BigBor posted:
Yes, yes it is hypocritical. And I could care less what you post. I am not easily offended. Post whatever you want. Again not the point. And no, an isht joke is not relevant, beacuse IGN is not yet using them for advertising. Again not the point. Keep it apples to apples.
You just can't stay on point. You are so all over the board it is never possible to discuss a simple point. The bacon bikini is no more revealing than the calvin klein ad you are so fond of (less so since you can't see the outline of genetalia like the man bulge in the add). Yes it is hypocritical to censor pictures in the forum when you are using similar pictures for advertising. Done.
Hazel-wudi posted:
Is it so hypocritical? Frankly, we have yet to have a VN member post a picture on this forum of well-built men wearing a few scraps of food and nothing else. Do you want to post one of men and see if it gets modded too? Do you want me to post one? I can go looking around on the internet and find one, maybe? I'm quite open to testing this.
As for the rest of it, by your logic a good isht joke is the same as an ad, because it generates revenue via increased site traffic. If you truly believe this, then do your part for IGN and tell us plenty. Thanks.
Beefy men wearing food and tons of isht jokes... ah, I love the smell of rules lawyering in the morning.
BigBor posted:
Wow, just wow. You keep missing the point, over and over. The only question left, is it intentional or do you just not get it. I guess when you can't argue the point, change the subject.
I will simplify the question one last time to see if you can stay on point. Do you find it hypocritical for a company to take a position where they use bikini skin to make money advertising, but they would disallow bikini skin in their forum content? That is the equivalent of Penthouse Magazine not accepting condom ads because the sexual inference might offend a delicate reader.
To argue one generates ad revenue and the other has no purpose is naive. The only reason internet ads generate revenue is due to site traffic. If the users of your site want to post a picture of comedic bikini skin and other users want to comment and laugh about it, then that is generating site traffic. You can certainly take a stance that bikini skin is not appropriate for your website. But once you decide to post ads using bikini skin, you have lost that moral high ground.
Wow, just wow. You keep missing the point, over and over. The only question left, is it intentional or do you just not get it. I guess when you can't argue the point, change the subject.
I will simplify the question one last time to see if you can stay on point. Do you find it hypocritical for a company to take a position where they use bikini skin to make money advertising, but they would disallow bikini skin in their forum content? That is the equivalent of Penthouse Magazine not accepting condom ads because the sexual inference might offend a delicate reader.
To argue one generates ad revenue and the other has no purpose is naive. The only reason internet ads generate revenue is due to site traffic. If the users of your site want to post a picture of comedic bikini skin and other users want to comment and laugh about it, then that is generating site traffic. You can certainly take a stance that bikini skin is not appropriate for your website. But once you decide to post ads using bikini skin, you have lost that moral high ground.
Is it so hypocritical? Frankly, we have yet to have a VN member post a picture on this forum of well-built men wearing a few scraps of food and nothing else. Do you want to post one of men and see if it gets modded too? Do you want me to post one? I can go looking around on the internet and find one, maybe? I'm quite open to testing this.
As for the rest of it, by your logic a good isht joke is the same as an ad, because it generates revenue via increased site traffic. If you truly believe this, then do your part for IGN and tell us plenty. Thanks.
Beefy men wearing food and tons of isht jokes... ah, I love the smell of rules lawyering in the morning.
Yes, yes it is hypocritical. And I could care less what you post. I am not easily offended. Post whatever you want. Again not the point. And no, an isht joke is not relevant, beacuse IGN is not yet using them for advertising. Again not the point. Keep it apples to apples.
You just can't stay on point. You are so all over the board it is never possible to discuss a simple point. The bacon bikini is no more revealing than the calvin klein ad you are so fond of (less so since you can't see the outline of genetalia like the man bulge in the add). Yes it is hypocritical to censor pictures in the forum when you are using similar pictures for advertising. Done.
Hey, I'm just asking for the charge of hypocrisy to be properly tested. You can't really do that by comparing how moderators respond to a clothing ad vs how they respond to a forum post of people wearing food. THAT is apples and oranges Bor, and saying as much is quite on point. (You might not like the point, but it's on point.) So, let us post images of men wearing food as well, and see if the moderators remove those. That would properly test the hypothesis, would it not? And if you want to say that all things are equivalent because they generate traffic and increase revenue thereby... well, I know I'm hardly the only one here that enjoys well-executed toilet humor. If we are to go that argumentative route, fine... I propose that each and every one of us support IGN by posting as much toilet humor as possible.
Asking Lawful Evil to not rules lawyer, refrain from skewering people on the horns of a dilemma, or to not set up situations where they win either way... that's like asking a baby not to wet itself, Bor. This is what we do, and there's no sense in getting so worked up over it. It doesn't mean I don't like you. I do, and I've thoroughly enjoyed this thread. Smile, Bor... life's too short.
-----signature-----
Elistra, 275th level Battle Og -- Frostfell
Naughty lil mage / Kachiko Kaiu / Everyone's Mule
Clan Takada.
4,662 posts in one week, 3-9-12 to 3-16-12.
Yes, that was 666 posts per day on average, and yes, that was intentional.
Naughty lil mage / Kachiko Kaiu / Everyone's Mule
Clan Takada.
4,662 posts in one week, 3-9-12 to 3-16-12.
Yes, that was 666 posts per day on average, and yes, that was intentional.
layer_embedded