
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)
or are you saying if someone posts enough child porn then that becomes ok too?

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)
And I am not gay for WB.

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)
So if you want to argue with the FAQ, take it up with a mod

I thought we were just discussing where the nsfw line actually was
( ,
Mon 9 May 2011, 8:05,
archived)

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)
we should probably move on

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)
As it stands, a big titted topless woman is defined as NSFW by the FAQ

move along people nothing to see here
( ,
Mon 9 May 2011, 8:14,
archived)

* Sorry, what I meant was "What that charming, fully clothed lady" said.
( ,
Mon 9 May 2011, 8:15,
archived)

then I discovered you can ignore yourself and the world became a little bit emptier
( ,
Mon 9 May 2011, 8:17,
archived)

The fact that 99% of them arent is beside the point.
( ,
Mon 9 May 2011, 8:03,
archived)