Jovitalk - Bon Jovi Fan Community

Jovitalk - Bon Jovi Fan Community (https://drycounty.com/jovitalk/index.php)
-   Announcements, Questions & Comments (https://drycounty.com/jovitalk/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   How come? (https://drycounty.com/jovitalk/showthread.php?t=34897)

ponrauil 04-12-2006 11:52 PM

There's been a debate on the sexy sigs because at a time there was a provocative escalation with them.

Panama's sig is the one and only violent one I remember seeing. So I guess it's just a matter of it being the first one, it's never been discussed. Just like no one complained about the sexy sigs when it was Javier's ass (hehe) only, but then you and Seb added your own and the debate started.

If a couple or more sigs like Panama's showed up we'd be hearing about it. But then I guess this thread will provoque the debate.


Ponrauil

Becky 04-13-2006 01:48 AM

Basically, I think it's like Ponrauil said. The sexy/nude sigs were made an issue. Users pushed the limits enough to cause Peter to make some guidelines of what's allowed and what's not.

UKjovi 04-13-2006 10:34 AM

Maria , like you said its violence against himself.
Becky and Ponrauil i agree with you to a certian extent .However no one complained about it at all , which made me ask the question is violence easier to accept than sex/ nudity ? which is obviously is .

|| Panama || 04-14-2006 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UKjovi
How come no one has complained about this picture
but when i had this picture there were loads of complaints

aww diddums lifes just so unfair for dirty pervs like you aint it? :(


Quote:

Originally Posted by UKjovi
Exactly!! where as seeing violence can scar a child . so why is it that people seem to accept it more?? where as nudity is more or less harmless but is frowned apon .

would you let your little 5 year old kid look at porn or your sigs cause its so 'harmless'?

|| Panama || 04-14-2006 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas Anderson
I'm not even referring to sex though, just nudity...though it is odd how, in this country, people can legally have sex at 16, but sex films and such are still rated 18.

cause there isnt a 16 cert? legal age is 18 in america- go figure.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas Anderson
At least in general we are more relaxed here than in the US. It is somewhat a product of the prudish victorian era. We've come a long way from people wearing swimming costumes which covered their whole body, but still there is an odd balance. Everyone is fundamentally the same, despite the basic difference between genders and then differences in size, shape and colour, there is no real need to hide or be ashamed of ourselves.

omg go live in a bloody commune!

|| Panama || 04-14-2006 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponrauil
Panama's sig is the one and only violent one I remember seeing. So I guess it's just a matter of it being the first one, it's never been discussed.

adrian had a gun for his av for ages and ages and i think that sparked something but i cant remember how long ago that was. and while we're on the subject of violence, jim's sig talks about battle or whatever- surely that should constitute as being violent too?

if you wanna have a ban then have a proper ban- none of this partial nudity bollocks- err no nipples blah blah- thats crap! either do it properly or dont do it at all!

Becky 04-14-2006 04:20 AM

How about individual users having the personal responsibility to choose images that are USER FRIENDLY for a COMMUNITY instead of selfishly testing the limits like children seeing how much they can get away with before Mommy slaps them on the wrist?

Would you want your child to see an image of someone mutilating himself? If not, then why is it in your signature? Ask yourself the questions you pose to someone else.

ponrauil 04-14-2006 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by || Panama ||
adrian had a gun for his av for ages and ages and i think that sparked something but i cant remember how long ago that was. and while we're on the subject of violence, jim's sig talks about battle or whatever- surely that should constitute as being violent too?

Well not in my book they shouldn't. Neither should yours btw.
I understand your sig can disturb some, it can also bring up some reflexion.


Quote:

Originally Posted by || Panama ||
if you wanna have a ban then have a proper ban- none of this partial nudity bollocks- err no nipples blah blah- thats crap! either do it properly or dont do it at all!

Was that addressed to me or everyone? Because I never asked for a ban...


Ponrauil

UKjovi 04-14-2006 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by || Panama ||
would you let your little 5 year old kid look at porn or your sigs cause its so 'harmless'?

No i wouldnt let them look at porn of course not. but as for my sigs yes as Becky asked would i mind my children seeing it. nudity is natural, however your sig is not. its self harming . i have never shown nipples in my sigs , if peter says no nipples then i would not post a pic showing them not that i would anyway.
Still you havent looked at my orignial post anyway as not once have i mentioned your name but asked is violence more acceptable than nudity/ sex? however instead you took this as a personal attack which it wasnt.
You do seem to take pleasure in attacking others though ,its almost as though its a way of making you feel better for your own faults?? ive never attacked you but you have attacked me on more than one occassion .
So either answer the question or stay out of the thread.

|| Panama || 04-14-2006 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Becky
How about individual users having the personal responsibility to choose images that are USER FRIENDLY for a COMMUNITY instead of selfishly testing the limits like children seeing how much they can get away with before Mommy slaps them on the wrist?

so i should respect the 'community' of this board- why? most users havent deserved my respect (and im pretty sure i havent deserved theirs either.) maybe i dont have the capacity to judge what is user friendly for a community unless ive been told, im sorry im not as mature as you folk.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Becky
Would you want your child to see an image of someone mutilating himself? If not, then why is it in your signature? Ask yourself the questions you pose to someone else.

firstly you dont actually know that this person is mutilating themselves. its only a bit of blood and a clean knife- youre just assuming.

please be aware of the fact that ive never once said that it was okay for a child to see such pictures- whereas UKjovi and neil did say that it was okay for kids to see naked people. if they say such remarks then yes i will comment back, regardless of my own opinions, just to see if they still think in the same mentality.

i dont have a child nor am i at an age where i should be considering to have one, nor do i know children of a very young age, so at this precise moment i cant really tell you what my reactions would be. unless i find something disturbing then i guess it would be okay. (if i was a parent then my reactions may be different- i dont know). but then again i feel that they do need to be aware that stuff like this does take place.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:12 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11.
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.