Quoting Post Archived Topic: It will not be bumped to the top of the forum. Topic Mods, could I use this as my avatar? 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 [m]Forever Angel[/m] at 8:53 am on Sep. 7, 2008[quote]Quote: from [m]The Professional[/m] at 10:43 am on Sep. 7, 2008[quote]Apparently FOLLOWING a policy is now going "rogue."[/quote]What policy were you following that is set up for a few mods to "step outside the box" to show the other mods how wrong they are? Rogue: Operating outside normal or desirable controls. [/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 2kewl4u2know Posted at 4:41 pm on Sep. 6, 2008 Or would it be denied?

Replies TheOtherHorseman Posted at 3:43 pm on Sep. 9, 2008 Who was calling someone stupid because of an image? the real anti christ Posted at 12:55 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 2:04 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 1:48 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 2:40 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 I see. You make an accusation and then it's on me to show that you're wrong? Good thinking. I guess that means I can say you're good at assumptions and generalizations and not have to come up with any specifics. Mud slinging at its finest. I love it.    Nothing is on you at all. I feel that you have demonstrated obstinate stupidity in the M2M forum in every topic you have chosen to speak out on regarding this and related issues. It isn't a topic of debate, it is a personal opinion. You shouldn't feel the need to argue against it. Ah, why didn't you say so in the first place? The way you stated that sounded to me like you meant it as if it were fact, not just an opinion. Sorry if I misunderstood your unique way of voicing your opinions. Henceforth, I shall ignore comments that could be taken that way. I appreciate that clarification. Mods are little bitches who apparently thinks they need to treat you like shit for disagreeing with them. I don't really see the need for anyone to be called stupid over a image so I think you made the right choice to try not to sling shit too. the real anti christ Posted at 12:47 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 /ignores bitch fight. If the guy in the images pants were buttoned, at the same place which they are currently would the image be approved? If the answer is yes then I don't see why the image wouldn't be approved as is. The hand would still be there either way and the message the same I would think. If no, which is what I hope and am expecting of you lot then I think we can safely remove underwear from the argument. While there is nothing inappropriate about covering onesself with their hand the objective of the image is to imply something inappropriate and that I would hope would be the bassies for rejection. Not to mention the fact that the image is utterly tasteless. Forever Angel Posted at 12:04 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 1:48 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 2:40 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 I see. You make an accusation and then it's on me to show that you're wrong? Good thinking. I guess that means I can say you're good at assumptions and generalizations and not have to come up with any specifics. Mud slinging at its finest. I love it. Nothing is on you at all. I feel that you have demonstrated obstinate stupidity in the M2M forum in every topic you have chosen to speak out on regarding this and related issues. It isn't a topic of debate, it is a personal opinion. You shouldn't feel the need to argue against it. Ah, why didn't you say so in the first place? The way you stated that sounded to me like you meant it as if it were fact, not just an opinion. Sorry if I misunderstood your unique way of voicing your opinions. Henceforth, I shall ignore comments that could be taken that way. I appreciate that clarification. TheOtherHorseman Posted at 11:48 am on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 2:40 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 I see. You make an accusation and then it's on me to show that you're wrong? Good thinking. I guess that means I can say you're good at assumptions and generalizations and not have to come up with any specifics. Mud slinging at its finest. I love it. Nothing is on you at all. I feel that you have demonstrated obstinate stupidity in the M2M forum in every topic you have chosen to speak out on regarding this and related issues. It isn't a topic of debate, it is a personal opinion. You shouldn't feel the need to argue against it. The Professional Posted at 11:41 am on Sep. 7, 2008 Perfect mod material! :D Forever Angel Posted at 11:40 am on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 1:17 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 2:12 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:59 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 1:50 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:21 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Trying to pass off an extension of your own assumptions to "us all" as fact. Not an assumption. I suppose, though, there may be some not so intelligent members who didn't get it, so "all" may have been a bit of an exaggeration.     