# MEL GIBSON DIED!!!!



## werdna (Mar 15, 2005)

well not realy but while your here go vote on aqua rank we are 18

http://www.aquarank.com/in.php?id=xenon


----------



## therizman1 (Jan 6, 2006)

Up to 16th...


----------



## the REASON (Jun 18, 2006)

i really dont hink aquarank is even worth voting at. omg guys applesnail.net is nipping at our heels!


----------



## Guest (Oct 5, 2006)

Whoever the f*ck keeps deleting my posts, there is absolutely nothing sexually suggestive about this image.
Tera is on her way to donate blood at the Red Cross, then she's going to feed puppies at the local no-kill shelter.


----------



## Guest (Oct 5, 2006)

Stop deleting my %^$^**& posts!


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

I never could figure out how supposed grown men need to put suggestive photos on line so that the younger crowd (under 17) has to be subjected to it. Including offensive images to our few women that post here. When you can come up with a real answer to it, I might consider not deleting your suggestive photos.









PS: Now you know who is deleting them.


----------



## Guest (Oct 5, 2006)

hastatus said:


> I never could figure out how supposed grown men need to put suggestive photos on line so that the younger crowd (under 17) has to be subjected to it. Including offensive images to our few women that post here.


Because we're highly perverse and...


> The Lounge This forum is reserved for any and all topics that are not related to fishkeeping. MEMBERS ONLY. WARNING: This forum contains material considered PG-13 in nature.


It's allowed.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

Try again:



> 2. No pictures or direct URL links displaying nudity, *sexually suggestive images*, or gore.
> * This goes for ALL IMAGES posted to the site (i.e. avatars, signatures, posted images, gallery images, etc.)
> -Thong shots
> -Nudity and near nudity
> ...


highlited just for you.


----------



## Guest (Oct 5, 2006)

Well, these aren't sexually suggestive.
In this photo. Tera emphasizes the importance of motorcycle safety.


----------



## mdrs (May 1, 2006)

the only legal definition for insanity is doing the exact same thing over and over expecting different results. but have fun playing with fire.


----------



## hyphen (Apr 4, 2004)

if you cant follow rules then dont post.

p.s. grow up.


----------



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

The rules intention with mentioning sexually suggestive images was to leave the door open to give discipline to members who posts pictures with overt sexual undertones that do not contain actual nudity.

However, it was also the intention that deletion of posts would ONLY be used if nudity is present. If nudity is not present the image should be discussed with other moderators to determine a course of action.

Please feel free to discuss in this thread if you want.


----------



## acestro (Jul 7, 2003)

So....

wait.

What happened to Mel Gibson?


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

It was never about Mel it was about voting for PFURY.


> well not realy but while your here go vote on aqua rank we are 18
> 
> http://www.aquarank.com/in.php?id=xenon


Perhaps we can sue him for false advertising?


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

a picture of tara patric taking a dump could be sexully suggestive, so is so damn s3xy and hot..


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

I didnt see anything wrong with those pics... I have seen worse.

But "Sexually Suggestive" is an opinion, as Nismo points out.

I can see how Frank may have been offended being that she is a porn star..... so ive heard....


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom Posted Today, 09:37 AM
> I didnt see anything wrong with those pics... I have seen worse.
> 
> But "Sexually Suggestive" is an opinion, as Nismo points out.
> ...


1. wrong, I personally was not offended.

2. My reasons for deleting was based on a complaint from a female member who has every right to complain based on the sexually suggestive image. To ignore the complaint is to agree with the image that offends some women than it does ALL THE MEN.

3. BULLSNAKE was acting like an ass and arguing the forum rules. Unless the forum rules are invalid or unenforceable, I acted accordingly (in my opinion) for the moment it happened. I make no apologies to anyone for looking out for the younger crowd and our few female members. LIVE WITH IT. The day that I no longer care about how PFURY is operated is the day I leave.









4. BULLSNAKE grow up.


----------



## Fresh2salt (Jul 16, 2004)

Voted


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

hastatus said:


> > Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom Posted Today, 09:37 AM
> > I didnt see anything wrong with those pics... I have seen worse.
> >
> > But "Sexually Suggestive" is an opinion, as Nismo points out.
> ...


Sorry Frank, I meant no offense - I didnt know there was a complaint.









I also think that Bullsnake meant no offense as well...


----------



## PygoFanatic (May 2, 2006)

I dont think the problem is Frank being too quick to delete posts, or Bullsnake for being too quick to post pics of hot chicks. I think the problem lies in the subjective natured, and seemingly contradictive, forum rules.

