Is it okay to show Nazi items here on APUG

[Sean]

I'll probably have to have some custom coding done to provide content control and selection. I can count on probably one hand how many gallery images I've deleted over the last 4 years due to reported posts, still that does not prevent getting skewered from both sides of a moderation. The only option is better software to allow those who get offended a way to avoid that content. This is what some of the major gallery sites have in their software. Until the software makes everyone happy it's a no win situation for anyone trying to manage the content. I also wouldn't say this was done because of 5 people, there were over a dozen reports and even if this poll vaguely shows the wishes of the overall community there is a high enough percentage to be concerned. We also lost two long term members today over this, 1 citing they can not be a part of a site fighting to allow such imagery to be posted. This is a highly sensitive subject and they were fine contributors, hopefully they will return. I feel leaving such content and opening the doors to it will result in nothing but negativity and constant threads like this.

 

[jstraw]

Wow!
I did not expect that an still image is going to create so much controversy. I wanted to display Leica camera and I added some memorabilia I bought at the air shows I attended in the United States in late eighties. The hat is actually "grenz schutz hut" from former DDR with flying wings attached to it. I also have a lot of US Navy memorabilia the airplanes I build and fly as models, should I have placed a Leica camera with Navy wings? I don't know, I apologize if I have offended half a dozend people this was not my intention. I made a still life that was pleasing to the eye with mid grays showing properly, I tried to expose and tone print to my liking does it matter what the subject is? I guess some people think it does.
I don't apologize for trying to improve my skills as a photographer.

Greg

Let me see if I understand this correctly.

An image that didn't contain any Nazi memorabilia was removed because "8-10" people incorrectly though that it did?

If that's the case I will refrain from sharing my thoughts on the question this thread raises and express my trust that the image will be restored and the person that posted it will receive an apology.

The DDR is not the Third Reich.

 

[jovo]

An image that didn't contain any Nazi memorabilia was removed because "8-10" people incorrectly though that it did?

The artifacts depicted (though not the Leica camera or case) included swastikas...they were nazi memorabilia.

 

[jstraw]

The artifacts depicted (though not the Leica camera or case) included swastikas...they were nazi memorabilia.

Ah, I see. Ok, so I will share my thoughts.

Ignorance frightens me. Information, symbols and memorabilia do not frighten me. The best weapon against noxious information is not it's removal, it's better information.

 

[Sean]

Let me see if I understand this correctly.

An image that didn't contain any Nazi memorabilia was removed because "8-10" people incorrectly though that it did?

If that's the case I will refrain from sharing my thoughts on the question this thread raises and express my trust that the image will be restored and the person that posted it will receive an apology.

The DDR is not the Third Reich.

there were 4 visible swastikas in the image

 

[Sean]

I also feel sorry that Greg is caught in the middle of this when no ill will was intended. It's been a bad day all around..

 

[Markus Albertz]

Incorrect. There were at least 3 items with the Hakenkreuz, the symbol that was formally adopted by the Nazi Party as the universal symbol of Nazism. Public showing of the Hakenkreuz is illegal in Germany. When this happens nowadays, it is commonly intended as propaganda.

Please re-read Sean's last post to understand why the image was removed.

Let me see if I understand this correctly.

An image that didn't contain any Nazi memorabilia was removed because "8-10" people incorrectly though that it did?

If that's the case I will refrain from sharing my thoughts on the question this thread raises and express my trust that the image will be restored and the person that posted it will receive an apology.

The DDR is not the Third Reich.

 

[kwmullet]

wow. I can see the rationales on both sides. Although it's borderline as far as I'm concerned (insomuch as I can have an opinion not having seen the image), I understand why Sean took it down. I would likewise agree with him taking down a picture of a seashell or a green pepper if it caused substantial discord in the apug community.

I would like Greg to post it somewhere like Flickr and post a link to it in the thread so that those who want to see the image can.

-KwM-

 

[Dave Parker]

wow. I can see the rationales on both sides. Although it's borderline as far as I'm concerned (insomuch as I can have an opinion not having seen the image), I understand why Sean took it down. I would likewise agree with him taking down a picture of a seashell or a green pepper if it caused substantial discord in the apug community.

I would like Greg to post it somewhere like Flickr and post a link to it in the thread so that those who want to see the image can.