Unintelligent members not getting things seems to be a recurring theme whenever you post. Really? Show me that theme. I'm sure you are perfectly capable of reading every post you've made here without me digging up links. I see. You make an accusation and then it's on me to show that you're wrong? Good thinking. I guess that means I can say you're good at assumptions and generalizations and not have to come up with any specifics. Mud slinging at its finest. I love it. TheOtherHorseman Posted at 11:17 am on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 2:12 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:59 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 1:50 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:21 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Trying to pass off an extension of your own assumptions to "us all" as fact. Not an assumption. I suppose, though, there may be some not so intelligent members who didn't get it, so "all" may have been a bit of an exaggeration.    Unintelligent members not getting things seems to be a recurring theme whenever you post. Really? Show me that theme. I'm sure you are perfectly capable of reading every post you've made here without me digging up links. Forever Angel Posted at 11:12 am on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:59 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 1:50 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:21 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Trying to pass off an extension of your own assumptions to "us all" as fact. Not an assumption. I suppose, though, there may be some not so intelligent members who didn't get it, so "all" may have been a bit of an exaggeration. Unintelligent members not getting things seems to be a recurring theme whenever you post. Really? Show me that theme. TheOtherHorseman Posted at 10:59 am on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 1:50 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:21 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Trying to pass off an extension of your own assumptions to "us all" as fact. Not an assumption. I suppose, though, there may be some not so intelligent members who didn't get it, so "all" may have been a bit of an exaggeration. Unintelligent members not getting things seems to be a recurring theme whenever you post. Forever Angel Posted at 10:50 am on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:21 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Trying to pass off an extension of your own assumptions to "us all" as fact. Not an assumption. I suppose, though, there may be some not so intelligent members who didn't get it, so "all" may have been a bit of an exaggeration. TheOtherHorseman Posted at 10:50 am on Sep. 7, 2008 Let us, then, come together in applauding the "rogue" moderators who have brought us together in a blissfully uniform approach to nudity in art, shall we? Forever Angel Posted at 10:46 am on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:22 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 1:17 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:09 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Ask and ye shall receive, seek and ye shall find, bitch and *all* nudity in art shall be banned. Thine blessed consistency has been blissfully found. Are you somehow under the impression that I care if nudity is or isn't allowed? Art or otherwise? As someone who wants consistency, one would imagine that you would applaud a removal of the disconnect between allowing a bare-breasted fairy on a tree and disallowing a girl in a bikini in her room. It would be awfully inconsistent with your desire for consistency if you did not. If an image goes against or fits within the guidelines, as written, and all moderators have pretty much the same attitude about it, why would I have any problem with consistent moderation? But, believe it or not, the image guidelines are not a serious concern of mine. It's the guidelines that are generally ignored completely, by most mods, that got me into the 'moderator consistency' discussion in the first place. TheOtherHorseman Posted at 10:22 am on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 1:17 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:09 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Ask and ye shall receive, seek and ye shall find, bitch and *all* nudity in art shall be banned. Thine blessed consistency has been blissfully found. Are you somehow under the impression that I care if nudity is or isn't allowed? Art or otherwise? As someone who wants consistency, one would imagine that you would applaud a removal of the disconnect between allowing a bare-breasted fairy on a tree and disallowing a girl in a bikini in her room. It would be awfully inconsistent with your desire for consistency if you did not. TheOtherHorseman Posted at 10:21 am on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 1:18 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:13 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 1:12 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 12:08 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 1:04 pm on Sep. 7, 2008 But we all know the real purpose of those posts.        Use of the royal "we" is presumptuous, Angel. How observant of you to notice. However I included the 'all' just for the purpose of removing that quality from the 'we'. So, -1.    Lies are also unbecoming. What lies would those be? Trying to pass off an extension of your own assumptions to "us all" as fact. Most recent 15 of 70 previous replies displayed.