PLEASE READ PR ADMINS!!!!!!!!!

[ryan24]

LOL, how is this a discussion? PR told people to remove the pictures, remove the pictures. If you honestly believe it's hypocritical that they allow The Todd to advertise, tough. It's their site, it isn't a democracy. They can be hypocritical if they want.

Also, the majority of the responses to the OP were full of jackassery.

Exactly.

[bradentonian]

I honestly thought it was FTW bi-posting just to force the issue

[Uncle Stan]

Methinks FTW needs to cool it for benefit of the rest of us.

I really like some of the sigs and would hate to see them all gone because FTW and others won't quit with their "jackassery" responses.

[cflabucsfan]

 I just went and looked at the message board rules. Rules #4 & #8 in particular address this area:
 
4.  Racist, religious and sexual orientation comments or insinuations are not allowed within this board forum. There are many ethnic groups within the message board community and all should receive the same courtesy and consideration.

8. Attaching photos/links in posts is acceptable, provided they are not of sexually explicit or profane in nature and are reasonable in size.

We should all follow these rules voluntarily in consideration of the sensibility of others. But if not, then the solution is simple. The admins simply need to enforce the rules in already in place.

If you want to look at naked women, there are plenty of "adult" sites you can visit.

[Hate]

While i think this entire issue is over the top, the OP should have sent his request to PR directly, not via the board.

[bradentonian]

sexually explicit

Which is open to interpretation.  I always considered this "no nudity", and I don't think anyone's sigs violated that.

[Signed]

I just went and looked at the message board rules. Rules #4 & #8 in particular address this area:
 
4.  Racist, religious and sexual orientation comments or insinuations are not allowed within this board forum. There are many ethnic groups within the message board community and all should receive the same courtesy and consideration.

8. Attaching photos/links in posts is acceptable, provided they are not of sexually explicit or profane in nature and are reasonable in size.

We should all follow these rules voluntarily in consideration of the sensibility of others. But if not, then the solution is simple. The admins simply need to enforce the rules in already in place.

If you want to look at naked women, there are plenty of "adult" sites you can visit.

The admins will enforce the rules when people report posts that break them. PR posted that they were receiving complaints about the  direction sig pictures were heading so they posted to stop it before it became fully nude gifs of girls in sexual acts. (By the way, they never said to remove female pictures all together; just not to get too explicit with them or they will have to remove them all.)

What we have now is just a bunch of people trying to troll, and kind of working with the responses they get, but mostly making themselves look bad and will have sig. pics removed all together in the future.

Which is open to interpretation.  I always considered this "no nudity", and I don't think anyone's sigs violated that.

The pictures are fine now, but they were starting to become more and more revealing in more porno-type poses.

[BucsFTW]

I mean if your son is browsing the internet himself without you there, you think these forums are the only places he is going to see a woman's bare ass?

It's none of anyone's business how the OP raises his children.  Well, you got one thing right.  Rare, but refreshing...

FTW is butt hurt that he was corrected by MC and told to remove images of this sort.  How, in God's name, would I possibly be "hurt"?  No logic Morg...

But for some reason, he can't get himself to comply.  Uhhhhhh.......  I "complied" immediately dipstick.

He's now being immature by finding and posting some image deep into the website of a PR advertiser to try to save face.  FOUR simple 'clicks' is "deep"...?  No.

Morgan...  As usual, you've stepped on your Johnson (again).  Why next just make your next step - simply stepping off.

Don't know why you're continuing to be an idiot about a simple, clear request the PR folks asked of you.

Who's the idiot Morg...?  The guy who completely complies with the requests from PR's admins, or the knucklehead who's too damned stupid to realize that the request has been met...?

In addition I would be more worried about your son looking at SCORES advertisement...

You mean like this one:



Yeah...  Pointed that out in the past as well...  What's going to really twist Morg's t-back is that video link is only ONE click away, while on the home page...!

And...  What's Dad going to say when his son says "Hey dad, can we go to 'Scores' after the game...?"  (After he made that ONE CLICK on the ad on the home page.)  And then he see's the "calendar"...



Yeah............  I'm sure a 14 year old boy is going to see that calendar, and say "Dad...  That's so gross...!"    Not.
(If you can't find him for 20 minutes.................  Just sayin')

I just went and looked at the message board rules. Rule #8 in particular address this area:

8. Attaching photos/links in posts is acceptable, provided they are not of sexually explicit or profane in nature and are reasonable in size.

We should all follow these rules voluntarily in consideration of the sensibility of others. But if not, then the solution is simple. The admins simply need to enforce the rules in already in place.

