Subject:
|
Re: Why these news groups were created
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Mon, 27 Sep 2004 17:26:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5410 times
|
| |
|
|
John wrote:
> Why this fixation on the adjective "graphic"? Isn't plain ol' sexual
> content inappropriate enough?
What do you mean by "sexual" content? Is mentioning that you have a wife
sexual? Is a guy mentioning that he has a boyfriend sexual? Is you
mentioning that you have a kid sexual? Is a woman mentioning tha she is
pregnant sexual? Is mentioning that you're a guy and someone else is a gal
sexual?
Of course "graphic" has similar problems. Is showing a picture of a guy
graphic?
Frank
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) Yes, I agree that everybody has different thresholds of what they consider to be appropriate and inappropriate. That is precisely why I would stay away from those type of arguments and simply categorize everything off-topic as being "adult". (...) (20 years ago, 27-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) Which is just as well, because I didn't. (...) Ah, I just bought the set tonite. So, in fact, you were actually referring to a word that the Futurama writers made up:-) (...) No, just all completely off-topic. (...) Why this fixation on the (...) (20 years ago, 26-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
151 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
