Conquer Club

Snorri1234 wrote:Ah well, f*ck it. As long as we're being all offended by pictures and teling others to take them down, anyone wanna go and PM twill to tell the Jesus Freaks that images of the death penalty are offense to us who are against it?

As a (former) mental patient who imagined his stuffed toys to be real animals I find your avatar very offensive. Please remove it.

hmmm i think the mods ruling on jbrettlip's old avatar was made in an effort to calm down the wicked shituation. jbrettlip you really werent helping the situation at all and im quite sure the mods received a few reoprts regards hte situation.

Regards owne's avatar, being catholic myself i couldnt careless what he thought about us!!

Frop wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:Ah well, f*ck it. As long as we're being all offended by pictures and teling others to take them down, anyone wanna go and PM twill to tell the Jesus Freaks that images of the death penalty are offense to us who are against it?

As a (former) mental patient who imagined his stuffed toys to be real animals I find your avatar very offensive. Please remove it.

Speaking as a member from a culture which speaks highly of coyotes I find your avatar of a coyote who is foolish and can't achieve anything very offensive.

Snorri1234 wrote:

Frop wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:Ah well, f*ck it. As long as we're being all offended by pictures and teling others to take them down, anyone wanna go and PM twill to tell the Jesus Freaks that images of the death penalty are offense to us who are against it?

As a (former) mental patient who imagined his stuffed toys to be real animals I find your avatar very offensive. Please remove it.

Speaking as a member from a culture which speaks highly of coyotes I find your avatar of a coyote who is foolish and can't achieve anything very offensive.

Wily is a Genius!

hulmey wrote:hmmm i think the mods ruling on jbrettlip's old avatar was made in an effort to calm down the wicked shituation. jbrettlip you really werent helping the situation at all and im quite sure the mods received a few reoprts regards hte situation.

Regards owne's avatar, being catholic myself i couldnt careless what he thought about us!!

I think brett's avatar was definitely a success as I'm always a fan of ridiculing retarded situations. You completely missed Owen's point as well as he stated being catholic himself on more than one occasion. By the way, is your keyboard broken or did you try to type with your oven mits on again?

jiminski wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

Frop wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:Ah well, f*ck it. As long as we're being all offended by pictures and teling others to take them down, anyone wanna go and PM twill to tell the Jesus Freaks that images of the death penalty are offense to us who are against it?

As a (former) mental patient who imagined his stuffed toys to be real animals I find your avatar very offensive. Please remove it.

Speaking as a member from a culture which speaks highly of coyotes I find your avatar of a coyote who is foolish and can't achieve anything very offensive.

Wily is a Genius!

Not only is he a genius, he also successfully managed to break the coyote stereotype as a sneaky and sordid little scavenger. He was just unfortunate enough to be cast as the anti-hero, which meant any of his clever endeavours would end in certain disaster. Hail Wile!

Frop wrote:

hulmey wrote:hmmm i think the mods ruling on jbrettlip's old avatar was made in an effort to calm down the wicked shituation. jbrettlip you really werent helping the situation at all and im quite sure the mods received a few reoprts regards hte situation.

Regards owne's avatar, being catholic myself i couldnt careless what he thought about us!!

I think brett's avatar was definitely a success as I'm always a fan of ridiculing retarded situations. You completely missed Owen's point as well as he stated being catholic himself on more than one occasion. By the way, is your keyboard broken or did you try to type with your oven mits on again?

yeah lol, the key pads keep sticking!!! I didnt miss owens point though and i certainly dont agree with it. Avatar's and usernames have always been a stickey point here at CC

Frop wrote:
.... You completely missed Owen's point as well as he stated being catholic himself on more than one occasion......

Blimey, Owen has got all the bases covered..
I bet he is also a lesbian woman and his mother is a wheelchair-bound Hindu!

jiminski wrote:

Frop wrote:
.... You completely missed Owen's point as well as he stated being catholic himself on more than one occasion......