From Bullsnake's quote of the forum rules, it sounds as if he has a case for being allowed to post his images. From Frank's post of the forum rules, it sounds as if he has a case for deleting the images that Bullsnake posts. Unfortunately, we live in a society in which expectations for its members must be spelled out down to the letter. The rule either needs to be "No pics of women at all" or "No pics of women with any portion of a thong, any portion of the areola, any portion of the buttocks, any portion of the thighs, any portion of the shoulder...."

Just a suggestion...but again, who the f*ck am I?


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

hastatus said:


> > Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom Posted Today, 09:37 AM
> > I didnt see anything wrong with those pics... I have seen worse.
> >
> > But "Sexually Suggestive" is an opinion, as Nismo points out.
> ...


bitchs always get all worked up about pictures of chicks far hatter then they are, instead of getting offended she should get her ass in the gym.. if men were stopped from looking at every image of a women that most women found affensive we would never be able to check out a decent rack..

/TOPS


----------



## Guest (Oct 5, 2006)

Hey, I was just making a joke in a contentless thread; then I was just having fun with the "guerrilla artist" and Frank who were so offended by a picture of Tera Patrick.

I will step down from this thread so the "guerilla artist" and the Frank can stop censoring me and flaming me with their moral superiority.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Bullsnake Posted Today, 10:05 AM
> Hey, I was just making a joke in a contentless thread; then I was just having fun with the "guerrilla artist" and Frank who were so offended by a picture of Tera Patrick.
> 
> I will step down from this thread so the "guerilla artist" and the Frank can stop censoring me and flaming me with their moral superiority.


I rest my case.


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

What case? I think Pygofanatic has a good point...


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> nismo driver Posted Today, 10:04 AM bitchs always get all worked up about pictures of chicks far hatter then they are, instead of getting offended she should get her ass in the gym.. if men were stopped from looking at every image of a women that most women found affensive we would never be able to check out a decent rack..
> 
> /TOPS


Try the porn shop on line. You can get all the images you need to satisfy you.


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

Alright...enough of this. Bullsnake...if the deleted pictures I saw in the staff lounge were posted by you then yes...one was completely inappropriate to post in this forum. Why the envelope is continually pushed is beyond me. 
If a picture is not something you would want you boss to see on your computer...dont post it. People are browsing at work...and the picture I saw...although not total nudity...could get some people fired if it showed up on their computer. Not only was it sexually suggestive but it could be considered sexual harassment if a female coworker saw it.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom Posted Today, 10:10 AM
> What case?





> and Frank who were so offended by a picture of Tera Patrick.


1. I don't know anything about Tera, nor do I care.

2. go back and read my remarks. Evidently you are bouncing around and replying to a thread that you clearly are not reading or understanding.


----------



## bjmarche (Jun 30, 2005)

> MEL GIBSON DIED!!!!


You had my hopes up


----------



## PygoFanatic (May 2, 2006)

Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:


> What case? I think Pygofanatic has a good point...


Greatest post ever!!


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> I dont think the problem is Frank being too quick to delete posts, or Bullsnake for being too quick to post pics of hot chicks. *I think the problem lies in the subjective natured, and seemingly contradictive, forum rules.*
> 
> From Bullsnake's quote of the forum rules, it sounds as if he has a case for being allowed to post his images. From Frank's post of the forum rules, it sounds as if he has a case for deleting the images that Bullsnake posts. Unfortunately, we live in a society in which expectations for its members must be spelled out down to the letter. The rule either needs to be "No pics of women at all" or "No pics of women with any portion of a thong, any portion of the areola, any portion of the buttocks, any portion of the thighs, any portion of the shoulder...."
> 
> Just a suggestion...but again, who the f*ck am I?


For those looking at the photos presently in this thread and think that those are the photos I deleted you are totally wrong. Xenon has remarked on the deleted photos above. I did not remove those that are presently in this thread because they are not offensive, though they are close.

Get a brain folks, I'm not big brother.


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

PygoFanatic said:


> > I dont think the problem is Frank being too quick to delete posts, or Bullsnake for being too quick to post pics of hot chicks. *I think the problem lies in the subjective natured, and seemingly contradictive, forum rules.*
> >
> > From Bullsnake's quote of the forum rules, it sounds as if he has a case for being allowed to post his images. From Frank's post of the forum rules, it sounds as if he has a case for deleting the images that Bullsnake posts. Unfortunately, we live in a society in which expectations for its members must be spelled out down to the letter. The rule either needs to be "No pics of women at all" or "No pics of women with any portion of a thong, any portion of the areola, any portion of the buttocks, any portion of the thighs, any portion of the shoulder...."
> >
> ...


