In light of the recent controversy over a photo shop hatchet job that I had done on the avatar of OMGdudeWhat, and then later, the images being deleted, I would like to propose a compromise.
Here is is original avatar . . . . .
. . . which of course can be seen on his forum posts.
First, before I propose my compromise, for those who have not seen the images before they were deleted, here is a verbal description of said images.
------------------------------
Photo #1
This was an enlarged version or the original avatar, and next to his photo was that rather disturbing image of an ugly (male/female?) with hair tied in braids and a big ugly smile with bad teeth. The original image was in color, and I used my Photo Base 3 application to make a smaller black & white version of the same, and I put it next to OMGdudeWhat's avatar, and saying that it was his high school girlfriend.
------------------------------
Photo # 2
This was a composite of OMGdudeWhat and his ugly "girlfriend" standing in front of a beat up old trailer home out in the woods.
------------------------------
Photo # 3
A black & white photo of our intrepid hero OMGdudeWhat wearing the Jersey Of Shame with the GAY 00 on it and a cheese head on top of his head.
------------------------------
OK, so I had promised that if the board moderators say I must either delete those images, or they delete the images, that I would abide by their decision, and I have, as promised.
Now, only two forum members (I won't mention names) that I know of, were offended by the hatchet job I had done on the avatar of OMGdudeWhat while one forum member posted the following, more or less in my defense.
OK, in the light of this development, I have do to be honest.Agent 47 wrote:OMG. SportsSuck.org has just gone down the pathway of censorship, i.e. book burning.Earl wrote: I've just deleted all the offensive images. That takes care of that.
Yes, I'm a little bit upset that my three photo shop images had to be deleted.
So, I have to ask myself, are we starting to go down the path of censorship?
Now, I understand, there are forum rules against posting pornographic images, or links to pornographic images, or any web sites containing said images.
But my photo shop images are in no way, pornographic. Quite the opposite, actually! The images are a real turn-off!
OK, his is my proposed compromise . . .
Instead of posting the actual images that show up in a forum post, would it be OK to post a link to the image instead?
That way, the image dose not show up in a forum post, but only the link to said image.
This way, the viewer has a choice.
If you think the photo might be offensive, then you have the option of not clicking on the link, and not seeing the image.
But for those who might like to view the image, you have the option of clicking on the link.
And of course, above the link, I would give a brief verbal description of the image, so that you would know what you are about to see, or choose not to see.
OK, does that sound like a reasonable compromise?
If the board moderators still say no, then naturally I will still abide by their decisions, either way.
Please let me know what you think.
OK?
Thank you.