b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 10415655 (Thread)

# The desk is shite but the job is not to bad Paul...
* Sorry about the rate but for some reason h has pissed me off, it's not like I am pushing his posts down the board?
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 7:40, archived)
# just looking at the pic in question
Far far worse get posted but if that is classed as nsfw then might be worth dixon considering if he should be on b3ta during work hours because far worse gets posted everyday
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 7:43, archived)
# :)
Thanks mate, that is exactly what I thought...
I really did do not think that is NSFW.
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 7:48, archived)
# I do
it goes against the rule in the FAQ, the only thing Dixon has done wrong is dare to point that out. If you know his work you'd know he's not exactly a prude.
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 7:52, archived)
# WARNING THE PIC BELOW DEPICTS STRONG MALE NUDITY AND BEWBS
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 7:52, archived)
# Ha ha ha....
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:08, archived)
# : D

(, Mon 9 May 2011, 9:39, archived)
# Has everyone done one of these?
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 12:01, archived)
# it's looking that way
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 12:52, archived)
# that reminds me of my trip to thailand.
ah... the memories.
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 10:15, archived)
# just because other people are breaking the NSFW rule
doesn't mean everyone can/should. B3ta is a comedy site, go you should g elsewhere if you want something to wank to.

or are you saying if someone posts enough child porn then that becomes ok too?
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 7:51, archived)
# it was hardly porn
and not all pics on b3ta are comedy pics. how many magenta cdc pics go up everyday? the wb morning pics are not what I would call wanking material or anything harder than what you would see in advert for perfume.

And I am not gay for WB.
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 7:55, archived)
# a picture of a topless woman holding her tits I would say
is a little saucier than "A suggestive picture of a lady in her underwear" which according to the FAQ "is probably NSFW even though there is no nudity"

So if you want to argue with the FAQ, take it up with a mod
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:02, archived)
# what mods?
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:05, archived)
# I wasn't aware this was an argument?
I thought we were just discussing where the nsfw line actually was
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:05, archived)
# it's open to interpretation
and it seems that, to some, wb got it wrong on that occasion.
we should probably move on
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:07, archived)
# ok, if you want to 'discuss' what is NSFW
discuss it with a mod.
As it stands, a big titted topless woman is defined as NSFW by the FAQ
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:08, archived)
# fair enough this is obviously turning sour
move along people nothing to see here
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:14, archived)
# ^ What she said...
* Sorry, what I meant was "What that charming, fully clothed lady" said.
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:15, archived)
# I just found out you can friend yourself
then I discovered you can ignore yourself and the world became a little bit emptier
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:17, archived)
# proper lol!
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:27, archived)
# Ha ha ha...
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 9:13, archived)
# cdc pics are meant to be funny.
The fact that 99% of them arent is beside the point.
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:03, archived)
# True, I'm off to work - Later people...

(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:17, archived)
# how can you suggest a cdc is not funny
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:20, archived)
# you have a point
but let's not blow it all out of proportion. the alternative to your child porn example would be no pics showing ankles

i AM gay for WB!
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 7:58, archived)
# I was deliberately exaggerating for comedic effect
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:03, archived)
# sorry
didn't see any humus in your post
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:09, archived)
# Yey!
(, Mon 9 May 2011, 8:12, archived)