Oh, I see


----------



## PygoFanatic (May 2, 2006)

hastatus said:


> > I dont think the problem is Frank being too quick to delete posts, or Bullsnake for being too quick to post pics of hot chicks. *I think the problem lies in the subjective natured, and seemingly contradictive, forum rules.*
> >
> > From Bullsnake's quote of the forum rules, it sounds as if he has a case for being allowed to post his images. From Frank's post of the forum rules, it sounds as if he has a case for deleting the images that Bullsnake posts. Unfortunately, we live in a society in which expectations for its members must be spelled out down to the letter. The rule either needs to be "No pics of women at all" or "No pics of women with any portion of a thong, any portion of the areola, any portion of the buttocks, any portion of the thighs, any portion of the shoulder...."
> >
> ...


I really hope that remark isnt directed at me. It should be clear to anybody who reads any of my posts (expcept the ones in the HOF) that I certainly do have a brain. To randomly say "Get a brain" is about as effective as PGD calling people "hipacrit" for thinking a fight video is fake.

By the way, for future reference, I have no idea what is and what is not inapproriate to post after reading the forum rules. So maybe I do need a brain. Or clearer rules.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

I am glad that there aren't 10 billion other sites where you can look at pictures of half-naked or naked chicks... Nope, everyone has to come to Pfury to get their fix.

Get over it already, like someone said before - people can get in trouble browsing at work. It's unnecessary and unsafe and I don't see why people always have to push the envelope


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> PygoFanatic Posted Today, 10:24 AM ...*I really hope that remark isnt directed at me.* It should be clear to anybody who reads any of my posts (expcept the ones in the HOF) that I certainly do have a brain. To randomly say "Get a brain" is about as effective as PGD calling people "hipacrit" for thinking a fight video is fake.
> 
> By the way, for future reference, I have no idea what is and what is not inapproriate to post after reading the forum rules. So maybe I do need a brain. Or clearer rules.


There is an old saying......if the shoe fits wear it.

The remark was meant for anyone that is arguing the obvious and Xenon has stated it.


----------



## PygoFanatic (May 2, 2006)

hastatus said:


> The rules intention with mentioning sexually suggestive images was to leave the door open to give discipline to members who posts pictures with overt sexual undertones that do not contain actual nudity.
> 
> However, it was also the intention that deletion of posts would ONLY be used if nudity is present. If nudity is not present the image should be discussed with other moderators to determine a course of action.
> 
> *Please feel free to discuss in this thread if you want.*


He said it, not me..


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> PygoFanatic Posted Today, 10:31 AM ...Way to go out of your way to insult somebody who is trying to intellectually contribute to the discussion. I guess if my argument doesnt help your case, I need a brain.
> 
> I wasnt referring to ANY pics at all. I was referring to the forum rules.
> 
> But thanks again Frank. You make this site oh-so-enjoyable with your condescending tone...


I give up, evidently you DO THINK I WAS talking about you.


----------



## PygoFanatic (May 2, 2006)

Maybe you werent referring to me, but you didnt explicitly say you werent when I asked. All I was offered was the old "if the shoe fits" addage. I appreciate the PM, however. I will now bow out of this debate as I have said all there is to say.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> PygoFanatic Posted Today, 10:36 AM
> Maybe you werent referring to me, but you didnt explicitly say you werent when I asked. All I was offered was the old "if the shoe fits" addage. I appreciate the PM, however. I will now bow out of this debate as I have said all there is to say.


Glad to clear it up with you. For the rest:


> There is an old saying......if the shoe fits wear it.
> 
> _The remark was meant for anyone that is arguing the obvious and Xenon has stated it._


Note the 2nd line.


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

PygoFanatic said:


> By the way, for future reference, I have no idea what is and what is not inapproriate to post after reading the forum rules. So maybe I do need a brain. Or clearer rules.


Ok...instead of just talking about how unclear the rules for this site are...why not do something productive and come up with a clear and concise rule that will not only give the members freedom to discuss various topics but be respectful to those members that are not going through puberty, parents who would allow their children to view this forum, and the occasional female member that doesnt want to view women being objectified. Now remember...everyone has a different view on these subjects, but your rule must make it completely clear what will be allowed and what wont be allowed not only to you...but every member on this site.


----------



## acestro (Jul 7, 2003)

In before the EVER so crucial lock....

Methinks this should be discussed outside of the lounge.

dang, now I'm down 2 cents


----------



## PygoFanatic (May 2, 2006)

Grosse Gurke said:


> By the way, for future reference, I have no idea what is and what is not inapproriate to post after reading the forum rules. So maybe I do need a brain. Or clearer rules.