-KwM-

KwM

I agree 100%, I posted an opinion without seeing the image, it happened while I was away from the computer today, I would really like to see the image, not promising I would like or dislike it, but as a photographer, would like to have the opportunity to judge for myself.

Dave

 

[Papa Tango]

By the same token, someone here said it was absurd to refer to such an image as propaganda. May I suggest that you take dictionary definitions with a pinch of salt. You will be better off if you educate yourself by reading comprehensive reports on Nazi Germany and news of the present day so you will understand what sort of things were and are common propaganda.

No, I shall not wander from the root meanings of the word, for to do so is to create a false sense of import or urgency. I have made a great study of the NDSAP as well as countless other governments and regimes. You see, I am a professional, political sociologist and have been paid obscene sums of money to create and spin propaganda for the demogogues we think represent our interests...

An interesting corrolary between 9-11 and the Reichstag fire. Are you up with the Enabling Acts as compared to the Patriot Act? There are two marvelous and shockingly similar pieces of propaganda... In any event, as one writer pondered, when did we lose our sensibilities? When political correctness, the fantasy of equality, and the fear of damaging ones delicate self-esteem was perpetrated on us by well meaning individuals who had been educated beyond their native intelligence. Time to move on...

 

[donbga]

Achtung Baby!

KwM

I agree 100%, I posted an opinion without seeing the image, it happened while I was away from the computer today, I would really like to see the image, not promising I would like or dislike it, but as a photographer, would like to have the opportunity to judge for myself.

Dave

This discussion reminds me of the controversy that occured back in the 80s when the Mel Brooks video, 'Hitler Rap' was aired on MTV intended to promote Brook's latest movie, 'To Be Or Not To Be'.

Very few people actually got to watch the video which was very funny. The irony of a America Jewish actor playing a Polish actor mocking Hitler seemed to be lost in the din of protest. In other words the act (video) was contextual, not meant to endorse Nazism or Hitler. Never the less the video was yanked, which in my mind was a sad irony mimicking what a Facist state might do when something is shown or expressed that doesn't fit some groups norms.

But of course one has to remember that MTV is a business and not a democratic republic charged with protecting free speech and freedom of expression so I guess that holds true of APUG as well. My vote was to leave the pic up and let everyone decide for themselves.

Here is the link to the video if anyone is interested in watching. Very funny IMO, and didn't merit the protestations considering the context.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yu2NqfISm9k

 

[mark]

Greg, it was a fine photograph, and you have nothing to apologize for. I have no idea where these folks got the propoganda BS.

I for one would have been happy to get one. It was a very well done image IMO.

 

[Buster6X6]

Thanks Mark
For everyone who want to see http://www.flickr.com/ image.

Greg

 

[raucousimages]

Nazis loved censorship, are we to follow them?

 

[c6h6o3]

An interesting corrolary between 9-11 and the Reichstag fire.

Nobody died in the Reichstag fire.

 

[Sean]

Thanks Mark
For everyone who want to see http://www.flickr.com/ image.

Greg

I think you'll need a direct link

 

[Pastiche]

I would like to (again, twice in two days seems excessive... but then... there is genuine merit) THANK Sean, for how this has been dealt with.

As many here are, like myself, not new to forum based sites, it should be evident how level headed and well managed this process has been.

Despite the differences people have expressed, and the unfortunate loss of two members, this issue has not even gotten WARM compared to other sites dealing with similar issues among themselves. I believe the great difference lies in the management of the matter, and ... of course, the quality of the constituents of APUG.

I'm sure there will be measures instituted in the future that accommodate both sides. Till then, APUG still stands, in my mind, as one of the havens of sanity on the internet. I speak of both it's users, as well as it's mods.

 

[Sean]

Well, I am now in the process of finding a coder to add some new features to the gallery. Basically making it so on upload you must select the type of image you are uploading, for example G (all audiences) R (may contain imagery offensive to some people) Nudity (contains nudity) War Imagery (contains imagery some may find offensive) etc. Members will then have options on their gallery profile page to block any images by tag. If someone doesn't want to see Nudes they set their profile to block all nudes, etc. This is the best solution I can think of and will basically make the gallery hands off to some extent..

 

[blaze-on]

We also lost two long term members today over this, 1 citing they can not be a part of a site fighting to allow such imagery to be posted. This is a highly sensitive subject and they were fine contributors, hopefully they will return.

