Quoting Post Archived Topic: It will not be bumped to the top of the forum. Topic Age appropriate content in topics Membername   Not a member? Sign Up Free (takes 20 seconds) Password   Forgotten your password? Post Font: Verdana Arial Black Georgia Comic Sans Impact   Size: Tiny Normal Big Huge   Color: Default Dark Red Red Orange Brown Green Olive Cyan Blue Dark Blue Indigo Black [ Check Spelling ] [ Post Preview ] [ LiveTags ] Quote: from [mod]hI jAMES[/mod] at 3:31 pm on Aug. 10, 2008[quote]Totally agree.  I see "excessive vulgar language" as a report reason and I doubt anyone has ever used it.[/quote] FAQ Keyword Search: Post Options Favorites Manager Notify me of new replies to this topic by email Notify me of new replies to this topic by private message Original Post Forever Angel Posted at 3:30 pm on Aug. 10, 2008 In a recent topic here concerning avatars and images, a mod had this to say: Look, this is a TEEN forum. As long as we're going to allow members as young as 13, we need to have our rules be appropriate for that age group. I wonder why it's only images that are considered inappropriate. Some topics contain language that would make a sailor blush, yet they're given a free pass. No one even thinks twice about them. That mod continued: But we do have users as young as 13 so LW needs to be 13 year old friendly. And parents would only need one glance at an underwear picture before kids are not allowed to use the site. I certainly wouldn't want my child on a site with those kind of pictures. I understand the meaning of the phrase, "A picture is worth a thousand words" but if all the pics are censored and the thousand words still exist, what's the difference? How many glances would be necessary before the parent of a 13 year old said, "Enough, no more LiveWire for you"? There is a guideline covering this, but it's so general and broad as to be meaningless. I won't state that it's never happened, but I've never seen a post deleted because of language. But I have seen pictures disappear and be denied.

Replies Forever Angel Posted at 7:00 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 8:12 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 I'm just having a bit of fun, Angel.  I don't think you're stupid at all.  I think you're amazingly hard headed to the point you can't see simple logic - but not stupid.  I've tried answering your questions, but as I said, when you won't take "subjective" for what it means, what more can I do? I can see logic. I can even see your point of view on 'street' language. And I do know (and really have for a long time known) what subjective means. I will admit to being very stubborn at times and extremely hard-headed on certain issues. I'm sorry, that's just the way I am. But maybe I was a bit too 'sincere' in the wording I've used in a few of the posts here. Maybe I overestimated everyone's ability to understand the actual point I was making (or trying to make). The clue is in the topic title. The thread is just a counterpoint to a couple of 'image' threads here.   iconoclast Posted at 6:54 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 5:00 pm on Aug. 16, 2008 Quote: from prisoner of hss at 3:54 pm on Aug. 16, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 4:53 pm on Aug. 16, 2008 Quote: from prisoner of hss at 3:51 pm on Aug. 16, 2008 forever angel, let me do my damn job. sheeeesh How am I preventing you from 'doing your job'? by posting topics Ah, so 'your job' depends on me not posting? its stereotypically the professional versus prisoner of hss with prisoner of hss as the decisive victor not forever angel versus the professional with a toss up The Professional Posted at 6:12 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 I'm just having a bit of fun, Angel.  I don't think you're stupid at all.  I think you're amazingly hard headed to the point you can't see simple logic - but not stupid.  I've tried answering your questions, but as I said, when you won't take "subjective" for what it means, what more can I do? Forever Angel Posted at 6:10 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:58 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 7:56 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:42 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Don't use words you don't know the definition to, Angel! Oh, did you give me the wrong definition? If you're going off the definition I gave you, it's right. If you're still going off your old definition before I showed you, it's wrong. Then I got it right. I really don't understand why you're going to such lengths to malign me when it would just be so much easier to answer my questions and shut me up. Attacking me, my opinions, my knowledge/intellect, isn't going to do anything but make this into an insult-fest. And for sure, that wasn't the purpose of this thread. Re-read the OP before you respond, please. The Professional Posted at 5:58 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 7:56 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:42 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Don't use words you don't know the definition to, Angel! Oh, did you give me the wrong definition? If you're going off the definition I gave you, it's right. If you're still going off your old definition before I showed you, it's wrong. Forever Angel Posted at 5:56 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:42 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Don't use words you don't know the definition to, Angel! Oh, did you give me the wrong definition? The Professional Posted at 5:42 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Don't use words you don't know the definition to, Angel! Forever Angel Posted at 5:40 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:32 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 7:31 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:24 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 LOL, I like that, seeing as how my summary was accurate. If you want to think so, be my guest. If it seriously becomes necessary for me to defend myself, I'll showcase our PM conversation. Oh the one that is covered in my summary you mean? Yes, that one. But without "subjective" interpretation. The Professional Posted at 5:32 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 7:31 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:24 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 LOL, I like that, seeing as how my summary was accurate. If you want to think so, be my guest. If it seriously becomes necessary for me to defend myself, I'll showcase our PM conversation. Oh the one that is covered in my summary you mean? Forever Angel Posted at 5:31 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:24 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 LOL, I like that, seeing as how my summary was accurate. If you want to think so, be my guest. If it seriously becomes necessary for me to defend myself, I'll showcase our PM conversation. The Professional Posted at 5:24 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 LOL, I like that, seeing as how my summary was accurate. Forever Angel Posted at 5:23 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:13 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 7:08 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:05 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 7:02 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Yes. Intentional or unintentional, it's a distortion having nothing to do with the truth. What would you call it?     I'd call it a good and accurate summarization of your posts. You'd be wrong. But that no longer surprises me. I can tell how wrong I am by your precise and clear rebuttal of the statements. Oh wait. A waste of time. Those smart enough to read my posts will see the distortions, those who aren't or don't, won't understand any rebuttal I make anyway. Nice try though. The Professional Posted at 5:13 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 7:08 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:05 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 7:02 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Yes. Intentional or unintentional, it's a distortion having nothing to do with the truth. What would you call it?    I'd call it a good and accurate summarization of your posts. You'd be wrong. But that no longer surprises me. I can tell how wrong I am by your precise and clear rebuttal of the statements. Oh wait. Forever Angel Posted at 5:08 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from The Professional at 7:05 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 7:02 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Yes. Intentional or unintentional, it's a distortion having nothing to do with the truth. What would you call it? I'd call it a good and accurate summarization of your posts. You'd be wrong. But that no longer surprises me. The Professional Posted at 5:05 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 7:02 pm on Aug. 17, 2008 Yes. Intentional or unintentional, it's a distortion having nothing to do with the truth. What would you call it? I'd call it a good and accurate summarization of your posts. Most recent 15 of 98 previous replies displayed.