|
Was this really offensive?
Wed, 22 Mar 2006 09:33:57 -0000
uk.people.silversurfers
previous
jamps...
Frederick Williams...
|
Yes. Someone was offended by it, therefore it was offensive. What's
more the offended person was almost certainly a highly competent, fully
professional offendee who goes to great trouble to be offended as often
as possible; so you may be quite sure that they know what they are
talking about and they really were offended.
Clearly such people need to keep their invaluable skills well-honed;
please help them by publishing as much offensive material as possible so
that they can get all the practise at being offended that they need.
|
|
I think this e-mail, received this morning, is a bit over-the-top! :-(
Ponder...
|
:-0
What I'd like to know is who's the prude that reported it!
jamps...
|
Probably someone who is jealous of the package! lol
Jackie...
|
I think it is ridiculous - that was quite harmless compared to some of the
things shown on the internet!!
|
|
|
frogman...
|
What a bunch of fuddy duddies how pathetic can they be? do a search on
web-search images for foto_cat_1.jpg and see just how many copies of that
photo it brings up, obviously not all isp's are as pathetic.
Aries...
|
I was away yesterday and didn't see Jamps photo link and in web-search images
the pics are too small to see, but I did see it in it's original size via
Yahoo images.
|
Flyiñg Ñuñ 2°°6 +...
|
It pulled up this:
Does that mean someone is now going to try to remove those from web-search's
Paul Jeffree...
|
Specially as 2 of those 6 are photos of catalogues, and nowt to do with the
"offending" image!
|
webspace? :)
|
|
West Stand Bowler...
|
Ridiculous, but like most things in this country now.......if they receive a
complaint, they will act.
So maybe don't criticise NTL, but rather the narrow minded prude who
reported it.
Did you post the link anywhere else?
Foxy at w**k...
|
I was going to ask that WSB. Because if not then it is definately
someone who was looking in Silversurfers
Tickettyboo...
|
LOL that narrows it down to anyone in the world who has a pc and net
access then Jen.
I think we forget sometimes, that this is a very public medium we use.
Just as I could do a web-search image search for the title of that pic,
someone who has never looked in here or posted could have done a web-search
groups search for it and reported any instance of it being posted, for all
we know.
There are some very odd people out there :-)
Foxy at w**k...
Foxy at w**k...
|
Yes I realise that Boo but if they were searching through web-search what
would they search for to access the post that Jamps made. Or have I got
it wrong and they accessed his web page then made the complaint ???
|
|
|
jamps...
|
Not posted elsewhere and it came from a very respectable source! :-)
|
|
Paul Jeffree...
|
Counterproductive too. I hadn't seen the original post, but took Froggies
advice and found the pic in web-search's first link, so I'm one more who's seen
it now but wouldn't have else.
Oooh, dreffull, dreffull... ;-)
|
Foxy at w**k...
|
Of course the page cannot be found now Jamps. But if it is the picture
of the cat you posted yesterday then it is not at all offensive, to me
anyway. I was amused by it and even printed a copy to show my Son as I
thought it so funny.
Steve...
|
I have to agree with you there Jen, I to thought the photo was funny and
Flyiñg Ñuñ 2°°6 +...
a first class guide for us all when we take photo's.
|
Did someone have to report you for this to happen ? If so I think that
person is very silly, and vendictive
|
$irVivor & =?iso-8859-1?Q?=A7ire=DFird?=...
|
Over the top!! Down right ludicrous in my opinion.
Looks like we have a *NetCop* watching us, (one in need of a sense of
humour transplant)
|
|
|