Ok...instead of just talking about how unclear the rules for this site are...why not do something productive and come up with a clear and concise rule that will not only give the members freedom to discuss various topics but be respectful to those members that are not going through puberty, parents who would allow their children to view this forum, and the occasional female member that doesnt want to view women being objectified. Now remember...everyone has a different view on these subjects, but your rule must make it completely clear what will be allowed and what wont be allowed not only to you...but every member on this site.
[/quote]

If you were seriously charging me with suck a task, I would seriously work on coming up with a rule that is as explicit as possible. I really wasnt attempting to complain...I just got a feeling of "damned if you do, damned if you dont" once different parts of the rules were quoted. If you cant see where Im coming from on that end, I dont think youre looking very hard. I think a clear formation of the rule would start by having the Moderators (i.e. you, Xenon, hastatus) and/or the MAB actually decide exactly what you do and dont want on the site. A rule can be codified once such guidelines are established.

Im not about to take time to come up with better rules than what you already have posted for the site if Im simply getting set up to get ripped to shreds. I know how democracy works, and its a slow-moving machine.

...Wait a minute...was that a trick to get me to come out of this thread-specific retirement?


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> acestro Posted Today, 10:50 AM
> In before the EVER so crucial lock....
> 
> Methinks this should be discussed outside of the lounge.
> ...


Good thing I always re-read threads, for a minute there thought I read....._now I'm down no cents (=no sense). _


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

PygoFanatic said:


> If you were seriously charging me with suck a task, I would seriously work on coming up with a rule that is as explicit as possible. I really wasnt attempting to complain...I just got a feeling of "damned if you do, damned if you dont" once different parts of the rules were quoted. If you cant see where Im coming from on that end, I dont think youre looking very hard. I think a clear formation of the rule would start by having the Moderators (i.e. you, Xenon, hastatus) and/or the MAB actually decide exactly what you do and dont want on the site. A rule can be codified once such guidelines are established.
> 
> Im not about to take time to come up with better rules than what you already have posted for the site if Im simply getting set up to get ripped to shreds. I know how democracy works, and its a slow-moving machine.
> 
> *...Wait a minute...was that a trick to get me to come out of this thread-specific retirement?*












I was totally serious. We have been struggling with a rule that would allow for a freedom to post but also let this site be appropriate for everyone to enjoy. Of course whatever you came up with would be discussed with staff and MAB and not just enacted...but I would really like to see what you could come up with. It is a huge and complicated task....maybe we will even need separate rules to direct the activities in the lounge vs the hobby forums.


----------



## Guest (Oct 5, 2006)

I think we can come up with a compromise that will be acceptable to everybody.
How about the rule that pictures of women canbe posted, but they have to be really ugly and wear something non-revealing like a burka or a beekeeper's outfit?
















:rasp:


----------



## werdna (Mar 15, 2005)

lol it must be workin we are at 12 now.. everyone keep reading and VOTING


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

I have learned not to post any pix of women at all...


----------



## ZOSICK (May 25, 2005)

have any of you seen a pg-13 movie. there is more nudity in pg-13 movies than most of what I have seen hear. It seems some one should be looking at the dumb ass drug posts. It seems you are saying drugs are OK but females are BAD. so are attractive females worse for kids or are drugs worse.


----------



## Guest (Oct 6, 2006)

I'm really surprised. As a JOKE, I hotlinked a few girlie pics to satirically "reward" people for voting on Aquarank and created a bit of a stir. This contentless thread is on its 3rd page and I've received about a dozen IMs about this.

I have my own theories on why those particular bikini pictures have had such an impact on certain individuals, but I don't want to risk offending anyone or making anyone uncomfortable.


----------



## acestro (Jul 7, 2003)

HOF?


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> 06 C6 LS2 Posted Today, 07:45 PM
> have any of you seen a pg-13 movie. there is more nudity in pg-13 movies than most of what I have seen hear. It seems some one should be looking at the dumb ass drug posts. It seems you are saying drugs are OK but females are BAD. so are attractive females worse for kids or are drugs worse.


Yes???? Yes??? Yes???



> Bullsnake Posted Today, 08:07 PM
> *I'm really surprised.* As a JOKE, I hotlinked a few girlie pics to satirically "reward" people for voting on Aquarank and created a bit of a stir. This contentless thread is on its 3rd page and I've received about a dozen IMs about this.
> 
> I have my own theories on why those particular bikini pictures have had such an impact on certain individuals, but I don't want to risk offending anyone or making anyone uncomfortable.


I'm not.











> acestro Posted Today, 08:13 PM
> HOF?


Some like playing with their fiddles.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

Here's a great idea. Since 99.7 % of photos that feature women in semi-states of undress, why not get one of our female members to write the rules. I think that would a great idea. Then the guys will know unequivacle what can and can't be posted by a woman's point of view on what is considered offensive to them. If that don't work. Suggest the women post men's photo that they like. May be some of our male members (and I don't mean the organ) will enjoy seeing them too.


