AU Photo Album Discussion

Quoted from the AU photo alblum.

My response was removed there because someone has moved the whole thread in ultra pc, be careful what you say mode, so I will try to get my statement across a bit more congenially for all the children on the boards.

For your information, two people have to file a moderation before a moderator is made aware of the content. Even if I 'had' reported it, another user would have had to have done the same before the post would have actually been dealt with. 

Now, if I 'do' admit admit to reporting it, then I can be moderated for trolling. And if I deny reporting it, it's not like anyone would believe me anyway. Therefore, instead of answering you directly, my only option is to stay silent. Of course, if the content which violated the TOS had not been here in the first place, this would never have happened. ;)

 

Lansdowne5

No I wouldn't think you were lying, I would give you credit for your word, as I don't think "explicate" lying is one of the machinations you employ.

Hey here is another idea, if someone can't be adult enough to look at some pixels on a screen without incurring some imaginary damage, they shouldn't open the god damn link.  Exercise a little personal self control instead or running around like some self righteous Orwellian demagogue giving instructions about what they think is acceptable for other people to see, say, or think about.  Sitri_

You know already, but I agree 100%, but we don't get to make the rules here, so thanks for moving your part of the discussion here.  Hopefully our members will follow the simple request we have asked and PM officers.

Hey here is another idea, if someone can't be adult enough to look at some pixels on a screen without incurring some imaginary damage, they shouldn't open the god damn link.  Exercise a little personal self control instead or running around like some self righteous Orwellian demagogue giving instructions about what they think is acceptable for other people to see, say, or think about.  Sitri_

Maybe if you are offended by an image in the photo album you shouldn't look at it.:roll: Does it really offend you that much if a group of atheists are posting pictures that bash your religion in an online forum? On a videogame website?:? Just a thought really.cowboymonkey21

Sadly, and apparently it does offend some of our members enough that others are getting moderations for it.

[QUOTE="cowboymonkey21"]Maybe if you are offended by an image in the photo album you shouldn't look at it.:roll: Does it really offend you that much if a group of atheists are posting pictures that bash your religion in an online forum? On a videogame website?:? Just a thought really.btaylor2404

Sadly, and apparently it does offend some of our members enough that others are getting moderations for it.

Yes. But that that doesn't mean it's the offended members who are actually reporting it . . . . . :) 

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]

[QUOTE="cowboymonkey21"]Maybe if you are offended by an image in the photo album you shouldn't look at it.:roll: Does it really offend you that much if a group of atheists are posting pictures that bash your religion in an online forum? On a videogame website?:? Just a thought really.Lansdowne5

Sadly, and apparently it does offend some of our members enough that others are getting moderations for it.

Yes. But that that doesn't mean it's the offended members who are actually reporting it . . . . . :) 

Lans you know I agree with you here.  We're splitting hairs.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"]

[QUOTE="cowboymonkey21"]Maybe if you are offended by an image in the photo album you shouldn't look at it.:roll: Does it really offend you that much if a group of atheists are posting pictures that bash your religion in an online forum? On a videogame website?:? Just a thought really.btaylor2404

Sadly, and apparently it does offend some of our members enough that others are getting moderations for it.

Yes. But that that doesn't mean it's the offended members who are actually reporting it . . . . . :) 

Lans you know I agree with you here.  We're splitting hairs.

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :) 

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"]

[QUOTE="cowboymonkey21"]Maybe if you are offended by an image in the photo album you shouldn't look at it.:roll: Does it really offend you that much if a group of atheists are posting pictures that bash your religion in an online forum? On a videogame website?:? Just a thought really.Lansdowne5

Sadly, and apparently it does offend some of our members enough that others are getting moderations for it.

Yes. But that that doesn't mean it's the offended members who are actually reporting it . . . . . :) 

Lans you know I agree with you here.  We're splitting hairs.

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :) 

For the record, not just for you.  I don't in any way shape form of fashion believe Lans is responsible for all of the reporting on this topic.  I think maybe one or two, but not all.  I don't think you would have wanted back in the union and then turned around and caused this amount of havoc.  Again I think we (all AU members) are above the fray here in allowing anyone to post and anyone to join, unlike many unions of this type.  And Lans we've disagreed many times, and will again, that doesn't mean I don't respect and welcome your opinions.

