Boy movies

[emuler]

IMHO it may be worthwhile to have posts without actual ed2k links for non-FLM films. Many films don't deserve a full release; some not even a full thread. Maybe a single, searchable thread where such movies could be listed, with a couple of screenshots, perhaps a non-ed2k link, and a short paragraph explaining why the poster thinks this is a dud, will help us all. Many films sound good on IMDB, etc. or at least suggest potential - I need to know that downloading these would be a waste of my resources.

Mimzy can tell us if it is technically better to have another section of the forum, or have a few very large threads. Currently we have [REL], [REQ], and Verified Off Topic. There are many films which don't fit any of these. Honourable Mention? Or should we simply post all kinds of crap in [REL] and request they be moved to [VOT]? Now that we have the reshare requests feature, we can post dead (unshared) ed2k links that can be reshared on request.

[donkeykog]

HAHA Emuler I love the Honorable Mention idea! Thats funny or brilliant!

I understand Phuzzys concern with the less then %10. I had not seen that, and makes sense as criteria for it to be on-topic. But we all use rarefilmfinder and many put the link in the posts. And I just think its awful harsh to say some movies are off-topic when they are clearly not (other then that criteria).

I need to know that downloading these would be a waste of my resources.

Maybe these certain movies just should not be under the harsh verified off topic but not in the on topic. Unlike Columbiana which has less then %10 AND no interesting moments. (Although I liked that movie).

I hope I am not sounding demanding, we have just been talking about site development recently and I am speaking my mind. There is no reason to makes things perverted, but still give credit where its due. I appreciate you all and look forward to your posts!

Its like how much screen time was in Der Baader Meinhof Komplex (https://www.first-loves.net/forums/v ... der+meinof), but clearly on topic.

[Phuzzy4242]

Believe me, Meinhof was discussed. Other than two minutes at the start of the film, there are no children at all in it. The only reason it's not in VOT is because of that little bit of nudity. I advocated moving it to VOT but someone objected.

There have to be some limits. Otherwise, what's the point? Might as well open FLM up for every kind of film, from chick flicks to slashers and this would be just another movie blog with very few childhood films. I don't think an "Honorable Mention" forum is needed - the Verified Off-Topic forum already does that job. Anything in that new forum would still be off-topic. Also, why remove any links? VOT was created so that off-topic films aren't just trashed, they remain available if people want them but there's no doubt they're not FLM.

[ptguardian]

This should be a moot point by now. I agree with Fuzzy on this, what we have is working.

Since only a blunt response is all I can really have time to offer at the moment I will break it down as to how I see it and keep in mind I am being mindful to ALL our well beings here. I am directing this towards everyone.

It is completely stupid to openly showcase, exhibit, portray yourself and the forum you very actively participate in as being a pervert of the adolescent nature and 'attracting' all the bad that can come of it. A little reminder that one of the best releasers we have here is no longer here because of screenshots of films posted here. Keep in mind no one is banning/not allowing films posted here containing RFF keywords and the fact that none have been deleted should be a in your face reminder of this. Simply recategorized to give wise implication that we are not a pedo magnet. I request what I see as being selfish behavior to please be toned down a notch.

Sorry for the direct response but it baffles me sometimes how careless people can be. All of our core members here are good people no reason to have any of them have misfortune come to them because a few people love showing off certain keywords too much.

Please consider that this is a community not just a quick fix for your perverted needs...subtlety is possible and benefits everyone.

My 2 cents in hope to further our gleeful prosperity

[emuler]

I get your point, Phuzzy, but only admins can create threads in the VOT section. What are the rest of us supposed to do? I don't want to post a turkey in the [REL] section - I have no intention of sharing it. I don't want to post it in the [REQ] section - I certainly don't want it. I have, however, wasted time finding, downloading and watching said turkey, and I want to advise others to steer clear. I would also have appreciated had that information already been here somewhere so I wouldn't have downloaded it in the first place.

Totally in agreement with PTg. I'm not talking about nudity here, just on-screen presence and significance of the role.

You look up the film on various databases like IMDB; you see the number of girls in the cast; you check the ages of these girls and decide to go for it. The girls are there, but in insignificant roles - in one case less than 2 SECONDS TOTAL. We need to be able to tell each other about these. Maybe mimzy can grab a database from somewhere and we can simply flag the various entries in it, or maybe he can set up a common thread where anyone can simply put the name and IMDB link and a one line comment. It is sad to think of dozens, even hundreds of our members downloading the same film, watching it, and then deleting it as being non-FLM.

[Phuzzy4242]

Hmm, I guess I can see your point, emuler, but I don't think an additional forum is called for. Would opening up VOT to allow anyone to create threads serve the purpose? That forum's main reason for existence is so we don't just trash a film that doesn't happen to meet FLM guidelines since someone might want the film anyway. A "sticky" thread in General could also do the job.

[mimzy]

We might consider allowing everyone to post in VOT, but on the other hand, VOT has release-type threads that are moved from somewhere else, so a list of IMDB codes and one line comments doesn't fit in very well. I'd say a sticky thread in General would be the best place for suck a list. The thread would show up if people search for an IMDB code. If it turns out to be not sufficient, we will figure out something else.

[mimzy]

Believe me, Meinhof was discussed. Other than two minutes at the start of the film, there are no children at all in it. The only reason it's not in VOT is because of that little bit of nudity. I advocated moving it to VOT but someone objected.

Probably me

Seriously, do we want to suggest that if someone finds a movie like BMK in the future, he should keep it in secret and for god's sake not release it here, because it is absolutely off-topic?

[Phuzzy4242]

I made the sticky thread here.

Seriously, do we want to suggest that if someone finds a movie like BMK in the future, he should keep it in secret and for god's sake not release it here, because it is absolutely off-topic?

For me, if the rest of the movie hadn't been OK in its own right I wouldn't have bothered downloading it but I didn't know that until afterwards so I was just lucky. Meinhof isn't a childhood film by any stretch of the imagination so it was posted here only because of the brief nudity. I never understood why anyone spends the time downloading a 2-hour film just to see 2 minutes of bare behind. In any case, there's now a place to put those "this film is off-topic" comments.

[donkeykog]

I never understood why anyone spends the time downloading a 2-hour film just to see 2 minutes of bare behind.

Agree, buy a nudist video But these (movies above) still do not fit the turkey (or false advertising) description. I understand the need to be discreet, so I am at a lack of ideas of how to present these movies. BMC, Delta Force, and DL are definitely not turkeys.

I love the idea of Emulers though and will comment there.


Sorry about totally moving this thread from boy movies.