Advertising Last completed movie pages
1971 Ferrari 365 GTB/4 'Daytona' 
Class: Cars, Coupé — Model origin: 
![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
Background vehicle
Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2007-11-18 23:57
|
I would have thrown out the girl. Do you have an idea, how complicated it's to clean that white interior? And it's not very comfortable to hang with your neck on the gear-handle. |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 00:00
|
Very uncomfortable indeed... |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 01:07
|
This picture is in general bad taste and certainly not suitable for viewing by the general public. This site currently has a good international reputation and I would like to see it stay that way. All adminsistrators should keep that in mind before posting such pictures. -- Last edit: 2007-11-19 01:08:14 |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 01:11
|
As the car itself is still worth listing, if there aren't other views of it, I suppose that only solution would be to censor the picture? I already know that Sixcyl you will disagree with that, but what other choice do we have if we want to keep this site acceptable to general audience? |
|
93montero ◊ 2007-11-19 03:25
|
This website is perfect, thanks to antp and the other administators. This Ferrari is uncommon and deserves a rightful page. Say no to censorship .gif ":)") |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 07:05
|
There is not any other picture of it |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 09:40
|
@wrenchhaed: but for European law (as I know, this site is managed by European guys) this pic can bee seen a tasteless, but it's not illegal. It's obviously a tasteless C-movie or so, so it's difficult to avoid tasteless pic, when you just dearching for cars. |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 10:29
|
Well for adults this might not be a problem, but perhaps for kids, but then i dont think many kids or little boys visit this site or do they? i think most of the people interested in this site is over 18 usually right? anyway the car is very well visible so in case anyone would feel offended the people making love could get pixelated, but i think that i wont be neccesary since nothing "explicit" is shown. |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 11:29
|
I was suggesting to censor a part of the picture, not especially remove it. As said on the other page, there are people who visit the site from their work place, it is not only a kid problem. The site starts to get a good reputation on various sites, and there is no reason why content for 18+ should be there, as it is a site about cars. |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 11:33
|
I agree to that. However on second thought, we should not be censoring to easily I think. -- Last edit: 2007-11-19 11:47:49 |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 15:11
|
The question is, are those two actors actually having sex? Didn't Russ Meyer only direct softcore porn? Did actors literally have sex in Russ Meyer films? -- Last edit: 2007-11-19 15:11:39 |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 15:17
|
I think this is where we may be coming to a culture clash here, would that statement be true in French or Dutch, German or other European cultures? I don't think Sixcyl sees anything tasteless at all about this kind of thing. -- Last edit: 2007-11-19 15:18:31 |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 15:18
|
I think is nothing wrong in that pic. Not even genitaliia there! C'mon let's be a bit more open minded! |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 15:24
|
I am not quickly offended (and I am not in this case of course) but I think that this is not suitable for a "general audience". In addition of that, the hosting company where IMCDB site is (OVH) specifies in the contract that erotic contents is not allowed (if this one is - I do not know). -- Last edit: 2007-11-19 15:29:07 |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 15:31
|
I would be a shame to delete a picture of a classic Ferrari (where the car takes up most of the picture) because someone's arse happens to be in it. -- Last edit: 2007-11-19 15:31:43 |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 15:36
|
I did not suggest to delete the picture but to censor it (even if I do not like to censor) |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 19:55
|
Come one guys!!! ... what's the problem here? Kids? ...but kids nowadays can watch thousands of internet pages or TV shows with hard pornographics and violence pictures and would certainly not be traumatized by a pair of buttocks , wouldn't they? ... so, your prudish fears (from 19th century at least) make me laugh  |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 20:04
|
Yes, but their parents would be cross if they found out  |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 20:09
|
The thing is some of us aren't prudes at all. I don't think antp or wrenchhead are prudes personally, they are only trying to make this site acceptable to visitors from all the over the world. What is acceptable in France might not be acceptable in the USA, or Japan or in middle eastern countries. -- Last edit: 2007-11-19 20:11:14 |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 20:15