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :) 

Lansdowne5

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

Funky_Llama

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

MetalGear_Ninty

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

Funky_Llama

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

Or even an alphabetism? ;)

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

Lansdowne5

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

Or even an alphabetism? ;)

:P

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

Lansdowne5

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

Or even an alphabetism? ;)

No, not at all, I meant a censored acronym:|

:P

MetalGear_Ninty

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

No, not at all, I meant a censored acronym:|

:P

Funky_Llama

I'm terrible sorry; my forum etiquette aint what it used to be. :(

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

No, not at all, I meant a censored acronym:|

:P

MetalGear_Ninty

I'm terrible sorry; my forum etiquette aint what it used to be. :(

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

No, not at all, I meant a censored acronym:|

:P

Funky_Llama

I'm terrible sorry; my forum etiquette aint what it used to be. :(

You're such a grammar cop.  Are you going to be correcting my posts as soon as you get your officer's badge? :)

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

Lansdowne5

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

Or even an alphabetism? ;)

Lans, I am terribly disappointed the CWU or BBU won't allow any members who do not fit their "code".  I don't expect them to take 50 Atheists but don't you think it would make the conversations over there better.  I know ours here are better because of you, danwallacefan and a few other religious people.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

No, not at all, I meant a censored acronym:|

:P

btaylor2404

I'm terrible sorry; my forum etiquette aint what it used to be. :(

You're such a grammar cop.  Are you going to be correcting my posts as soon as you get your officer's badge? :)

Anyway, yeah...

I've got my eye on you. :x

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

btaylor2404

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

Or even an alphabetism? ;)

Lans, I am terribly disappointed the CWU or BBU won't allow any members who do not fit their "code".  I don't expect them to take 50 Atheists but don't you think it would make the conversations over there better.  I know ours here are better because of you, danwallacefan and a few other religious people.

I explained this on Felix's blog. If we allowed atheists to join it would destroy the whole purpose of the union. :)

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

Lansdowne5

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

Or even an alphabetism? ;)

Lans, I am terribly disappointed the CWU or BBU won't allow any members who do not fit their "code".  I don't expect them to take 50 Atheists but don't you think it would make the conversations over there better.  I know ours here are better because of you, danwallacefan and a few other religious people.

I explained this on Felix's blog. If we allowed atheists to join it would destroy the whole purpose of the union. :)

I humbly disagree.  It would provide another viewpoint.. I have no desire to post in religious topics, just one' like the global warming, and political topics.  Do you not think that another viewpoint would be a benefit?  Your's here surely is.

Well, since they believe that they are utterly right and we are utterly wrong then in their opinion their are entitled to provide with advice and counsel and we are not. Besides when you are labeled "morally inferior" there's not much of a two-sided debate. I can clearly see their desire to speak to mute audiences: they will speak while we will listen. They know that we will speak also, so they are not taking chances in creating a sitiuation where a democratic dialogue can take place. Weird huh?Teenaged

Yes it is, and I think they are doing a disservice to their union not allowing other opinions in.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

btaylor2404

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

Or even an alphabetism? ;)

Lans, I am terribly disappointed the CWU or BBU won't allow any members who do not fit their "code".  I don't expect them to take 50 Atheists but don't you think it would make the conversations over there better.  I know ours here are better because of you, danwallacefan and a few other religious people.

I explained this on Felix's blog. If we allowed atheists to join it would destroy the whole purpose of the union. :)

I humbly disagree.  It would provide another viewpoint.. I have no desire to post in religious topics, just one' like the global warming, and political topics.  Do you not think that another viewpoint would be a benefit?  Your's here surely is.

We'll have to agree to disagree then, because Scripture explicitly says not to have fellowship with non-believers. :) It has nothing to do with blocking out other opinions, excluding a select group of people, or preventing certain situations from arising. It's plainly and simply because Scripture forbids it.

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

Lansdowne5

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

Or even an alphabetism? ;)

Lans, I am terribly disappointed the CWU or BBU won't allow any members who do not fit their "code".  I don't expect them to take 50 Atheists but don't you think it would make the conversations over there better.  I know ours here are better because of you, danwallacefan and a few other religious people.

I explained this on Felix's blog. If we allowed atheists to join it would destroy the whole purpose of the union. :)

I humbly disagree.  It would provide another viewpoint.. I have no desire to post in religious topics, just one' like the global warming, and political topics.  Do you not think that another viewpoint would be a benefit?  Your's here surely is.