----------



## ZOSICK (May 25, 2005)

most business decisions are made on 80% of data. so why would some thing less then 80% be logical.
if 80% of the public wanted to see dead cats on TV then you have dead cats on TV the majority always rule as long as its no taboo or immoral. just my opinion.


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

hastatus said:


> Here's a great idea. Since 99.7 % of photos that feature women in semi-states of undress, why not get one of our female members to write the rules. I think that would a great idea. Then the guys will know unequivacle what can and can't be posted by a woman's point of view on what is considered offensive to them. If that don't work. Suggest the women post men's photo that they like. May be some of our male members (and I don't mean the organ) will enjoy seeing them too.


No thanks, enough of the world's media is influenced by women.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> 06 C6 LS2 Posted Today, 01:31 AM
> most business decisions are made on 80% of data. so why would some thing less then 80% be logical.
> if 80% of the public wanted to see dead cats on TV then you have dead cats on TV *the majority always rule* as long as its no taboo or immoral. just my opinion.


Yes in democracy unless you get sued and tied up in court. Followed by a liberal judge giving in to the minority. Ah Freedom the price we all pay. BUT (and here's where you are totally wrong, ready?

This is a PRIVATELY OWNED FORUM BOARD. So the rules you think exist on majority wins, is well to put it bluntly bull sh*t.











> Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom Posted Today, 07:33 AM ...No thanks, enough of the world's media is influenced by women.


Ahh, somone is afraid of women.


----------



## acestro (Jul 7, 2003)

Uh oh....

I think this can be figured out. It just has to be OBNOXIOUSLY explicit or it has to allow certain select mods to judge each picture individually.


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

I dont know about being afraid, but everything I see on TV or the movies is totally targetted towards women (except sports). Look at these ads where the man is an idiot and the woman has to help him do it. It is total sexism. If there was a commercial where the woman was helpless and the guy had to come in and help her... all of the "Feminists" would go crazy...


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom Posted Today, 08:10 AM
> I dont know about being afraid, but everything I see on TV or the movies is totally targetted towards women (except sports).* Look at these ads where the man is an idiot and the woman has to help him do it. It is total sexism.* If there was a commercial where the woman was helpless and the guy had to come in and help her... all of the "Feminists" would go crazy...


Obviously you weren't into Ozzie and Harriet.


----------



## nemo the piranha (Sep 29, 2006)

oh rite


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

But you see my point...?

How about those ads where the man can't make himself food... he has to be dependent on his wife (or gf) to come home and save the day.

Never does it show the woman totally dependent on the man for his paycheck, while she sits at home watching TV.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom Posted Today, 08:24 AM
> But you see my point...?
> 
> How about those ads where the man can't make himself food... he has to be dependent on his wife (or gf) to come home and save the day.
> ...


I think you watch too much tv.


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

Actually, I dont pay for cable TV anymore. Just cable internet.


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

hastatus said:


> Here's a great idea. Since 99.7 % of photos that feature women in semi-states of undress, why not get one of our female members to write the rules. I think that would a great idea. Then the guys will know unequivacle what can and can't be posted by a woman's point of view on what is considered offensive to them. If that don't work. Suggest the women post men's photo that they like. May be some of our male members (and I don't mean the organ) will enjoy seeing them too.


if i wanted to deal with some bitchs telling me what to do i would get married..

why would a site that has 99 percent males have the rules written by the 1 percent?

that is the most submissive hippy p*ssy bull sh*t i have ever read


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> nismo driver Posted Today, 09:11 AM ..if i wanted to deal with some bitchs telling me what to do i would get married..
> 
> why would a site that has 99 percent males have the rules written by the 1 percent?
> 
> that is the most submissive hippy p*ssy bull sh*t i have ever read


Welcome to PFURY where your opinion is worth about the same as mine (or not).


----------



## thebluyak (Apr 14, 2006)

nismo driver said:


> Here's a great idea. Since 99.7 % of photos that feature women in semi-states of undress, why not get one of our female members to write the rules. I think that would a great idea. Then the guys will know unequivacle what can and can't be posted by a woman's point of view on what is considered offensive to them. If that don't work. Suggest the women post men's photo that they like. May be some of our male members (and I don't mean the organ) will enjoy seeing them too.


if i wanted to deal with some bitchs telling me what to do i would get married..

why would a site that has 99 percent males have the rules written by the 1 percent?

that is the most submissive hippy p*ssy bull sh*t i have ever read
[/quote]

LOL good point


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

Actually, its not a good point. I know I wrote this before. Must be overlooked. Its a PRIVATE FORUM the rules are written by that 1% for the owner of this board. Why not just contribute to the MAB and tell whet rules you want instead of whining about it? Much more value in membership then.


