Chocolate Forum
Chat => General => Topic started by: drterror666 on January 21, 2009, 01:26:31 pm
-
According to the blurb, At 17:56, on Saturday, 18 May 2008, 290 people invaded this forum in one gathered attack! The question is why?
I really am bored at work today...
-
It was new, people were curious.
-
What that's it? No conspiracy theory, nothing? Disappointed doesn't begin to describe it.
-
It was cos pham had promised to post a pic of himself naked for one minute only starting at 17.56
-
Probably a few search engines updating at the same time too, that can add 50 or so users.
Wouldn't naked pics drive people away? there's plenty of other sites for that sort of thing ;)
-
I dunno. A naked pictures thread. Netbuddy would explode!
-
Wouldn't naked pics drive people away?
Who showed my naked photo to you then???
-
I would come for a peek.
-
I wouldn't go that far, fnarr, fnarr...
-
I used to work at Kodak... (Hehehehehe... Hehehehehehe hehe hehe) Seen enough things going on pictures that make you wonder. Whenever we got nudes in or racey stuff, they had to be reprinted because the machinery is not set up to process large areas of skin, people tend to come out white blobs so they have to re-print them with a shorter exposure so that skin looks pink.
Because you have to inspect each individual image to determine type of colour shift and exposure, you get to see some mind scarring images. I am still traumatized some 15 years on, some nights I wake up screaming and covered in sweat beads.
Like the 16 stone chocolate woman in a leotard that keeps on chasing me in my nightmares wanting me to eat her... (Fnarr Fnarr)
-
Did you ever see any illegal or disturbing images?
-
Is that important?
-
It is to him.
-
@bounty
I never saw anything like that myself but they did have cases like it.
I mainly worked on enlargements :D
-
Did you work on any illegal or disturbing enlargments? :D
-
By law doesn't a person developing photos have to report something they deem to be improper.
-
Yep, 100% correct.
You do get your regulars who STILL try to get material processed by using several different shops and different names.
I suppose now everything is going digital and being able to print your own at home... these sorts of things will not be intercepted.
As for disturbing enlargements, we would regularly get in a few naturalists on various holiday and resort shots.
I used to laugh at the students that worked in the engineering dept. As they had to constantly tend to the machinery, when ever a set of nudes came out of the processor, you'd often hear a loud cheer & woolf whistles, if it was male nudes, you'd here a loud boo-ing. Nutters the lot of them.
-
By law doesn't a person developing photos have to report something they deem to be improper.
Basic rules are you can have a male and a female, male and a male, female and female or any combo mix you like as long as theirs no clear signs of penetration going on, if that is the case then its an actual offence as it is considered hard porn and currently in the UK hard porn is banned where as soft porn (top shelf stuff) is legal. The line that divides the two is very very thin.
ANY photo thats got nudity in it that also contains children has to be assessed by the lab supervisors, if they do not feel that the pictures warrant a call to the police, they will first off run a copy set off which is then locked in a safe and the shop (originator) and the customer (clients name) get logged in a book.
If they keep getting dodgy photos they report you and give the police all the materials gathered to that date. If they do not get a repeat, think its 3 months, the prints are then destroyed.
-
I imagine more people use a digital camera and print their pics of themselves.
-
Well for every technology or advancement you always have the Pro's & Con's that come part n parcel of it all.