We'll have to agree to disagree then, because Scripture explicitly says not to have fellowship with non-believers. :) It has nothing to do with blocking out other opinions, excluding a select group of people, or preventing certain situations from arising. It's plainly and simply because Scripture forbids it.

Lans, you do realize how wide open you left yourself there with "fellowship with non-believers".  If Scripture forbid it then why are you here.  If it's to hope to convert minds, then why not allow Atheists in the CWU for the same purpose, rather than try to convert the OT from time to time with epic fail?  You cannot come up with an answer that is logical.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

btaylor2404

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

Or even an alphabetism? ;)

Lans, I am terribly disappointed the CWU or BBU won't allow any members who do not fit their "code".  I don't expect them to take 50 Atheists but don't you think it would make the conversations over there better.  I know ours here are better because of you, danwallacefan and a few other religious people.

I explained this on Felix's blog. If we allowed atheists to join it would destroy the whole purpose of the union. :)

I humbly disagree.  It would provide another viewpoint.. I have no desire to post in religious topics, just one' like the global warming, and political topics.  Do you not think that another viewpoint would be a benefit?  Your's here surely is.

We'll have to agree to disagree then, because Scripture explicitly says not to have fellowship with non-believers. :) It has nothing to do with blocking out other opinions, excluding a select group of people, or preventing certain situations from arising. It's plainly and simply because Scripture forbids it.

Lans, you do realize how wide open you left yourself there with "fellowship with non-believers".  If Scripture forbid it then why are you here.  If it's to hope to convert minds, then why not allow Atheists in the CWU for the same purpose, rather than try to convert the OT from time to time with epic fail?  You cannot come up with an answer that is logical.

I don't want to turn this into an argument. But we're not trying to convert anyone . . . . and I'm not here to have fellowship with you. 

I don't want to turn this into an argument. But we're not trying to convert anyone . . . . and I'm not here to have fellowship with you. 

Lansdowne5

"The inquisitor beats the whore to fulfill the same desire for which he is punishing her."  

I can't remember where I read this, but I did want to give this likely recognizable quote credit to someone else.

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

Lansdowne5

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

Or even an alphabetism? ;)

Lans, I am terribly disappointed the CWU or BBU won't allow any members who do not fit their "code".  I don't expect them to take 50 Atheists but don't you think it would make the conversations over there better.  I know ours here are better because of you, danwallacefan and a few other religious people.

I explained this on Felix's blog. If we allowed atheists to join it would destroy the whole purpose of the union. :)

I humbly disagree.  It would provide another viewpoint.. I have no desire to post in religious topics, just one' like the global warming, and political topics.  Do you not think that another viewpoint would be a benefit?  Your's here surely is.

We'll have to agree to disagree then, because Scripture explicitly says not to have fellowship with non-believers. :) It has nothing to do with blocking out other opinions, excluding a select group of people, or preventing certain situations from arising. It's plainly and simply because Scripture forbids it.

Lans, you do realize how wide open you left yourself there with "fellowship with non-believers".  If Scripture forbid it then why are you here.  If it's to hope to convert minds, then why not allow Atheists in the CWU for the same purpose, rather than try to convert the OT from time to time with epic fail?  You cannot come up with an answer that is logical.

I don't want to turn this into an argument. But we're not trying to convert anyone . . . . and I'm not here to have fellowship with you. 

Lans, we're not arguing, at least I'm not.  Just discussing a difference of opinion.  If your not here to have "fellowship, hang out, thorn in some folks side" whats your point in being here? And I ask that with no malice, there's just no other way to ask it. And yes conversion/testimony/whatever you wish to call it is a point of the CWU, I've read the union many times, and know that's CM & BR goal when they post a topic in the OT then hammer it with points of scripture.

I don't want to turn this into an argument. But we're not trying to convert anyone . . . . and I'm not here to have fellowship with you. 

Lansdowne5

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I don't want to turn this into an argument. But we're not trying to convert anyone . . . . and I'm not here to have fellowship with you. 

Funky_Llama

NOOOOOOO, if you had "fellowship" with us you would almost get contaminated with.... with.... with.... atheism, yeah atheism, that's right. You know, the spreading disease which is more dangerous when you try to see a point through the prespective of the other person. Very dangerous indeed!

