The rules for the images in the Flickr Group that you see in the banner of ITM are the same as those for Quick Reviews– though there may be some images that will be approved that are immodest, they will not be grossly so, and they should be more of a borderline set.

The problem with these rules is that I've heard feeback from both sides.

They're too immodest!

One group has seen our site and those images (especially when there were images submitted that had not been approved) and did not want to be affiliated with us.  The question was, "Why can't all the images be modest?"

The answer was that this is not necessarily our goal here.  We want to help people look at modesty and be able to identify it.  That means that sometimes we're going to show images that are borderline.

Where are the immodest ones?

I get the opposite from the Flickr crowd.  They wonder where the immodest photos are, so that they can vote one way or another.  They think the group defeats its purpose because (in their opinion) everything's modest.

What do you think?  How do you best accomplish the goal of the site while making sure to take into consideration those that are sensitive, passionate, and believe we need to only show modest photos?

Erin said:

Heh. I have found some of the images to be immodest (*surprise surprise*), however, since the title of our blog is “Is This Modest?”,  and not “This Is Modest” I think it isn't really an issue. I like the fact that you keep even the examples of immodesty tame so it's not like we have bikinis prancing across the top of the screen.

I've actually been going more modest since the issue was raised– until I got the "where are the immodest photos?" e-mail.  Man, what a tightrope.

Foy said:

I've seen more immodest material in the advertisements than in the pics, though there are definitely some that will raise your eyebrows. Maybe it should be examined on a case by case basis? I.e – you see one that is over the top, you delete it. That make sense?

I do have the ability to moderate the images, the problem is that anyone that joins the group can publish images to the group without my approval (perhaps there's a way to change this setting), so something can get up there that's over the line and be there (and chase people away!) before I get to it.

I'll look into settings.

Foy said:

You doin't have to be a modesty Nazi, but there are some images/advertisements, like the one I mentioned to you the other day, that defeintaely cross the line.

But to argue for the other side, some people that would like to advertise modesty on this site may be put off by immodest images on this site.  And once you see something, you can't unsee it.

Visual mediums can be tricky.

That is actually not a bad idea.  I think that part of the problem is that casual or first time visitors may not understand that the banner is actually dynamic.  The pictures that you see today are not the ones that were there a month ago.  There are at least 1 or 2 new ones every day, so it's not like we're only advertising the immodest ones, they rotate to (hopefully) show a good cross-section.

Foy said:

Will there be a note above the dynamic pics in the redesign?

I'm not sure what part the Flickr feed will play in the redesign.  It may just be "food" for QRs instead of they way they are presented now.

I guess we'll have to see what we come up with.  Any input is always appreciated.

Well, they might stay, but they may not be as prominent.  I'm not quite sure yet.

We share a love of dynamic content, so I wouldn't worry.