Not Work Safe Banner above a comic not labeled-properly.

[Darardusaki]

Searched and couldn't find a similar topic.

I was just checking an update on an SJ comic that I read, when I saw a banner for "Gay Naked Barbarian." Considering that there was no 18+ warning and that I was on what I believe to be a fairly clean site, I clicked it thinking it was going to be an SJ humor comic that didn't actually have anything to do with the title.

Instead I was linked to this blatantly pornographic site :http://www.spunkcomics.com/kong/?p=2621 (NOT WORK SAFE) where there are gay porn ads and links to hentai involving minors from the anime Naruto.

My problem is not necessarily with the content of the site, my problem is with the fact that the ad was not clearly labeled on a site that is supposed to be pretty clear of porn. The comic in question is a G or PG comic too so there is no reason for an ad like that to be associated with it.

Why was this ad allowed to go through? I'm hoping it was a fluke because I am refreshing the page like crazy to get a screencap and so far I've just been getting the ads for manga studio and darker than black.

[Darardusaki]

Got a screen shot after several refreshes.



Woops, it was Kong the Gay Barbarian. I must have gotten the other title mixed up after going to the site. Either way. There it is.

[Supertoad]

I was just checking an update on an SJ comic that I read, when I saw a banner for "Gay Naked Barbarian." Considering that there was no 18+ warning and that I was on what I believe to be a fairly clean site, I clicked it thinking it was going to be an SJ humor comic that didn't actually have anything to do with the title.

It was titled "Gay Naked Barbarian." Seems pretty obvious what it would be about, no?

[Darardusaki]

I was just checking an update on an SJ comic that I read, when I saw a banner for "Gay Naked Barbarian." Considering that there was no 18+ warning and that I was on what I believe to be a fairly clean site, I clicked it thinking it was going to be an SJ humor comic that didn't actually have anything to do with the title.

It was titled "Gay Naked Barbarian." Seems pretty obvious what it would be about, no?

Maybe you didn't actually read my post about KONG THE GAY BARARIAN. Maybe you just don't understand what the issue with KONG THE GAY BARBARIAN really is. Let me make it a little clearer for you in case I used too many words the first time around:

1. Ad was not labeled as an adult comic
2. Ad was located on a site that is supposed to be clean
3. Ad did not display any suspicious material
4. Taking points 1, 2, and 3 into consideration, one might be led to the conclusion that the ad was for a clean comic hilariously titled "KONG THE GAY BARBARIAN" hosted on SmackJeeves.
5. Taking into consideration that minors browse SJ, it is reasonable to assume that at some point a parent will notice the ad in question and accuse SJ of allowing links to cartoon gay/child porn on their site, causing a huge sh*tfest resulting in a lot of unnecessary drama.

I can personally assure you that KONG THE GAY BARBARIAN is indeed hilarious in its own way. However, linking to a pornographic site with ads for gay cartoon porn involving minors with no warning whatsoever is not.

[ninjies]

Maybe you didn't actually read my post about KONG THE GAY BARARIAN. Maybe you just don't understand what the issue with KONG THE GAY BARBARIAN really is. Let me make it a little clearer for you in case I used too many words the first time around:

1. Ad was not labeled as an adult comic
2. Ad was located on a site that is supposed to be clean
3. Ad did not display any suspicious material
4. Taking points 1, 2, and 3 into consideration, one might be led to the conclusion that the ad was for a clean comic hilariously titled "KONG THE GAY BARBARIAN" hosted on SmackJeeves.
5. Taking into consideration that minors browse SJ, it is reasonable to assume that at some point a parent will notice the ad in question and accuse SJ of allowing links to cartoon gay/child porn on their site, causing a huge sh*tfest resulting in a lot of unnecessary drama.

I can personally assure you that KONG THE GAY BARBARIAN is indeed hilarious in its own way. However, linking to a pornographic site with ads for gay cartoon porn involving minors with no warning whatsoever is not.

while i agree with the inappropriateness of the ad, i'm surprised that you think SJ is a clean site.

[Amante]

while i agree with the inappropriateness of the ad, i'm surprised that you think SJ is a clean site.

This.

The ads work off of Project Wonderful I believe, people just pay to have their ads shown across a bunch of websites. I'm not sure how much freedom they get over control on the ads being placed. Besides, It could always just be a spam making it's way past the defenses. You find similar things (or worse) on even child gaming sites. It's the internet, it happens.

[Darardusaki]

while i agree with the inappropriateness of the ad, i'm surprised that you think SJ is a clean site.

"fairly clean" as in no porn. I am not stupid, I have seen some of the more mature comics. But unless there is stuff on this site that is like pornography I am sticking with the belief that this ad doesn't belong on SJ, or at least should be clearly labeled.

I'd like something done about it, not a bunch of dumb comments from the peanut gallery about why it was clicked or how "clean" I thought SJ was.