|
Its not the pair of buttocks but what they are sitting on. I'm not prudish but do try to exhibit a little common sense when I put something on the internet for the whole world to see and judge me by. |
|
◊ 2007-11-19 20:21
|
Exactly, you made my point better then I did. Its not a matter of personal taste. |
|
◊ 2007-11-20 20:05
|
So what? this site is french at the origin... it's the same as "news papers freedom" ... should we ban satiric news paper as we have in some western countries ( Canard Enchainé, Charlie-Hebdo in France for instance) because some articles , drawings or pictures can (or do) hurt some sensibilities (mostly for religious purpose)... (remember the case of the danish paper 2 years ago) |
|
◊ 2007-11-20 21:57
|
Not all, just the things that may hurt many people  And that's another subject.The site has French origin, maybe, but it is a site - so accessible internationally - and most of the visitors are not French. Anyway our (French) hosting company does not want erotic contents. I do not want these much either. Same for continuous discussions like that; I am fed up with that. Some day I'll just send FTP password to some other admin and give up. Why is it so much a problem to modify that picture by blurring a part, compared to the numerous pictures that you modified by adding arrows or by cutting & zooming them? -- Last edit: 2007-11-20 22:04:47 |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 13:56
|
geez, just pixelate the people and it is solved :roll: |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 14:00
|
Normally everybody is complaining that Sixcyl's pictures are too blurry and not well visible enough... .gif ";)") |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 14:56
|
@antp: at first many thanks for the unbelievable big work and enthusiasm, you put in this side.  (Leffe, is it o.k.?)On the other hand: stay cool. You don't have a reason to be upset. It's not unusual, that different things are different seen in different countries, so you cannot make, that everyone is happy. For me this forum, especially the variety of opinions of guys, sitting all around the world, is very interesting, informative and also sometimes exciting. But I'm strictly against the way, that secenes like that above, have to be blurred. Sorry, but as I wrote above: this site is based in Europe and created by Europeans, so there is no reason to make a genuflection to an law or rule from the U.S. We Germans (I think, also other Europeans) are mad and pissed, when we see in the TV all this blurred stuff and hear these many "beep"-sounds to cover "bad" words - what a bullshit. So atom (from Sweden) has done something illegal, too? See here: /vehicle.php?id=134802 Or the German Ralph with that pic from a GDR-movie: http://img142.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bester00avr9.jpg ?? Sorry folks, stay down in reality. -- Last edit: 2007-11-21 14:57:41 |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 15:00
|
It's o.k. here. The main thing is, that the naked facts ("nackte Tatsachen", we say in German) are recognizeable |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 16:35
|
How about a bit of fashion?![[Image: daytonafashionhq0.5919.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/0is228/daytonafashionhq0.5919.jpg) ... or a Martian butt? ![[Image: daytonamarsiantq1.8892.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/0is406/daytonamarsiantq1.8892.jpg) |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 18:00
|
Sure, but what upsets me is that for Sixcyl it seems that it is better to have full freedom even if it annoys the majority (or a large number of people), rather than fix limits on which the majority agrees. It is the same for background cars actually, even it is a completely different subject. -- Last edit: 2007-11-21 18:00:46 |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 19:58
|
I don't ask for full freedom (see what I said about pornography) but as citizen of a civilized and emancipated society (european)I can't bear beeing restricted with some reactionary backward looking way of thinking |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 22:15
|
By "full freedom" I was meaning that: not wanting to be restricted by other people's sensibilities/opinion/etc. You do not want pornography, but what if some other members wants it? Why erotic contents and not pornography? As none of these are accepted by the hosting company nor really acceptable for a general audience for a site about cars... I prefer to lose butt and breast pictures that I do not care about as it is a site about cars, rather than losing some members and reputation of the site. -- Last edit: 2007-11-21 22:19:09 |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 22:19
|
Geez, here's a rather appealing and certainly not-too-revealing image of a tasteful couple having a good time and it generates so much fuss, while posting rather disturbing images from a horror movie and going over how "wonderful" the most disgusting scenes were (I do read that whether I want it or not, I use the "see all comments" thing) is absolutely OK... |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 22:20
|
If I remember well the disgusting scenes were criticized too. |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 22:25
|
