Hey

[fiasco!]

my avatar is more offensive than king's

[DEAD!]

my avatar is more offensive than king's

At least the Tigers have at least won a World Series since, oh, 1908; (1935, '45, '68, '84)

[Roger Clemente]

my avatar is more offensive than king's

At least the Tigers have at least won a World Series since, oh, 1908; (1935, '45, '68, '84)

Yeah, when's the last time King has won the World Series, huh?

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.

[JQK]

Why, i won the 60 World Series.. you thought that was Maz that hit that ball? Nope, he was sick that day, i filled in, it was great....

[Phil]

If anyone is offended by JQK's avatar perhaps they could come out into the public here! That way they will be able to see what we all think of them!

I was the one who complained.

I thought I was using "proper channels", but obviously not. Next time I'll go straight to the source.

I find it absolutely unnecessary and rude, and it's not something you can very easily ignore. That, and there's no doubt in my mind that there are impressionable young minds that read this board who don't need to be exposed to the kind of profane, rude behaviour that goes on here. If I want to be flipped off, I'll cut someone off in traffic. I shouldn't have to see that when I go to get my sports logos info at a public message board. If you feel the need to do this, get your own website, post as many pictures of you want of you flipping off the world, and let people choose whether or not they want to see that.

This has absolutely nothing to do with having/not having a backbone, and absolutely everything to do with being offended by the indecency of an avatar.

[zoneranger]

Always controversial aintcha John?

P.S. That was some home run, 'No Touch"!

[tajmccall]

This is always a tough, and touchy subject. Censorship on the Net. I think both members are generally creamer friends of mine on the board (phill/JQK) and both have very different, but distinct personalities.

It can be made that there are impressionable minds about these days, and while it takes a stance of so called social responsibility, i think its nothing more than a metaphor for society today.

I think wheter JQK has that up or not (the avitar), anyone beyond the age of 5 will have seen that(middlefinger), and will have even seen a few swear words. My point is its not any of our jobs to tell what is acceptable and what is not. But saying that, if anyone is offended, they need to have the forum to contest that which is offending them. Which is why this is a issue with duality.

I dont think going to the authority, chris, was wrong, but i would also do what phil did, and admit it was them who said it, so i think everything he did was just.

I guess i think the question boils down to do you protect the culturly innocent, or the youngans, or the rights of everyones speech?

I think us americans get a little crazy about freedom of speech, because its beaten in our head all through school how great it is (like were the only ones who had it, or even invented it!) so we tend to think that we are entitled to offend. Well by our rules, you are, but most of the civilized world chooses not to push those buttons 'just because you can.'

Conversely, i swear all the time, but i guess i have no problem keepin it off the board, after all i dont go dropping f bombs shopping at the mall with kids around, regardless of if theyve heard it or not.

But i see john, and many others worries, that you cant say or do anything with out people worrying about it. Anything that someone does to my future kid, outside of extremely traumatic experiences, id like to think ill be able to self correct. they come home swearing, it happens, the next time they do, they taste irish spring. ahh, whats that, ahh, its parenting. People are uber sensitive as a whole, and its a bit funny to me, someone who doesnt let others get me down too much.

basically, i dont care, it doesnt offend me, if i knew you all better id be much more lugar, because it is hilarious, but if it really bothers somebody, poke fun of that instead of swearing, im sure youll find mockery much more releaving john.

ill start,

Homer, your a big fat idiot,

Brian In Boston...wait

Sean in St. Cloud (thats in central MN)

[yh]

I think the avatar is a riot and frankly anyone who follows collegiate or professional sports these days is going to be exposed to profanity, drug use, violent crimes, exploitation of women, bad sportsmanship, vanity/self-flattery, cats and dogs living together, Michael Irvin's suits and a myriad of other societal maladies, so seeing King's avatar on a sports-related board really shouldn't shock the conscience of anyone who visits this magical domain.

With that being said, I must ask, is that character in the photo really you? It bears a striking resemblance to the very funny actor Donal Logue.

[JQK]

It really is me...

