What are the forum rules?

[Nick Danger]

Have you determined what will be allowed in the new forum?

I notice that Liquid posted a couple of beefcake pics that are cropped just above the groin. I celebrated the opening of the previous adult forum by posting one of Mrs Danger's drawings of a nude guy, but not erect and not having sex.

I know that where you set the limits will affect your viewership. Going harder (or softer) will drive out some people, but attract others.

[Abelkems]

There are no rules. It's Anarchy. Bring on the midgets and gerbils. :D

[XCritic Editor]

Very close to DVD Talk. But yes to nudity... However:

Even though this is an adult review site, there can be no sexual acts in any image used in the forum, even if genitalia are not shown. This is a hard and fast rule due to Title 18, Section 2257 of Public Law 109–248. Basically the law states that a webmaster has to have proof that anyone on their site that is depicted in a sexual act is over 18. In the past site owners could just refer the feds to the movie’s production company, but no more. So that we don't have to keep track of mounds of paperwork the decision was made to eliminate explicit images all together. Please make sure you abide by this rule.

[LiquidSky]

Hey Nick-- The cropped photos were the best I could find of Erik Rhodes so it wasn't intentional. :)

[XCritic Editor]

Here are the full rules:
http://www.xcritic.com/legal.php

[big whoppa]

Hmmm...does this mean if they're younger than 18 then it's OK to post naked pics if they're not in a sexual act? That can't be allowed either.

[Nosmo Rex]

What's the rule on graphics in the sig, and avatars? Will mods get avatars, or even "mere mortals"? How about sig banners; will they be allowed?

[Nick Danger]

What about drawings of imaginary people, instead of photographs of real people?

[Shannon Nutt]

I see some adult studio big-wigs and PR people are already starting to spam the forums with links to their movies...are we going to allow this? I thought that was what the PR section was for...to keep studio head/reps in there.

People like me, Houston Don and the mods know who these posters are, but to the average forum user they look like just another member - so at the very least they should have some kind of sig below their name indicating that they work for a studio.

[TimeandTide]

I see some adult studio big-wigs and PR people are already starting to spam the forums with links to their movies...are we going to allow this? I thought that was what the PR section was for...to keep studio head/reps in there.

People like me, Houston Don and the mods know who these posters are, but to the average forum user they look like just another member - so at the very least they should have some kind of sig below their name indicating that they work for a studio.

Which posts are you talking about? Unless they were deleted, of recent posts, this was the only one I could find that wasn't placed in the PR thread:

http://www.xcritic.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8192634&postcount=167

[Nosmo Rex]

Which posts are you talking about? Unless they were deleted, of recent posts, this was the only one I could find that wasn't placed in the PR thread:

http://www.xcritic.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8192634&postcount=167


I'm guessing he's talking about Adella's recent posts in Adult Movie Talk.

[Houstondon]

I see some adult studio big-wigs and PR people are already starting to spam the forums with links to their movies...are we going to allow this? I thought that was what the PR section was for...to keep studio head/reps in there.

People like me, Houston Don and the mods know who these posters are, but to the average forum user they look like just another member - so at the very least they should have some kind of sig below their name indicating that they work for a studio.

Two notes on this one: The plan is to designate all industry people, yourself included, with a title; be it director/performer/company. That way, people will know who's who and be able to act accordingly. I haven't seen a lot of off topic behavior by studio types yet but the website is a work in progress; many of the older posts in need of being moved to more appropriate locations.

I'm guessing your issue was with Adella's post since I didn't see a horde of rampaging spammers yesterday and I would ask that you take a second look at the CONTEXT of what was written there; I playfully interjected a link to a review on this website about a review for Babysitters, some industry shill at Empire (kidding!) added a link to his website, and then she added a link to the trailer of the movie I brought up. As a service to readers, I even added the link to the review in question; a completely reasonable idea for companies wise enough to make public such trailers.

The other possibility was Brianna Banks & director B. Skow joining before that; each invited here and well within the guidelines. Briana is a performer and was asking for fan input on what they want to see in a movie. It is appropriate for her to post in the performer forum (or any other public forum on the website) and comment on upcoming projects; especially when she's offering fans a rare opportunity such as this (to design scenes for her to perform). If she. Skow, Adella, or any of the many lurkers here decide to go on a PR spree in posts all over the website, I know at least one of the moderators, a "super" moderator if you will, that will move their posts to the proper spot and reprimand them accordingly but a single link does not a problem make.

In short, I agree with you that we need to label industry folks but some of this is going to have to be sorted out on a case by case basis lest we run the risk of becoming like the ultra restrictive moderation that pisses people off (ala a "consortium website" you may have heard of in your travels) or the wild west known as XPT where just about anything goes. If you see specific violations of the rules, by all means click the report to moderator button and they'll take care of it though.

PS: who is this "we" you speak of? Got a mouse in your pocket? lol

[XCritic Editor]

I see some adult studio big-wigs and PR people are already starting to spam the forums with links to their movies...are we going to allow this? I thought that was what the PR section was for...to keep studio head/reps in there.

People like me, Houston Don and the mods know who these posters are, but to the average forum user they look like just another member - so at the very least they should have some kind of sig below their name indicating that they work for a studio.

Studio reps will be clearly identified as such. And they've been specifically invited to participate in the forum.

[soggypie]

I have a question thats probably way off-topic here,but I couldnt find it anywhere else.
Whats with the whole 'reputation' thing?
How does it work,what do we get it for,etc.

[Satyr]

Just a note - when I registered there was language stating that it was forbidden to post anything "vulgar, ... obscene..." Aren't the majority of posts on this site vulgar and/or obscene?

And what's the rule on nudity in pictures? Are female frontal nudity shots showing lips OK? What about action pics?

[TimeandTide]

Just a note - when I registered there was language stating that it was forbidden to post anything "vulgar, ... obscene..." Aren't the majority of posts on this site vulgar and/or obscene?

And what's the rule on nudity in pictures? Are female frontal nudity shots showing lips OK? What about action pics?

From the Forum Rules link:

Even though XCritic.com is an adult discussion site, there can be no sexual acts in any image used in the forum, even if genitalia are not shown. This is a hard and fast rule due to Title 18, Section 2257 of Public Law 109–248. Basically the law states that a webmaster has to have proof that anyone on their site that is depicted in a sexual act is over 18. In the past site owners could just refer the feds to the movie's production company, but no more. So that we don't have to keep track of mounds of paperwork the decision was made to eliminate explicit images all together. Please make sure you abide by this rule.


Full nudity is A-OK as long as it doesn't involve a sex act. So, no huge dildos being pushed into the girl's pussy. A girl spreading her lips for the camera might be construed as a sex act, so I'd probably avoid those. But pics of say, Paulina James spreading wide for the camera? Post as many as you can! ;)