I can only say narrow minded individuals are for me, not a loss.
I fear you'll possibly lose more because of the censorship-not the image.

 

[Sean]

I can only say narrow minded individuals are for me, not a loss.
I fear you'll possibly lose more because of the censorship-not the image.

If anyone wants to use a censor free system then by all means they should leave and do this. Maybe they are better suited to usenet newsgroups where they can fully immerse themselves in a rabid cesspool of total carnage and censor free bliss. Who am I to stop them? Every online community system I have ever used that's worth using has rules, regulations, boundaries and moderations that take place. We do the best we can, we try to steer the environment here the best we can and we try to avoid censorship. We make good calls, bad calls, borderline calls. This is the most censor free community I've ever used especially compared to the other photo sites I've used in the past. It's impossible to please everyone. I really should accept that fact so that I don't drive myself crazy on days like today. I am not Flickr, Google, Webshots, etc unfortunately I don't have a bunch of staff and I can't dump $600,000 into a custom coded dream system designed so that everyone is so happy they hear angels singing in the background as they use the site. APUG is what it is and I'll keep trying with my ball of twine and duct tape to make things as good as possible. I believe in this community and it's cause and I think we are doing the best we possibly can. That's all I can do and people can decide if they want to be a part of the site or not. Now, I think I better go have a beer and try to relax for a bit. Sorry for the ranting, it's just been one of those days and I've been dealing with the removal of that image for 13hrs straight now.

 

[vanspaendonck]

Maybe this is becoming off topic because the topic of this thread is shifting, but I would like to take this opportunity to point out that a "Nazi" is someone who was a member or supporter of the NSDAP (Nazional Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei) between (roughly) 1923 and 1945.
Some people term every German that wore a uniform between 1933 and 1945 a Nazi. This is false because (1) the NSDAP was never very popular amongst german army officers (2) under the constitution of the Weimar Republic (untill 1933) members of the armed forces were not allowed to vote, and therefor cannot be accused of bringing Hitler to power. Even worse is the ignorant habit of some people to call every German a Nazi, regardless of date of birth, race, creed, or politican persuasion.
I have not seen the image that started this tread, but I wonder if it is really an image of, by, of promoting Nazi's of Nazism.
I agree with those who say that it depends on the context whether an image should be banned.

 

[kwmullet]

[...]it's just been one of those days and I've been dealing with the removal of that image for 13hrs straight now.

Yikes! Have a beer, some offline family time and a nice long snooze! As far as I'm concerned, it's not worth the trouble, distraction and expense to customize attempts to not offend into the gallery. Seems like a slippery slope to me. There's always going to be new demands to further partition the gallery because of some new way someone could be offended.

At the end of the day (especially agonizingly long days like this) it's your call, Sean, but if I had my druthers (which I don't, nor should I) I'd leave things the way they are and if particular images, even images of puppies or candy canes, caused much of an uproar and distraction from discussing and viewing traditional photography, then I'd say just remove the image.

Much of the appeal of APUG is it's narrow scope. If we get caught up in long-winded discussions of politics and human rights, regardless of how worthwhile those particular discusssions might be, we'll dilute the value of APUG.

If the poster of such an image likes, they can extended the courtesy of uploading it to a more general-purpose site, like a blog or flickr where everyone can then post comments to it, and post a link to it on apug.

BTW -- I skimmed through the 140-some IDs on flickr that had "buster" in them and none of them jumped out at me as being Greg's. Maybe Greg could post a direct link to the image in question.

-KwM-

 

[Markok765]

I saw the photo before it was removed.
Nice photo!

 

[arigram]

I don't want to make Sean bust his ass to make the gallery more complicated, but if that will allow more photographs to be posted, by all means, its a good thing.
If some have ideological and psychological problems with certain images, its their problem, not ours. I want to see more erotic, nudes, etc that some narrow minded conservatives have trouble with.
And I didn't have any problem with the photograph of Greg.

 

[Markus Albertz]

Greg, it was a fine photograph, and you have nothing to apologize for. I have no idea where these folks got the propoganda BS.

I for one would have been happy to get one. It was a very well done image IMO.

Myself and others have attempted to explain the issue here. To conveniently dismiss it as BS is nothing but disrespectful and ignorant.