dark humor" making breastfeeding analogous to guns. "If it could blow his head off.....", somehow I don't find that very funny at all.

The pic was hot-linked from a parenting site. The Admin don't usually have flags set up at work for URLs to parenting sites. Do they now hire enough admins to oversee employee use of the internet that they view each and every page a person visits at work? Somehow, I'm doubting they do.

For the rest of you out there who clicked on the post at work, and are now worried you're about to be in hot water, relax. It was a harmless pic of a mother feeding her baby from a parenting website.

It was a baby eating lunch, people. Even if your boss was standing behind you that's not hard to explain.

reconsider who they're working for. Or, if that is not practical, stay off DU while at work or use their cell phone to read DU.

Jesus, what are we becoming that a breastfeeding baby is NSFW???

If the image was linked from some naughty site, I could see people freaking out. But it was from a parenting site, for Pete's sake. As it is, I don't think any workplace which allows you to use the internet for personal reasons would bat an eye at it. I know none I worked at in the past would have.

The whole thing is a case of much ado about nothing.

from being flagged... you wouldn't believe the stuff flagged on the system at the last HR consulting job I did. DU wasn't banned but CNN was... a lot of sites are banned if someone complains. (For the record, I was checking CNN for a story that impacted the company I was working for... had to get the story off my personal phone.) And if someone had seen the picture on that computer screen and reported it, innocent child having lunch or not... it wouldn't matter. There are some people who would find that picture offensive.

As to computer police at work, most companies do not have someone monitoring web access but some do... and believe me, if an employer wants to get rid of an employee, they will find stuff. It doesn't happen often but it does happen. Why take the chance?

I'm not making excuses. I am asking for a bit of common sense... don't take chances... be a responsible adult and put NSFW in the title line. I certainly don't like the puritan nature of this country, but I do respect my fellow DU'ers.

Honest question. If a person's boss is so out to get them, that they're even flagging parenting sites as verboten to view at work, how can posters here be responsible?

If I'm allowed to use the internet for personal use at my job, and they don't mind if I read political forums in my spare time, I'd assume parenting sites were allowed as well.

Think about it, if you're worried about where an image is hot linked from because you're work has strict rules as to what you can view, the last thing you should be doing is reading DU, or any site which allows hot linking. People can lift a harmless looking image from a site your system admin finds questionable at any time.

The whole premise of this argument seems silly to me.

should be smart enough to understand post containing nudity, extreme sexual content, and offensive words (and they should know what those are) should include a warning. A simple NSFW gives the reader the option to decide if they choose to read then or later in a more secure environment.

You may assume parenting sites are allowed if the company allows open access but if a prudish employee happened to see that picture on your monitor and reported it.... the site would likely be blocked. The person, whose computer the picture is on, could be in trouble. As for an employee being targeted, I've had supervisors come to me and ask me to obtain the records of employee computer's access from IT. I asked the supervisor to provide me in writing what his suspicions were.... he had been told the employee was accessing a sports site all day long (not banned). We didn't confront the employee, whose work was excellent... I refused. We sent out a communiqué stating that while accessing the net at work was allowed, to please refrain from excessive use and preferably only during breaks or while at lunch. I don't like hearsay without proof. We did not have another issue and prevented that employee from being embarrassed.

I did not say the poster would be responsible for the reader getting into trouble. I said the poster should be responsible to label any potential controversial material. The reader then has the option, and that's on them... but if they don't know, and they do open the post... they run the risk, no matter how slight, for having an issue.

It's courtesy....

I wasn't saying you said the poster would be responsible if someone were to get in trouble. I was thinking about what you said and asking about how a person here would know what arbitrary line an employer was drawing. Based on the criteria you pointed out.

I threw off the whole thing with the last sentence. It made it appear I was saying that to you, which I wasn't. I meant it toward a workplace which would use those methods against their employees whom they allow to view places like DU in the first place. I wasn't clear about that and I apologize for any misunderstanding.

The Hof is a badass with perfect nipples!


LOL

Sauce for geese and ganders, y'know.

