|
NO GAMES WORKING ON PSP DARK ALEX 3.02 CUSTOM FRIMWARE
|
|
|
Auslander
AfterDawn Addict
|
22. December 2006 @ 17:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
no mods had said a word against it before, but now i happily have true approval. i'm going to have to bookmark that, ddp, as members have started to argue it recently.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. December 2006 @ 17:29
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
0VVL
Suspended permanently
|
22. December 2006 @ 17:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
*slurp* Yea, b/c cartoon porn is ok. Just as long as it's not flesh. I think this thread should be closed. Enough arguing, guys. I don't think any of those guys should have to change their sig until a big censored mark is across that wolf girl's boobs. They DO have a point...
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
22. December 2006 @ 17:36 |
Link to this message
|
|
go right ahead as only drd & site admin can over rule a mods decision. what are you getting me for christmas??
thread will be closed once certain parties do something except for the 1 i temp banned.
0VVL, edit yor sig to conform to forum specs.
2. An image-only signature should be less than 50kb in size, and be at most 500 pixels wide and 200 pixels tall.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. December 2006 @ 17:39
|
|
0VVL
Suspended permanently
|
22. December 2006 @ 17:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
Coal. Muahahahaha.
|
|
Auslander
AfterDawn Addict
|
22. December 2006 @ 17:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
dude, there's nothing showing that doesn't show in a bikini, not even a nipple!
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
22. December 2006 @ 17:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
aus, leave it alone as you know & i know it is alright.
|
|
Auslander
AfterDawn Addict
|
22. December 2006 @ 17:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
sorry, ddp. jumped the gun there a bit.
|
|
0VVL
Suspended permanently
|
22. December 2006 @ 17:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
i saw what they were talking about before. i saw a nipple there the first time. now you go and edit it. good choice, auslander. but you missed the 2nd nipple on the right.
EDIT: nvm you got it. ;)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. December 2006 @ 17:42
|
Newbie
|
22. December 2006 @ 17:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sorry ddp, but I thought I would point something out. I think I can see less "flesh" on Auslander's sig than in a Victoria's Secret commercial. Maybe in 1812, or in Amish country it would be considered porn, but not in today's world. And she has bunny ears, wolves don't have big floppy ears.
|
|
Auslander
AfterDawn Addict
|
22. December 2006 @ 17:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
OVVL, i changed that earlier tonight, as three people finally voiced their dislike. i will say, though, i did have mod approval before the change. :-)
while taking the liberty of photoshopping over a fur pattern (believe it or not, they were not nipples, but at that size they appear to be), i also removed a facial hightlight that i found disagreeable under the jpeg compression. the sig is 99.9% the same, though, which makes me happy. ^.^
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. December 2006 @ 17:46
|
Senior Member
|
22. December 2006 @ 17:53 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Auslander:
OVVL, i changed that earlier tonight, as three people finally voiced their dislike. i will say, though, i did have mod approval before the change. :-)
while taking the liberty of photoshopping over a fur pattern (believe it or not, they were not nipples, but at that size they appear to be), i also removed a facial hightlight that i found disagreeable under the jpeg compression. the sig is 99.9% the same, though, which makes me happy. ^.^
So...to clear it all up, this isnt animal pron? Cause it sure as hell does look like that to me...
|
|
Auslander
AfterDawn Addict
|
22. December 2006 @ 18:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
"porn" would require actual nudity and/or sexual activities, both of which my sig lacks. "animal porn" would actually require animals and consist of bestiality, which my sig also lacks. at worst, my sig is a "furry teaser." ^.^
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. December 2006 @ 18:26 |
Link to this message
|
I don't feel we should be subjected to the 'Fury' belief system, since it's a bit odd dressing up like a school mascot and rubbing on other school mascots (thanks for teaching me CSI Ep 406; Fur And Loathing) but seriously, it's a bit much, put ITs face or something u don't need 5 Renders of IT in provocative or suggestive positions.
besides, it's not even anatomically correct (wrong amount of nipples)
oh and i read up a bit on your complex ( http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/Furry ) searched
not trying to flame or war or whatever., but maybe this should just be changed(his sig), and Auslander lighten up, quit reporting everyone for everything. it's not your responsibility to check our sigs for compliance.
besides what if someone's child comes to these forums trying to learn something about their psp or gamecube or 360, say the kid is 10-13 years old, like the parent really wants the kid staring at some anamorphic rendition of a wolf being provocative.
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
22. December 2006 @ 18:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
everybody is off topic!!
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Auslander
AfterDawn Addict
|
22. December 2006 @ 18:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
*shrugs* all that matters, honestly, is that i'm within the limits of the rules. it's been stated in several places that not following the sig rules will lead to an immediate ban. while that is not heavily enforced, i'm still in the right on this one, in accordance to AD's rules.
whatever that child sees is really no worse than what the child would see at a public swimming pool in the middle of a hot summer.
and as for anatomically correct...the character is an animal/human hybrid. it's pretty safe to say that there's no real "anatomically correct" that can be brought in.
*edit*
and great source of propaganda there, by the way, smurff.
arg, ddp, it's so hard with these guys. >.<
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. December 2006 @ 18:34
|