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

hastatus said:


> Actually, its not a good point. I know I wrote this before. Must be overlooked. Its a PRIVATE FORUM the rules are written by that 1% for the owner of this board. Why not just contribute to the MAB and tell whet rules you want instead of whining about it? Much more value in membership then.


are you calling xenon a woman?


----------



## thebluyak (Apr 14, 2006)

hastatus said:


> Actually, its not a good point. I know I wrote this before. Must be overlooked. Its a PRIVATE FORUM the rules are written by that 1% for the owner of this board. Why not just contribute to the MAB and tell whet rules you want instead of whining about it? Much more value in membership then.


Honestly i dont care about the rules, if we have pg 13 material works for me, if not then im not going to worry over it. But the MAB should take a stand on a SET rule so we can stop having this pissing match over what someone wants to post and what .5% of the members find offensive


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> nismo driver Posted Today, 09:27 AM ...are you calling xenon a woman?


Actually, you are:_ if i wanted to deal with some bitchs telling me what to do _


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

nismo driver said:


> Here's a great idea. Since 99.7 % of photos that feature women in semi-states of undress, why not get one of our female members to write the rules. I think that would a great idea. Then the guys will know unequivacle what can and can't be posted by a woman's point of view on what is considered offensive to them. If that don't work. Suggest the women post men's photo that they like. May be some of our male members (and I don't mean the organ) will enjoy seeing them too.


if i wanted to deal with some bitchs telling me what to do i would get married..

why would a site that has 99 percent males have the rules written by the 1 percent?

that is the most submissive hippy p*ssy bull sh*t i have ever read
[/quote]

FTW









Totally agree.


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

hastatus said:


> > nismo driver Posted Today, 09:27 AM ...are you calling xenon a woman?
> 
> 
> Actually, you are:_ if i wanted to deal with some bitchs telling me what to do _


uh thanks for taking that out of context, that statement was direct towards the scenario of "if" the women wrote the rules about pictures..

i currently feel that the rules in place are fair and there is no need for a change to further restrict them..


----------



## thebluyak (Apr 14, 2006)

yeah they are fair but then it leaves the mods to decipher the rules in their own manner, What frank may think is offensive taylor may not. We need a set sceniaro of when to edit posts and delete peoples pictures


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> frank may think is offensive taylor may not.


Good grief, some of you think I run around censoring.










What I find offensive:

1. killing babies
2. people killing people.
3. Photos with real killed people in them that are posted for enjoyment.
4. Pornography posted towards kids (17 and under).
5. Idiots that can't figure out 1 - 4.

Other than that. I could care less what you post on here in the lounge. If I get a complaint whether it be by a woman, man or child I act on it. Get real people.


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

hastatus said:


> > frank may think is offensive taylor may not.
> 
> 
> Good grief, some of you think I run around censoring.:laugh:
> ...


so in this situation instead of acting on it by deleteing the picture why not tell the complainer to deal with it and not eb uber sensative?

heres a complaint frank: i dont like your posts can you delete them?

now bviously im not being serious but the point is you cant go around deleting everything that one person complains about, im sure you get tons of complaints abotu numerous things but just because it a girl complaining about a picture of a hot girl that most of us apprecaite doesnt mean you should delete tha one picture but nothe other 9k on this forum that the complainer might no t even know about but would possibly complain abot if she did find them..

virtually every thread to trick people into voting turns into a string of bikini pics and voted posts so is she now going to read through everyone and pick choose which pictures she thinks are offensive then ask you to clean them up?

oh yeah VOTED 11thpace and going up keep voting you bitchs (refering to all people not jsut women)


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> nismo driver Posted Today, 09:56 AM...so in this situation instead of acting on it by deleteing the picture why not tell the complainer to deal with it and not eb uber sensative?
> 
> *heres a complaint frank: i dont like your posts can you delete them?*
> 
> ...










If you only knew how many REPORT TO THE MOD I get on the very same thing you just posted.









Let me put it in simple words: I FOLLOW THE RULES, if I get a complaint about a member breaking the rules, then they are deleted as per THE RULES. Jeezes, your an idiot.


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

hastatus said:


> > nismo driver Posted Today, 09:56 AM...so in this situation instead of acting on it by deleteing the picture why not tell the complainer to deal with it and not eb uber sensative?
> >
> > *heres a complaint frank: i dont like your posts can you delete them?*
> >
> ...


frank if your going to be sucha stickler for the rules then whats up with this comment, i have refarained from laying into you for misquoting me yet you feel it necessary to take a jab at my intellect?

follow the rules!

consider this my formal complaint that your making a personal attack on another member..