And since I do get the reference, do you have any evidence that HoF is responsible for the alert or the hidden jury result?

and who was the cool one, ME!

Cause I represent the Hof!

His nipples have been ALL OVER DU

Don't post pictures of him without a warning. It always unnerves me. I have sensitive sensibilities. The HOF is NSFJ (Not Safe For Jamastiene).

[URL=http://www.sherv.net/][IMG][/IMG][/URL] [URL=http://www.sherv.net/][IMG][/IMG][/URL] [URL=http://www.sherv.net/][IMG][/IMG][/URL] [URL=http://www.sherv.net/][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

I've never had a job where I could surf the internet. To be fair, I never had a normal job, but I don't see any employer being cool with employees surfing while on the clock.

And it was for a nipple. We all have two (some have more), it wasn't for a violent picture but a baby getting fed.

Puritanical Underground

Some people are salaried employees and not "on the clock" so Internet usage is tolerated and even encouraged.

Didn't realize the NSFW was missing

I didn't alert, was not on a jury, but to use a woman breast feeding her child to counter NRA arguments, is a bit strange to say the least.

nastiest things imaginable which I guess was his point but, holy fucking hell.

my juror comment would have reflected my reasoning.

It was an asinine statement and as such, I did not find it to be conducive to intelligent discourse. I saw little chance of healthy debate arising from the OP. As usual YMMV.

Apparently, not every job is as full as mine.

all made by retirees, students and unemployed people.

I work at home. Have a work laptop and personal laptop on my desk. My work is really slow right now so I am on DU and other places. And I have asked a million times to go part time, or take time off when it is slow - and the answer is always no.

don't usually have to worry about their boss spying on their browsing habits, lol.

There are all kinds of jobs. Most of them, when using company hardware, software, and bandwidth, discourage non-work related computer use.

Of course, I'm a teacher. It doesn't matter how many hours outside my contractual day I'm at work, I never have time to use my computer for personal things. And if I did, I wouldn't want to; our system is overloaded and slow. I can be on in the middle of the day today because it's the first day of summer break.

Still, I have a really hard time imagining jobs with that kind of down time; it's just outside my universe.

expect that some non-work use happens just as in the old days we would be discouraged from using phones for personal calls but it was done to some extent - just don't abuse it.

My daughter is a first year teacher and she uses her iPhone quite a bit in the classroom - hooks it up in some way to the whiteboard - I'm sure she pre-screens where she is going first, so no chance of seeing nipples on DU.

And yes I know how hard and how many hours teachers work, I have learned a lot this year as I see the tremendous effort (and no social life) my daughter has put in. We are both hoping it gets a bit easier next year.

I have been a project manager for a long time and there has never been a consistent work level - sometimes it's all out and sometimes nothing much happening.

an indirect gun thread, against GD rules, that I can agree on.
Which should have been handled by a GD host.
but a jury alert?
Sheesh.

Why the sudden romper room like fracas cause a nipple pic got hidden?

Gee I just can't imagine why!

All this bullshit about 'shouldnt you be workin at work hurr hurr nipples!'

Yeah, its ever so puzzling why this kind of jackassery is suddenly the norm here.
(Just kidding we all know why)

Seriously?

BTW, redqueen, the post that was hidden for depicting breastfeeding (the horror!) was not my post. So, it wasn't possible for me to post the NSFW warning, which is absurd in this case.

as a picture depicting breastfeeding.

You and everyone else knows damn well that images of nipples are considered material that is censored by the media.

If the nipple was mostly obscured by a baby's mouth this wouldn't be an issue - and again, anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows it.

I would do the thing where I pretend to be confused as to why so many people are feigning ignorance but we all know what's going on here. Its pathetic.

on here, in your estimation, that is pathetic?

the deliberately obtuse and their feigned outrage are at it again.

OP that was locked is NSFW. I don't feel outrage. I feel pity. I'm SMH at how puritanical some people are that a nipple in the presense of a baby is NSFW.

appear to be judging DUers and finding fault with their reasoning. You understand the difference here, yes?

is absurd. If that incurs a judgement on someone, then so be it. They are prudes. That is my judgement.