| |
In lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, Paul Sinasohn wrote:
| |
I have to agree with L.F. Braun.
Crass, rude, and NOT kid-friendly.
|
If children young enough to be harmed by that image actually read lugnet in
meaningful numbers I will eat a hat. With your choice of garnishes.
| |
Please consider not posting items that would be offensive to children. Would
your sister/mom/grandmother/aunt /wife/girlfriend/significant other approve
of that graphic and comment?
|
Well, I haven’t got a sister, I’m not married, the girlfriend list would be
mostly on the side of finding it quite funny, I’m not currently on speaking
terms with my mother, and my grandmother would go into shock - but she also goes
into shock at the idea of gay men marrying, so I consider her to be a less than
reliable moral indicator.
| |
Paul Sinasohn
speaking only for myself.
|
I appreciate your concern, but I find it interesting that you would complain
about a mildly sarcastic reference to a body part which I find beautiful and
natural, and not to Sophie’s repeated and laughable threats of physical violence
in this same thread. I consider those far more harmful to children.
I agree that posting the image was an act of poor judgment, but for entirely
different reasons.
Soren
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Soren Roberts wrote:
| |
I appreciate your concern, but I find it interesting that you would complain
about a mildly sarcastic reference to a body part which I find beautiful and
natural, and not to Sophie’s repeated and laughable threats of physical
violence in this same thread. I consider those far more harmful to children.
|
I’ll admit that I haven’t read the entire thread, so I haven’t seen those
threats. When I get a chance, I’ll find them and respond appropriately.
Paul Sinasohn
speaking for myself
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Soren Roberts wrote:
| |
In lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, Paul Sinasohn wrote:
| |
I have to agree with L.F. Braun.
Crass, rude, and NOT kid-friendly.
|
If children young enough to be harmed by that image actually read lugnet in
meaningful numbers I will eat a hat. With your choice of garnishes.
|
Soren, one is a meaningful number where that is concerned. But the bad-taste
quotient in general was really my particular lament--not having children or
being an actual small child, I’ll leave that outrage to those who may.
| |
| |
Paul Sinasohn
speaking only for myself.
|
I appreciate your concern, but I find it interesting that you would complain
about a mildly sarcastic reference to a body part which I find beautiful and
natural, and not to Sophie’s repeated and laughable threats of physical
violence in this same thread. I consider those far more harmful to children.
|
I think you’re missing something. The point is that those other threats being
broached are not only being addressed with due unction, but they’re also not
especially surprising. The crux of my comment was that I expect better from
you, from a knowledge of your posting history. Just because someone’s out there
making threats and acting badly does not mean that it’s suddenly OK to be just a
little less crass.
While I accept, sadly, that some denizens of these waters seem to be unable to
control themselves, it really bothers me much, much more when someone I have a
very positive impression of stoops to such a level. Otherwise, what would be
the point of fussing?
best
LFB
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lindsay Frederick Braun wrote:
***snip
| |
one is a meaningful number...
|
***snip
***snip
| |
addressed with due unction, but they’re...
|
***snip
| |
The crux of my comment...
|
Not to make sport of all this, Lindsay, but I can’t help noticing a vaguely
eccliesiastical flair to this post. Are you undergoing a rebirth of some kind?
Dave!
|
|
|