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> frank if your going to be sucha stickler for the rules then whats up with this comment, i have refarained from laying into you for misquoting me yet you feel it necessary to take a jab at my intellect?
> 
> follow the rules!
> 
> *consider this my formal complaint that your making a personal attack on another member.. *


Complaint noted. But doesn't change the fact that YOU can't follow the rules and arguing with me about the pinned rules illustrates my point. Only an idiot can't figure that out.







Feel free to PM me if you want to explore your view of yourself.


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

hastatus said:


> > frank if your going to be sucha stickler for the rules then whats up with this comment, i have refarained from laying into you for misquoting me yet you feel it necessary to take a jab at my intellect?
> >
> > follow the rules!
> >
> ...


how is it that i cant follow the rules? when was the last time iever posted an innappropraite picture?

im not arguing the rule i agree with the rule im arguning your interpertation of enforcing the rule..


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> again withthe insults
> 
> im not arguing the rule i agree withthe rule im arguning your interpertation of enforcing the rule..


Interpretation? Interpretation?:laugh:









What part of this don't you get?



> 2. No pictures or direct URL links displaying nudity, sexually suggestive images, or gore.
> * This goes for ALL IMAGES posted to the site (i.e. avatars, signatures, posted images, gallery images, etc.)
> -Thong shots
> -Nudity and near nudity
> ...


For the record, Nismo has not posed a suggestive photo. The argument centers on the rules and my interpretation of it. I have already told the TEAM and Staff that the photos posted originally were indeed sexually offensive (I showed it to them) and while 1 photo was border line, the other 1 was indeed offensive. Now, why did I immediately remove them?

It was a judgment call. The photos were on-line in the wee hours of the morning when mods are either in bed sleeping or not on-line. Kids however are on-line. I had already gotten complaints about it. I was not going to wait for other STAFF or the TEAM to discuss it while the photos were still on line. Certainly the offender would have continued to post more........and he did, though not as strong.

Perhaps my calling Nismo "an idiot" was strong. But its frustrating when someone who professes to be an adult can't figure out the reason why I deleted them. I get the impression that Nismo thinks its OK to subject children to nudity or near nudity. I make no apologies for looking out for the kids.


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

hastatus said:


> > nismo driver Posted Today, 09:56 AM...so in this situation instead of acting on it by deleteing the picture why not tell the complainer to deal with it and not eb uber sensative?
> >
> > *heres a complaint frank: i dont like your posts can you delete them?*
> >
> ...


Dang... that was not cool...


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom Posted Today, 11:39 AM ...Dang... that was not cool...


How's this? Opinons are like a$$holes everyone has them.


----------



## ZOSICK (May 25, 2005)

this thread is funny as hell..


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> 06 C6 LS2 Posted Today, 12:28 PM
> this thread is funny as hell..


It is indeed. The offending photos were taken off a long time ago and they act as if they were still there or subject to argue about.


----------



## redrum781 (Apr 10, 2006)

voted...thats what this tread is about.....right? btw looks like i missed the good pics


----------



## thebluyak (Apr 14, 2006)

hastatus said:


> > 06 C6 LS2 Posted Today, 12:28 PM
> > this thread is funny as hell..
> 
> 
> It is indeed. The offending photos were taken off a long time ago and they act as if they were still there or subject to argue about.


BTW I wasnt calling u out when I said u might find something offensive and taylor may not, just the first two mod names that came to my head.

I dont think its so much about the photos being taken off or not but the rules are kinda vague and you know people will push the line just to find where the straw is drawn


----------



## Guest (Oct 6, 2006)

hastatus said:


> Perhaps my calling Nismo "an idiot" was strong. But its frustrating when someone who professes to be an adult can't figure out the reason why I deleted them. I get the impression that Nismo thinks its OK to subject children to nudity or near nudity. I make no apologies for looking out for the kids.


BOOO!! Playing the Sally Struthers "I'm saving the children..." card. That's weak! That argument didn't work for Michael Jackson, either.









How about the rule that we can post pictures of women in bikinis if they're really fat. 
I don't think women feel as 'threatened' by fat women as they do attractive women.


----------



## redrum781 (Apr 10, 2006)

god i feel sorry for there ankles


----------



## acestro (Jul 7, 2003)




----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> BOOO!! Playing the Sally Struthers "I'm saving the children..." card. That's weak! That argument didn't work for Michael Jackson, either.
> 
> How about the rule that we can post pictures of women in bikinis if they're really fat.
> I don't think women feel as 'threatened' by fat women as they do attractive women.


hoohumm, you really do make my point don't you. Only an idiot would come back with another idiotic photo post to make a meaningless post.