The ads work off of Project Wonderful I believe, people just pay to have their ads shown across a bunch of websites. I'm not sure how much freedom they get over control on the ads being placed. Besides, It could always just be a spam making it's way past the defenses. You find similar things (or worse) on even child gaming sites. It's the internet, it happens.

That makes more sense, thanks for the on-topic response. Hopefully something can be done about it.

[ninjies]

"fairly clean" as in no porn. I am not stupid, I have seen some of the more mature comics. But unless there is stuff on this site that is like pornography I am sticking with the belief that this ad doesn't belong on SJ, or at least should be clearly labeled.

I'd like something done about it, not a bunch of dumb comments from the peanut gallery about why it was clicked or how "clean" I thought SJ was.

the point i was trying to make was that you said your main problem lied in the fact that a dirty ad landed on SJ, which supposedly has no porn. it does. there's a fair amount of porn here. someone browsing this site has as much a chance of running into porn HERE as they do clicking an ad that leads them to a different site with porn, especially when said ad is pret-ty specific about what it's about.

the ad will probably go out of rotation soon anyway.

[Darardusaki]

the point i was trying to make was that you said your main problem lied in the fact that a dirty ad landed on SJ, which supposedly has no porn. it does. there's a fair amount of porn here. someone browsing this site has as much a chance of running into porn HERE as they do clicking an ad that leads them to a different site with porn, especially when said ad is pret-ty specific about what it's about.

the ad will probably go out of rotation soon anyway.

Yeah, I just did a search with "mature" and all and found a gay porn comic with what appears to be a child getting fucked in it. Pretty blatant and now I'm disgusted. Is that sort of thing allowed on SJ now? I have been reading up on certain comics for a year now but haven't browsed for new ones so I am shocked that outright porn is now allowed.

Edit: I'm looking again to see what the rules are because I might have missed something when I looked through them before posting this topic. If SJ now allows blatant porn I think I'm done with it.

[ninjies]

the point i was trying to make was that you said your main problem lied in the fact that a dirty ad landed on SJ, which supposedly has no porn. it does. there's a fair amount of porn here. someone browsing this site has as much a chance of running into porn HERE as they do clicking an ad that leads them to a different site with porn, especially when said ad is pret-ty specific about what it's about.

the ad will probably go out of rotation soon anyway.

Yeah, I just did a search with "mature" and all and found a gay porn comic with what appears to be a child getting fucked in it. Pretty blatant and now I'm disgusted. Is that sort of thing allowed on SJ now? I have been reading up on certain comics for a year now but haven't browsed for new ones so I am shocked that outright porn is now allowed.

they've been around since i joined, almost 3 years ago, and there's nothing in the ToS that says otherwise so i'm going to assume "yes".

[Darardusaki]

they've been around since i joined, almost 3 years ago, and there's nothing in the ToS that says otherwise so i'm going to assume "yes".

Not even keyword searches for porn, pornography, sex, etc come up with ANYTHING in the rules wiki page. "mature" comes up with the page on how to turn the warnings on and off.

Hell, the search menu doesn't list "mature" or "erotic" etc when you looks for new comics, so I had assumed that they didn't allow that. Mature is such a blanket term too, to me "mature =/= porn".

I don't mind porn comics, or comics involving the topic of sex, so long as they're CLEARLY marked in their ads or I am expecting it, but if SJ and its community really has no issues with people posting comics with kid-like characters being raped, fucked, etc, I think I am done with this site.

[Darardusaki]

To be fair the mature warning system is fine with me since it mentions you need to be a legal adult.

But again. The point is that the ad was not marked as an 18+ site.

And now I have a problem with the site being okay with kid-like characters in porn comics.

>:(

[ninjies]

To be fair the mature warning system is fine with me since it mentions you need to be a legal adult.

But again. The point is that the ad was not marked as an 18+ site.

And now I have a problem with the site being okay with kid-like characters in porn comics.

>:(

try to avoid double posting.

we recently had a big discussion over that issue, and some things may or may not have changed in the ToS. you should wait for clarification from Admin before jumping to conclusions.

[misuzu]

I'm pretty sure th ToS says nothing illegal and last I checked, kidde porn is illegal.

The problem is that Smack Jeeves Host so many comics and it's near impossible to regulate every single one and the ads that pop up there.

[Darardusaki]

try to avoid double posting.

we recently had a big discussion over that issue, and some things may or may not have changed in the ToS. you should wait for clarification from Admin before jumping to conclusions.

Would you mind linking me to said discussion? I'd like to read it and be a part of it since I had once wanted to post comics on SJ.

I'm pretty sure th ToS says nothing illegal and last I checked, kidde porn is illegal.

The problem is that Smack Jeeves Host so many comics and it's near impossible to regulate every single one and the ads that pop up there.

The problem is that people call their characters legal age yet draw them as 5, 10, 14 years old. Drawn child porn isn't illegal in the states, it's considered "obscene."