[yh]

You bear a striking resemblance to the very funny actor Donal Logue.

[Saintsfan]

Its always about the children isn't it? I didn't mean to have a go at you syphi, I guess if I was offended by something on here, my first action mught be to PM the person who I was offended by, but otherwise I think you acted perfectly within your rights! But hey, its a sports related board, there is all sorts talked about in a fairly adult way, people might find the Babe of the Week thread a tiny bit offensive, but what else would you expect on this kind of message board.

Just to say as well, I respect Syphi for airing his opinion in the way he did.

[JQK]

Like i have said, i had no problem with what took place, i just wished i was contacted instead of going to Chris and having him tell me. That seemed a little childish. Almost like when you're five, and that one in kindergarten always rats you out "oooooooooooooohhhhhh i'm gonna tell on yoooooooooooooou"

[sc49erfan15]

I was 99 44/100% sure that was Jeremy Shockey...

I must say I really don't care for the avatar, but I'm a strong believer in free speech, so it personally doesn't matter to me whether it stays up or not.

[slapshot]

Avatar, schmavatar, whatever...

I don't even pay attention to them anymore. They are so small and pixellated I can't necessarily tell what they are sometimes. Isaw it was the finger, and whatever, I don't even notice it anymore.

I didn't even get all the jokes about the picture. I thought it was someone famouse, I didn't know it was jqk.

Donal Logue...he was Jimmy the cab driver on MTV about 10 years ago. He did an awesome parody of Alanis Morrissette's "Ironic" Video..."It's like meeting the girl of your dreams, and finding out she's five". Beautiful.

Anyway, who are we to judge what someone else finds offensive? SyPhi, I suppose you could have pm'ed jqk first, but you did do it privately right to the boss (chris) instead of whining about it in relentless posts. And you did admit to it instead of remaining anonymous.

As far as protecting potential viewings form children, what is this, Disney? If people prefer their exposure to news be 100% sanitized, that's why we have newspapers and Radio Disney. I don't censure myself for the 1% chance a minor might be within earshot. I think things like "Wife-Beater" taunts to David Justice and Jason Kidd are funny. (I DO NOT condone wife- or anyone-beating...but if you're in the public eye and do something stupid and people find out, you reap what you sow) I'm not going to start swearing like a longshoreman when I umpire a little league game, but I'm not going to be all G-rated either when I'm at my 8:30 pm bowling night either. Maybe it's not us who need to create a separate newsgroup where we can express our view freely. Maybe it's children or those easily offended that need to start their own heavily-policed website where everything is all sunshine and lollipops.

All in all, you two have to work it out I guess. I'm not offended by the avatar, like I said, I don't even notice them anymore. I used one of the defaults just to fill up some space.

[tajmccall]

Hahahaha.

I enjoyed the tone of that exchange

[quantum]

I'm indifferent to the avatar.

There was another thread discussing how we should leave the policing of the board in Chris' hands. I believe SyPhi did the right thing in the spirit of that discussion, although a PM probably should have been done first.

Since JQK still uses the "offending" pic, apparently Chris has established board policy on the matter.

[CC97]

Since JQK still uses the "offending" pic, apparently Chris has established board policy on the matter.

No, not really.

[paynomind]

Well, if you were soliciting input on what the rules should be.. i'd say PG13 guidelines.

- Parents Strongly Cautioned. Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13. This signifies that the film rated may be inappropriate for pre-teens. Parents should be especially careful about letting their younger children attend. Rough or persistent violence is absent; sexually-oriented nudity is generally absent; some scenes of drug use may be seen; one use of the harsher sexually derived words may be heard.

I think this means we can drop an occational f bomb, and JQK can continue flipping off all who dare cross his path, but our babe of the week can't show full insertion, but a nip through a wet shirt may be ok.

Sound like a reasonable guideline? (not rule)

[JQK]

...but our babe of the week can't show full insertion, but a nip through a wet shirt may be ok.

Damn... there go all my Jenna Jameson pics... oh well...

[paynomind]

JQK,

If you wanna post some real good pics like that, feel free to send them to my PM, or directly into my email!