|
Post by canadian mojo on Apr 5, 2009 21:03:52 GMT -5
I'd apologize, but I'm really not sorry. No need to apologize! Boobage is always welcome, particularly in a Skyfire apologetics fest. MOAR BOOBAGE! Since you asked. We can always cross post if the-thread-that-wouldn't-dietm looks like it's slowing down too much and won't reach 100 pages of fail.
|
|
|
Post by JonathanE on Apr 5, 2009 22:03:04 GMT -5
No need to apologize! Boobage is always welcome, particularly in a Skyfire apologetics fest. MOAR BOOBAGE! Since you asked. We can always cross post if the-thread-that-wouldn't-dietm looks like it's slowing down too much and won't reach 100 pages of fail. 100 pages of fail would be a new record, I think. Nice pic, by the way!
|
|
|
Post by John E on Apr 6, 2009 0:19:23 GMT -5
100 pages of fail would be a new record, I think. The pages are smaller on this new board though. 15 posts instead of 25, I think.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 6, 2009 5:48:32 GMT -5
No need to apologize! Boobage is always welcome, particularly in a Skyfire apologetics fest. MOAR BOOBAGE! Since you asked. We can always cross post if the-thread-that-wouldn't-dietm looks like it's slowing down too much and won't reach 100 pages of fail. Fucking hell? I just posted that pic today for the first time in like a year. Seriously, what are the odds? Bee-zar.
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Apr 6, 2009 11:39:03 GMT -5
Skyfire: The LDS church used to teach that all native americans were Lamanites, yes? The LDS church now teaches that the Lamanites are a tiny minority, yes? Are you willing to say that the church was wrong? It's a fair question.
|
|
|
Post by Paradox on Apr 6, 2009 12:01:28 GMT -5
Since you asked. We can always cross post if the-thread-that-wouldn't-dietm looks like it's slowing down too much and won't reach 100 pages of fail. Fucking hell? I just posted that pic today for the first time in like a year. Seriously, what are the odds? Bee-zar. It's a FSTDT miracle!
|
|
|
Post by canadian mojo on Apr 6, 2009 19:43:05 GMT -5
Since you asked. We can always cross post if the-thread-that-wouldn't-dietm looks like it's slowing down too much and won't reach 100 pages of fail. Fucking hell? I just posted that pic today for the first time in like a year. Seriously, what are the odds? Bee-zar. "Our thoughts, it is as though they are becoming one." -Puss in Boots, Shrek 2 I guess I can't use it in the other thread any more. I'll just have to go find more boobage. Time to limber up my wrist muscles.
|
|
|
Post by Lady Renae on Apr 6, 2009 23:34:50 GMT -5
If this thread becomes a spam source, it will be locked. It's filthy enough in here as it is. Don't push it. If you want it to reach the "100 pages of fail", keep talking. Pic spam will not be tolerated here from ANYONE.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 7, 2009 0:37:20 GMT -5
What "spam source"? What "filthy"? That bikini picture that is now missing? There must be something I'm missing here because I haven't seen any pictures on this new site that are any worse than the shopping adverts in the Sunday paper.
|
|
|
Post by Lady Renae on Apr 7, 2009 1:53:56 GMT -5
The word "filthy" was not in reference to any pictures, but rather the attitude and atmosphere that has been building up. It hasn't reached F&B levels yet, which is why it hasn't been moved, but the aforementioned "cross posting" and the implied desire to start flooding pictures like the above aren't acceptable.
That is all.
|
|
|
Post by JonathanE on Apr 7, 2009 3:18:12 GMT -5
I have to disagree, LR. The pictures posted can be viewed as a statement to the absurdity of the apologetics being flung about like dung by a chimp. It seems to me to parody this absurdity. As parody, then, the pictures are legitimate. That is all.
|
|
|
Post by Lady Renae on Apr 7, 2009 3:20:47 GMT -5
I'm not condemning anything done thus far. I'm just saying "don't overdo it". Actions like those referenced previously would be overdoing it.
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Apr 7, 2009 4:07:43 GMT -5
What Lady Renae said. Be good, dammit. *shakes fist like an old man chasing rapscallions off his lawn*
|
|
|
Post by JonathanE on Apr 7, 2009 4:09:52 GMT -5
I'm not condemning anything done thus far. I'm just saying "don't overdo it". Actions like those referenced previously would be overdoing it. Again, I respectfully disagree. No one has threatened to flood the post with "pic spam"*. The pics were posted with the intent, from what I see, as a method of parody. Is parody filthy? Indeed, is mocking inane apologetics "filthy"? As an aside, I noticed that several of my posts have been edited, with comments by mods, that border on censorship. Is there a double standard with regards to one making an ass of oneself through their words? *"Pic spam" has been attacked rather relentlessly in several threads. If a "ROTFL" cartoon, in context and as a response to a ridiculous post, or to an ad-hom response is pic spam, then I disagree with that, as well. While I understand the intent of the moderators in keeping the boards civil, mocking the ridiculous is still the stated purpose for this site's existence. If a few well-placed cartoons or pics highlight the absurdity of certain posts, they should be considered legitimate, in the context of what this site is about. I'm not trying to pick a fight here, at all. Rather, I am trying to highlight a direction we, as a board, are heading towards. To me, that is "filthy".
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Apr 7, 2009 4:13:12 GMT -5
The issue is when a pic is the only "rebuttal". That's when it's spam.
Or when it's part of every rebuttal.
|
|