And duly so! But why would nudity, especially when the persons in question are rather good-looking, be an issue? |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 22:30
|
Maybe because in most of the societies it is considered as not suitable for kids. And also because at work it is not well accepted to surf on sites with "erotic" contents (and for example if I can't surf safely to the site from my work, I do not know where I'll find the time to do what I do for the site  ) |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 22:34
|
When did this happen? |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 22:36
|
1. Kids should be in bed by now 2. It is only healthy for kids to know how human beings look like. They will find out anyway. 3. At work, you should do work... And if you are being caught posting @ IMCDb, I don't think it really matters if the person catching you in the act would notice there is an exposed bum in the Ferrari... 4. G-MANN, let's not go back to those moments, shall we? |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 22:38
|
I just don't remember seeing any disturbingly violent images on this site. |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 22:39
|
They weren't violent, just disgusting, and the whole discussion of the movie's contents even more so. |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 23:32
|
Yes, this is the point. Im my company private Internet-surfing is forbidden, too. If you watch erotic or pornografic sites, doesn't matter. This is not the point. The point is, that you use you working time for your private edification - and don't do your work. O.k., it's not a big thing, when you are looking a few minutes for the news-headlines, sometimes I'm just checking very shortly my running eBay-offers, but that's all and that's not a problem. Noone wil say anything about it. Once a colleague was thrown out. Not because he was surfing on erotic pages. The reason was, that he has spend several hours per day during his work-time to make the treasury of his football-club. -- Last edit: 2007-11-21 23:33:09 |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 23:41
|
In many companies you can surf in free hours (or even when you do a small pause in your work), but still not on erotic sites |
|
◊ 2007-11-21 23:46
|
I don't think that even the lovely buttocks of the lady here make this site an erotic or porn one. That said, it is far too involving and fun for it to be allowed to be visited @ work |
|
◊ 2007-11-22 09:36
|
This discussion is getting a bit off-topic (topic=cars) and should continue in the forum, I would suggest. -- If the hosting company does not accept such images that is a fact we cannot argue with. Change the image (with a bit of style, please) and get back to the site's main objective. If it gets worse, change the hosting company. The film is legal (rated 14 in Italy!) and fashion magazine covers you find in every supermarket are certainly more erotic. And don't listen to every prudish comment. There are people out there in the world that think cars are evil. Would you listen to them? |
|
◊ 2007-11-22 10:52
|
rater R or 18+ in others, and banned in some others (Iceland) |
|
◊ 2007-11-22 17:03
|
|
|
◊ 2007-11-22 17:05
|
Antoine why dont you "put a final dot" to this, do anything but discussing this for such a long time is pointless  |
|
◊ 2007-11-22 17:12
|
And the conclusion is what? Censoring or not? |
|
◊ 2007-11-22 17:35
|
Bah what for? there's nothing splicit on here no? or is it? or if there's a majority against it then pixelate the couple and done, no? |
|
◊ 2007-11-22 18:30
|
For me there's nothing wrong here, i'd vote leave it at it is |
|
◊ 2007-11-22 18:49
|
fast way, why dont you poll it and that's it? because we are going to be discussing this for ages and not reaching any point, making a poll is the fastest way, with it we will see if the majority wants it as it is or not. |
|
◊ 2007-11-22 21:17
|
Why a poll? My impression is, that except wrenchhead everyone else is against any censorship or deleting. So what? |
|
◊ 2007-12-02 18:00
|
I am not necessarily for censorship or deletion. I simply would like to keep this site suitable for anyone to visit - that includes anyone, of any age, from any society or ethnic group if they are interested in cars. That means that we should show as much respect as we can for other people's ethos. That is solely my concern - nothing else. It is a fact that in order to meet such a goal someone has to set rules and enforce them because in any group there is always a minority who will insist on demonstrating their lack of concern for it by indulging in their personal fetishes. It is apparent that most of you are not at all concerned about these things and think no further then your personal tastes so I will not comment further on these issues. |
|
◊ 2011-07-19 02:03
|
This is just an insult to vehicles. |
|
◊ 2011-07-19 02:06
|
Personally, I dont believe in people doing this in vehicles, I don't Know why. I just dont, Poor Ferrari though. I agree with the others if we want a good reputation, we need to fix stuff like this. -- Last edit: 2011-07-19 02:06:51 |
|
◊ 2011-07-19 02:08
|
Ah, you've dug up a classic. It's the quintessential sixcyl shot. It defines him. |
|
◊ 2011-07-19 03:42
|
1971+ for front lights (compare to earlier US lighting at /vehicle_7495-Ferrari-365-GTB-4-1972.html ). |
Add a comment