Glad you made the female complaint valid......and that you fit her description.

Personally, I'm glad that you are nowhere near my grandkids.









PS: I see you quickly removed the other photo and substituted a new one. Why not just put the other one back on so that we all can see what you changed.


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

redrum781 said:


> > BOOO!! Playing the Sally Struthers "I'm saving the children..." card. That's weak! That argument didn't work for Michael Jackson, either.
> >
> > How about the rule that we can post pictures of women in bikinis if they're really fat.
> > I don't think women feel as 'threatened' by fat women as they do attractive women.
> ...


hhmmmm
i could work wonders with this good thing there are rules


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

Yes I'm sure you could nismo. I'm quite clear where you are coming from.



> my sister is #1 best prostitute


----------



## thebluyak (Apr 14, 2006)

hastatus said:


> Yes I'm sure you could nismo. I'm quite clear where you are coming from.
> 
> 
> 
> > my sister is #1 best prostitute


How has this thread not gotten locked lol


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

Damn man, you're being a complete ass today... or maybe you always are


----------



## Guest (Oct 6, 2006)

Frank, I'm not being obstinate here. I really want to work with the staff on this.
Is this bikini picture okay?


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Bullsnake Posted Today, 01:15 PM
> Frank, I'm not being obstinate here. I really want to work with the staff on this.
> Is this bikini picture okay?


Now that is ugly.


----------



## Leasure1 (Jul 24, 2006)

Parents should keep kids off the net if they don't want them to see pics of hot chicks. That is why internet providers put parental controls on thier cpu. If parents chose to not use this, then it is an invitation to look at what ever the child wants. Personally, I would not put a cpu in ANY of my childrens rooms. Hell, I know what I was doing on the net when it first came about. JACKING THAT KID OFF!!! Besides, listen to the music that is on everyday radio top 40. Every song talks about wanting a guy to rub my ass and lovely lady lumps. In the back and in the front. Come on. Now that is sexually provocative. A pic dosen't actually TELL the story. You gotta make one up. Radio however is the opposite. You can't see it, but it's ok if they hear EXACTLY what to do with thier c*ck and balls. Put them in the next beeeatch's mouth.

For example" Wait till you see my dick"
That song tells all the 14 y/o boys to show thier thing off like it's a prize from the fair. Stick it in thier mouth, blah freakin'n blah. Not to metion they bleep out the bad words with a girls voice has just reached climax

There is no way around sexuallity in the 21 century. It's everywhere. Better ban Victoria's secrete from making the famous bra and panty comercials. Otherwise things may get out of hand. Kids these days know it all from Pot, coke, titties, and ass. IMO, there is no way of stoping it. To this day, I still find free porn all over the net. Wordsex.com Is great for the ones who wives gave up on them along time ago, and for the 16 y/o who need to "VENT". LOL


----------



## ZOSICK (May 25, 2005)

bullsnake you find some odd pic's man.


----------



## thebluyak (Apr 14, 2006)

Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom said:


> Damn man, you're being a complete ass today... or maybe you always are


Who?


----------



## Leasure1 (Jul 24, 2006)

I think P-fury needs a forume for people to go and curse at eachother and call people names or something. I think everyone here gets worked up sometimes, and we all need a place to take aggression and stuff out on eachother









Ofcourse we would need this thread to be rated R, so I doubt this will happen, but I still think we all need a place like this.


----------



## thebluyak (Apr 14, 2006)

there would be no way to regulate who goes in and out, you cant set it to check the birthday because you can put whatever birthday you want. But sometimes I do feel like picking fights so I feel where thats coming from


----------



## nismo driver (Jan 27, 2004)

hastatus said:


> Yes I'm sure you could nismo. I'm quite clear where you are coming from.
> 
> 
> 
> > my sister is #1 best prostitute


well now i understand you are not in touch with the youth of today to understand the inside joke there..

however bullsnake conviently tied into it


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> nismo driver Posted Today, 02:05 PM
> QUOTE(hastatus @ Oct 6 2006, 04:08 PM)
> 
> Yes I'm sure you could nismo. I'm quite clear where you are coming from.
> ...


I beg to differ with you, I'm well versed on the youth of today and the so-called adults that feed them filth that covers lyrics, tv, etc., etc., etc. But I've tried to lead kids into a better a way of communicating instead of digging from the dirt. You can color it all you want with your ego, but filth is filth. And that you will not change.

Since there have been calls to lock and Nismo has pretty much summed up how he see's thing as have I. The thread is now closed.


----------

