a firm family favourite
From the Inappropriate Actors challenge. See all 550 entries (closed)
( , Thu 11 Oct 2007, 16:25, archived)
From the Inappropriate Actors challenge. See all 550 entries (closed)
( , Thu 11 Oct 2007, 16:25, archived)
I thought you were being harsh
then I saw the big cock in the middle of the picture.
Link it please miklambam.
( ,
Thu 11 Oct 2007, 16:28,
archived)
Link it please miklambam.
I wonder if Lionel Blair could handle Free Willy for 2 whole minutes?
/'Give Us A Clue' blog
edit: Good Lord.... FIVE of them on the same page...
( ,
Thu 11 Oct 2007, 16:26,
archived)
edit: Good Lord.... FIVE of them on the same page...
in my humble opinion it's borderline nsfw, although it clearly has a boys dangly bits on it, it couldn't be misconstrued as porn.
i would however link it, if it were my image.
and i'm guessing as i type this more people will ask for it to be linked or just deleted.
therefore majority rules.
( ,
Thu 11 Oct 2007, 16:32,
archived)
i would however link it, if it were my image.
and i'm guessing as i type this more people will ask for it to be linked or just deleted.
therefore majority rules.
How can an erect penis be construed as anything but pron?
It IS porn.
( ,
Thu 11 Oct 2007, 16:41,
archived)
NSFW doesnt specify porn
in fact its not even a proper guideline, i mainly consider anything NSFW if it has a pic of anything that I would have sexual harassment charges filed against me for having on my screen as a co-worker passes. Its "Not Safe For Work", not "Porn In A Pic" that was being commented on
( ,
Thu 11 Oct 2007, 16:55,
archived)
i stand very much corrected.
and was clearly wrong in my understanding of the nsfw guidelines, in my defence, i did say i'd link it if it were mine.
interestingly it would appear our illustrious leader has let it it pass, without using his power as ubermod.
where do we stand on magenta cocks, bad language, and images mocking religion and such being nsfw.
( ,
Thu 11 Oct 2007, 17:06,
archived)
interestingly it would appear our illustrious leader has let it it pass, without using his power as ubermod.
where do we stand on magenta cocks, bad language, and images mocking religion and such being nsfw.
I decided for myself recently that no real genitals or tits, nor obvious porn origins for the main pic was a decent rule of thumb
but I have seen stuff that breaks my own rules get by without any excitement on the boards plenty of times purely 'cos it was very heterosexual, and I got toasted for one that had neither genitals nor porn site origins but had very gay refs (2 guys naked in a very 'up the chuff' position taken from a safe sex flyer in a 'How Gay Are You' test pisstake) so it's still bloody hard to call at times, but it does seem gay/for-the-ladies oriented stuff is considered disproportionally more dodgy than het/for-the-boys stuff by the majority, but that's got obvious reasons.
I do think it might be helpful to get clearer guidelines in place.
( ,
Thu 11 Oct 2007, 17:27,
archived)
I do think it might be helpful to get clearer guidelines in place.
Wow,
A cock....linky linky for NSFW, my boss just got the hard :
Thank you
( ,
Thu 11 Oct 2007, 16:33,
archived)
Thank you
Well, it doesn't offend me, tho visually speakin nowt much does really, annoy yes, offend, no
but could you have chosen an uglier cock!? It certainly looks like it's spent a long time in salt water!
Best link it feller, send me a message if you need to know how, I hadn't the foggiest the first time I was fucked over for it!
( ,
Thu 11 Oct 2007, 16:39,
archived)
Best link it feller, send me a message if you need to know how, I hadn't the foggiest the first time I was fucked over for it!