its a cock
probably yours - come on link it ffs
edit : how does that not look like porn!??!
edit 2 : that fp was NSFW too!
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:34,
archived)
edit : how does that not look like porn!??!
edit 2 : that fp was NSFW too!
a cock shopped onto a building looks no more like porn than an magenta CDC
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:36,
archived)
I think you're being a cock
I'm not particularly a fan of HappyToast's work or owt, but I think that's SFW.
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:38,
archived)
so a cock on your screen is not considered porn?
what do you consider porn? (remember this is why people wear underwear)
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:40,
archived)
I thought porn involved sexual acts or poses
not anatomy.
However, I also jsut read the thread down there that Verity linked, so I must take note of Mystery Bob's comment and Toastie's double standard.
Also, have this:
Nobody ever said this wasn't SFW, and I must have posted it 20 times over the years.
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:44,
archived)
However, I also jsut read the thread down there that Verity linked, so I must take note of Mystery Bob's comment and Toastie's double standard.
Also, have this:
Nobody ever said this wasn't SFW, and I must have posted it 20 times over the years.
from a distance this looks like a guy blowing his own horn
and not just a giant penis with legs
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:47,
archived)
YOU FUCKING LIAR!
THAT'S A MORE OBVIOUS COCK THAN THE ONE I DID!
It's got bollocks for fucks sake!
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:48,
archived)
It's got bollocks for fucks sake!
yes but its not a giant cock with legs
this is clearly a guy with a horn and a blended penis on the end of it, the bollocks look like some sort of stand for the horn - and yet it is NSFW its NOT A GIANT PENIS ON LEGS
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:51,
archived)
mine wasn't on legs
that's what the Albert Memorial looks like!
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:52,
archived)
but is a penis porn?
although I note the Mystery Bob said "NUDITY= NSFW", I'm not convinced a penis = porn...
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:48,
archived)
It's not double standards if that comment isn't current
It is in response to my being told I was wrong before that I considered this ok.
Silly me for listening to people.
Of bollocks I've done it again here!
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:47,
archived)
Silly me for listening to people.
Of bollocks I've done it again here!
pffft
yes, I see what you mean. Ok, it's not double standards, it's a u-turn.
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:50,
archived)
yeah but on the other hand
you've been a pretty big file size nazi in the past. so, going by your current justification that standards evolve, does that mean that file sizes creeping up are now acceptable?
i'm all for pushing boundaries, but, i dunno, i guess i didnt expect something so obviously dodgy from you.
just my 2p worth.
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:52,
archived)
i'm all for pushing boundaries, but, i dunno, i guess i didnt expect something so obviously dodgy from you.
just my 2p worth.
yes
which is why as you say "in the past" I commented on them but now just offer artistic advise.
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:55,
archived)
Seriously Vino
what's up with you? why are you trawling my history trying to catch me out on things?
Both of those images (if memory serves) were a long way over the limits. The first possibly being an 800k anim.
I didn't pointlessly swear, I was polite and to the point and more over had a nice chat with the guy I awarded my friendship badge to.
I even helped out by providing an board friendly, optimised version.
What is it I have done to offend you so utterly deeply? And why are you angry toward me helping out here and there?
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 21:31,
archived)
Both of those images (if memory serves) were a long way over the limits. The first possibly being an 800k anim.
I didn't pointlessly swear, I was polite and to the point and more over had a nice chat with the guy I awarded my friendship badge to.
I even helped out by providing an board friendly, optimised version.
What is it I have done to offend you so utterly deeply? And why are you angry toward me helping out here and there?
no, this is far more deep rooted seeming
Oh, and how come you're not complaining equally hard about the picture of a lady garden further up the board?
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 21:43,
archived)
oh
well its mildly nsfw but its not a giant vagina on legs/arse on legs...
anyways... back to the top of the board
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 21:59,
archived)
anyways... back to the top of the board
You have always ALWAYS been a bit of a nazi
and, hey, I'm OK with that. You can be quite harsh at times, but as long as you stick to your own high standards I can't fault it.
But with this post? You've posted something that you yourself would have pounced upon and "corrected" the poster about.
Either you've had a complete change of heart or you're trying to prove some sort of point.
I don't believe the first and I don't like the second.
You're not an inexperienced or immature poster, so you should know that some people would find that picture NSFW and yet you didn't post it as a link.
Then you've been all "who me? But I'm only agreeing with you all!" about it.
It made me angry. You know better. You've proved you know better by telling others.
You seem to have caught me on a bad day and for that I apologise. Maybe Oxfordshire disagrees with my normally sweet temperament.
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 21:47,
archived)
But with this post? You've posted something that you yourself would have pounced upon and "corrected" the poster about.
Either you've had a complete change of heart or you're trying to prove some sort of point.
I don't believe the first and I don't like the second.
You're not an inexperienced or immature poster, so you should know that some people would find that picture NSFW and yet you didn't post it as a link.
Then you've been all "who me? But I'm only agreeing with you all!" about it.
It made me angry. You know better. You've proved you know better by telling others.
You seem to have caught me on a bad day and for that I apologise. Maybe Oxfordshire disagrees with my normally sweet temperament.
You know what you need?
a nice cup of cocco and a hug and warm blanket :)
don't hit me!
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 21:52,
archived)
don't hit me!
I honestly had listened to other B3tans
*rest of message will be gaz'd to you shortly to take it off the board*
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 21:55,
archived)
If that's the case
why don't you ask your boss to come over and tell you if he thinks it's pornographic?
No? Thought not.
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:42,
archived)
No? Thought not.
stand a few feet from your computer
it looks like a twoer with a sickle/moon shape at the top.
I'm more than happy for a mod to edit it - I'm not trying top be naughty. Going by what has recently been FP'd I thought this would be an ok challenge entry
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:36,
archived)
I'm more than happy for a mod to edit it - I'm not trying top be naughty. Going by what has recently been FP'd I thought this would be an ok challenge entry
please note that erectile penises are not shown on television because this is considered porn
floppy cocks are often shown on tv (one reason why i do not own one a television) and therefore this is somehow "ok"
bollocks i say - cocks off tv! (including chegwins)
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:38,
archived)
bollocks i say - cocks off tv! (including chegwins)
It's not an erect penis!
It's been rotated from a dangling one ;D
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:40,
archived)
excuse my poor gramma *lends her 5p*
i was supposed to say "i do not own a television"
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:43,
archived)
I've never done a cock picture before
It's only because others have been deemed acceptable that I've done this, and I think I've tinted and blended it in to the photo enough for it to be ok, if not "art"!
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:40,
archived)
The thing is that the cock is clearly visible
and people can lose their jobs for this sort of stuff.
( ,
Mon 30 Jul 2007, 20:42,
archived)