And "fellowship" would entail nice feelings and to be honest, why have nice feelings for someone you don't appreciate in particular, right? ;)

I'm sure Lans sees it more like a mission by the Doctors without Borders, or whatever they're called. He is the one sent by the Evangelism HQ to plant seeds but not stay much or mingle with lesser beings in fear of being absorbed into our population by our devious means which are... lets see... dialogue,  listening and accepting the different prespectives... yeah...

:lol: 

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I don't want to turn this into an argument. But we're not trying to convert anyone . . . . and I'm not here to have fellowship with you. 

Elraptor

[QUOTE="Elraptor"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I don't want to turn this into an argument. But we're not trying to convert anyone . . . . and I'm not here to have fellowship with you. 

Funky_Llama

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Elraptor"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I don't want to turn this into an argument. But we're not trying to convert anyone . . . . and I'm not here to have fellowship with you. 

Elraptor

If anyone has a personal issue with TCWU, they should take it up with the leader or one of the officers. If TCWU is violating Terms of Use in any way, then that should be reported to the moderators. Otherwise else, it makes no sense trying to debate TCWU's membership requirements.

If anyone has a personal issue with TCWU, they should take it up with the leader or one of the officers. If TCWU is violating Terms of Use in any way, then that should be reported to the moderators. Otherwise else, it makes no sense trying to debate TCWU's membership requirements.

Genetic_Code

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I don't want to turn this into an argument. But we're not trying to convert anyone . . . . and I'm not here to have fellowship with you. 

Elraptor

You pop in here and have your bit of fun way to much. :).   So you never answered are you and I on speaking terms again, last I heard on the photo thread no.:(

If anyone has a personal issue with TCWU, they should take it up with the leader or one of the officers. If TCWU is violating Terms of Use in any way, then that should be reported to the moderators. Otherwise else, it makes no sense trying to debate TCWU's membership requirements.

Genetic_Code

I strongly disagree Gene.  I've applied to be a member there, to discuss some of their non-religious topics, talking to their officers=brick wall, at least Lans is open for discussion.  Like it or not Lans is their only member here and "speaks for them" from time to time here.  If he wishes to end this conversation he may say so.

[QUOTE="Elraptor"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I don't want to turn this into an argument. But we're not trying to convert anyone . . . . and I'm not here to have fellowship with you. 

btaylor2404

You pop in here and have your bit of fun way to much. :).   So you never answered are you and I on speaking terms again

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I know, I'm just making it clear that it wasn't necessarily me who reported it. I know for a fact that there are members of other unions watching the AU photo album topic. :)

Lansdowne5

Don't you mean a censored acronym? :wink:

Or even an alphabetism? ;)

Lans, I am terribly disappointed the CWU or BBU won't allow any members who do not fit their "code". I don't expect them to take 50 Atheists but don't you think it would make the conversations over there better. I know ours here are better because of you, danwallacefan and a few other religious people.

I explained this on Felix's blog. If we allowed atheists to join it would destroy the whole purpose of the union. :)

I humbly disagree. It would provide another viewpoint.. I have no desire to post in religious topics, just one' like the global warming, and political topics. Do you not think that another viewpoint would be a benefit? Your's here surely is.

We'll have to agree to disagree then, because Scripture explicitly says not to have fellowship with non-believers. :) It has nothing to do with blocking out other opinions, excluding a select group of people, or preventing certain situations from arising. It's plainly and simply because Scripture forbids it.

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="Elraptor"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

I don't want to turn this into an argument. But we're not trying to convert anyone . . . . and I'm not here to have fellowship with you. 

Elraptor

You pop in here and have your bit of fun way to much. :).   So you never answered are you and I on speaking terms again

Well now I'm happy again. :) Hopefully the reluctant part will go away!

This is getting irritating. I got moderated again (for someon's dissapointment just a warning was sent to me) for some pictures I posted which had no offensive words other than the word "sex". I guess again those pictures hurt someone's religious pride! I suggest whoever did it mature or at least explain to me how these pictures were offensive and in what way since I'm probably too stupid to understand...Teenaged

Was that the Russel's teapot one?

I think your moderation might have had something to do with the suggestion that God is some kind of pervert who created sex solely for the purpose of watching it. I found that one really funny but I can understand if some people didn't like it.