Blimey, Owen has got all the bases covered..
I bet he is also a lesbian woman and his mother is a wheelchair-bound Hindu!

no, i don't have all my bases covered... i'm just a guy that was told i should have put my concerns in cheats & abuse for swifter and more thorough action, than what i received. had i known that pm'ing 4 mods, and having them take it directly to the mod forum and having a debate therein, was not as thorough as posting in cheats & abuse, this wouldn't even be an issue. so, since andy says he was not aware of the situation, i sent him the user name and have asked him to explain how the Black Face avatar falls under common sense or the aforementioned "art work" defenses, and have yet to hear back. only one of the mods i directly asked expressed concern, due to the fact that i included the definition of black face in my original plea for an explanation of the use of the avatar, and i appreciated it. again, i have lived with the ruling and held my own silent protest, until jbrettlip decided to press the matter, which was not my original intent or motive. however, i have yet to hear how/why this BLACK FACE avatar falls within the "common sense" guidelines andy layed out earlier OR the "art work" defense i was presented with in the original decision. still waiting.-0

owenshooter wrote:

jiminski wrote:

Frop wrote:
.... You completely missed Owen's point as well as he stated being catholic himself on more than one occasion......

Blimey, Owen has got all the bases covered..
I bet he is also a lesbian woman and his mother is a wheelchair-bound Hindu!

no, i don't have all my bases covered... i'm just a guy that was told i should have put my concerns in cheats & abuse for swifter and more thorough action, than what i received. had i known that pm'ing 4 mods, and having them take it directly to the mod forum and having a debate therein, was not as thorough as posting in cheats & abuse, this wouldn't even be an issue. so, since andy says he was not aware of the situation, i sent him the user name and have asked him to explain how the Black Face avatar falls under common sense or the aforementioned "art work" defenses, and have yet to hear back. only one of the mods i directly asked expressed concern, due to the fact that i included the definition of black face in my original plea for an explanation of the use of the avatar, and i appreciated it. again, i have lived with the ruling and held my own silent protest, until jbrettlip decided to press the matter, which was not my original intent or motive. however, i have yet to hear how/why this BLACK FACE avatar falls within the "common sense" guidelines andy layed out earlier OR the "art work" defense i was presented with in the original decision. still waiting.-0

so you decided to put up an avatar of christ getting pissed on, in a artistic manner?!?! Your like a kid that hasnt got his way, so he does something to get his own back!! Its an avatar for petes sake. Who gives a fuk!!

hulmey wrote:so you decided to put up ana avatar of christ getting pissed in in a artistic manner?!?! Your like a kid that hasnt got his way, so he does something to get his own back!! Its an avatar for petes sake. Who gives a fuk!!

You realize you completely contradict yourself, right?

I have a confession to make. A few DRS members and I didn't just piss, but took a complete dump, on four devout followers of Jesus. Some would even refer to them as "Jesus Freaks." Here is the evidence:

Game 2759668


Should we also be worried about receiving some formal reprimand from CC?

Avatar as a form of protest.

Dear owenshooter,

I have been thinking about this avatar issue, and really the only appropriate recourse you have is to some how make an avatar of that Garrett Morris SNL sketch in which he sings (in response to the parole board asking what he'd do if he were released from prison):


[Mod Edit]

Since, after all, that is the converse of what Blackface basically communicates.

owenshooter wrote:

jiminski wrote:

Frop wrote:
.... You completely missed Owen's point as well as he stated being catholic himself on more than one occasion......

Blimey, Owen has got all the bases covered..
I bet he is also a lesbian woman and his mother is a wheelchair-bound Hindu!

no, i don't have all my bases covered... i'm just a guy that was told i should have put my concerns in cheats & abuse for swifter and more thorough action, than what i received. had i known that pm'ing 4 mods, and having them take it directly to the mod forum and having a debate therein, was not as thorough as posting in cheats & abuse, this wouldn't even be an issue. so, since andy says he was not aware of the situation, i sent him the user name and have asked him to explain how the Black Face avatar falls under common sense or the aforementioned "art work" defenses, and have yet to hear back. only one of the mods i directly asked expressed concern, due to the fact that i included the definition of black face in my original plea for an explanation of the use of the avatar, and i appreciated it. again, i have lived with the ruling and held my own silent protest, until jbrettlip decided to press the matter, which was not my original intent or motive. however, i have yet to hear how/why this BLACK FACE avatar falls within the "common sense" guidelines andy layed out earlier OR the "art work" defense i was presented with in the original decision. still waiting.-0

No worries partner, i was only kidding...
A black, Catholic, female, Lesbian (i know that is rather in the title) who cares for their immobile, Hindu, mother can chose whatever avatar they want, without fear of repercussion....
However, far from your taking me seriously, hopefully i did allow the opportunity to lay out your case... once more ; )

owenshooter wrote:on that note, something to ease our eyeballs from another thread. all the ballbusters avatars at your fingertips for your enjoyment!!-0

I love how showing an almost completely nude female is fine as long as you cover up 3 small areas. Or that the same 2 areas on a female are "lewd" and "inapproriate" but on a man they're perfectly fine.