I agree...  When rules get broken - administration seems, in my eyes, to do a fantastic job.  They made a request, and personally, I changed my sig due to that request.

The admins will enforce the rules when people report posts that break them. PR posted that they were receiving complaints about the  direction sig pictures were heading so they posted to stop it before it became fully nude gifs of girls in sexual acts. (By the way, they never said to remove female pictures all together; just not to get too explicit with them or they will have to remove them all.)

"...fully nude gifs of girls in sexual acts." was never mentioned in the request.  Why?  Neither has EVER been displayed be me.  I would consider that tasteless.

Which is open to interpretation.  I always considered this "no nudity", and I don't think anyone's sigs violated that.

As did I...  My sigs have NEVER displayed a nude woman.  Scantily clad women in somewhat provocative posses...?  Sure.
But then again...  Aren't cheerleaders "scantily clad" and somewhat "provocative" at times...?

I mean.....  Look at this pic.  I know hard-core bible belt Baptists who, without hesitation, would simply call this type of thing "porn":

The pictures are fine now, but they were starting to become more and more revealing in more porno-type poses.

While I DO agree some of the sigs were getting more revealing (a request which I immediately complied with), I do have to ask...  What are "porno-type poses"...?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In closing, I'd like to address one of my most respected "internet friends" post on the matter...

FTW. I have seen your opinions on censorship and what not...and I get that you are trying to make some sort of a statement with the latest sig....hell, I wish that there werent issues with my former sig cause I would love to have that back...

...but you are about to force PRs hand into removing sigs from the message boards altogether.

I will kindly ask....Would you please "self police" before this happens?

I am really a simple guy...  Not complicated at all.  I appreciate a female's beauty.  When I'm reading/posting about football - I enjoy having a little "eye candy" while I read.

Exact same principle behind having cheerleaders on the sideline...  Are they really there to "lead us" in cheers?

Let me ask you chace - WHY would you possibly want a beautiful woman in your sig?

I have no idea what your reasoning is, but for me, personally, it's just eye candy.  Nothing more, nothing less.

I'd also venture to say that it's the same reason EVERY guy who has a female in his sig or avatar does...  Huh Morg...?  Mind removing that slutty image from your avi...?




Bottom line, chace, is this:  I see no reason whatsoever why the same images Pewter Reports advertisers use, can't also be used in sigs.

Like I said...  Simple.

Pewter Report chooses what will, and what won't be, allowed in terms of "sexually explicit content" by their advertisers.

I think not being able to utilize those same images in a sig would be, at the very least, hypocritical.

[player101]

Personally, I think sites like PR (and most moderated internet forums) are not kid friendly zones. The football conversations here are adult oriented, often times with aggressive language and arguing with plenty of f-bombs being thrown around. I would probably be more concerned about that type of thing than women in lingerie but I guess everyone is different.

[Hate]

Geez, people need to relaxxx. Good thing is that soon, the offseason will be over.... and we can get down to the business of football.

[tatmanfish]

Don't know why some are so insistent on pushing the issue.

because posters here would rather argue than talk Bucs football.

some posters would rather ask questions than present their opinion.

[The Anti-Java]

Yawn......

[Beatles123]

FTW, really? I'm losing respect for you as the day goes by. Just listen to what they told you to do and don't be a sarcastic toolbox about it. C'mon. you're better than this! At least, I thought......

It really is laughable to me that people actually think this should be fought against. I applaud the OP for wanting to raise her son free of nudity...if I was raised any different when I was younger I would not be in a good place right now and that is a fact.

Only woman bleed. LEARN THAT.

[BucsFan4090]

Don't know why some are so insistent on pushing the issue.

because posters here would rather argue than talk Bucs football.

some posters would rather ask questions than present their opinion.

[BucsFan4090]

FTW, really? I'm losing respect for you as the day goes by. Just listen to what they told you to do and don't be a sarcastic toolbox about it. C'mon. you're better than this! At least, I thought......

It really is laughable to me that people actually think this should be fought against. I applaud the OP for wanting to raise her son free of nudity...if I was raised any different when I was younger I would not be in a good place right now and that is a fact.

Only woman bleed. LEARN THAT.

The fact that people complained about this is pathetic.

We never had the amount of crybaby sissies that would run to PR and make this an issue a few years ago.

Granted there were more cheerleading sigs and everything....but why should I have to change something that has been generally accepted for all this time because someone's kid saw something. It would be one thing if it was something completely vulgar or graphic...but it isnt.

Its that type of attitude that pisses me off. I can't trust my kid so therefore I demand everyone else to change so my son is not harmed.

Like I said once before....USE ADBLOCK...ITS FREE AND WORKS LIKE A CHARM!