Seriously people, stop complaining about all this shit. Stop taking offense at digital pictures on a website! Stop taking offense so easily! Stop being hypocritical whiners who still think female nipples are WRONG AND IMMORAL or whatever the bleeding hell the words used are.

They're just images! They're not real, they do not show intent and they are should not be deleted or banned. If you're of the opinion that your little kid is not allowed to see female nipples then you can use adblock or a good pornfilter but what you really should do is seriously think about the way you raise your kid. Human bodies are not something to be shamed about. Neither are images or works of art which depict a thing you might hold dearly in a bad light evil. Why take offense at these things? Why bother with such a huge waste of time as being offended by a bunch of pictures?

Seriously, just get over it.

havent you posted this already^^^^

we heard you the first time so stop being retarded!!!

hulmey wrote:havent you posted this already^^^^

we heard you the first time so stop being retarded!!!

It's because bitches keep complaining about this stuff. I mean seriously, anyone who thinks the rules put into place aren't stupid is deluded.

Common opinion seems to be that all the images should be banned, which is like smothering freedom of expression with a sledgehammer.

Snorri1234 wrote:

hulmey wrote:havent you posted this already^^^^

we heard you the first time so stop being retarded!!!

It's because bitches keep complaining about this stuff. I mean seriously, anyone who thinks the rules put into place aren't stupid is deluded.

Common opinion seems to be that all the images should be banned, which is like smothering freedom of expression with a sledgehammer.

Yeah but im sure everyone heard your opinon the first time

In that case, please direct your attention to the following genius contained herein:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=59020&start=150#p1507096

pimpdave wrote:In that case, please direct your attention to the following genius contained herein:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=59020&start=150#p1507096

Stop trolling. Encouraging other members to be racist is not good anyway.

still waiting on that explaination from andy...-0

I'm a christian, but I don't care much for any religious symbol, unless you count the Bible. But when people like Owen go around with these images clearly created with only one purpose, and that is to cause conflict, it really pisses me off. I think that one rule should be to ban any avatar posted with the intention of strking controversy. As for (I believe it was) Night Strikes coment about not asking for the image to be removed because he is "partialy biased", in my opinion, if a mod with any point of view finds something offensive (with in reason) they should have the right, and the obligation to ask for said object to be removed, and if thier request is turned down, it should be reported to Admin for final judgment.

Edit: went back and checked. it was Night Strike. And just to clarify as to whyI think a removal request dhould be his obligation, Night Strike, if you find it offensive, I can nearly garuntee that somebody else does, too.

Mr_Adams wrote:I'm a christian, but I don't care much for any religious symbol, unless you count the Bible. But when people like Owen go around with these images clearly created with only one purpose, and that is to cause conflict, it really pisses me off. I think that one rule should be to ban any avatar posted with the intention of strking controversy. As for (I believe it was) Night Strikes coment about not asking for the image to be removed because he is "partialy biased", in my opinion, if a mod with any point of view finds something offensive (with in reason) they should have the right, and the obligation to ask for said object to be removed, and if thier request is turned down, it should be reported to Admin for final judgment.

Edit: went back and checked. it was Night Strike. And just to clarify as to whyI think a removal request dhould be his obligation, Night Strike, if you find it offensive, I can nearly garuntee that somebody else does, too.

well i think your avatar should be banned because its causing controversy with me.... i don't believe gay men should be able to be in an exercising area with straight men because it makes me uncomfortable.

how is it controversial that he chooses that avatar? its just a yellow cross from the regular person's perspective. i'd rather look at that then some chick taking a dump on an old man's penis

I agree with you on both points there. I hate my avatar, and the picture you describe is disgusting as well. I only have this avatar because I lost a bet, and must keep it for 2 weeks. (I wonder when that ends? )