Active Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
I humbly disagree, LionHeart.
I concur, Dr. Zeonix.
I concur, Dr. Zeonix.
...That's me. Damaera. But I guarentee you, Lukyas' face is in my signature! It's not me!Haven't you heard? Lukyas sees all...............................on the internet.
Wow warren, you seem to be pretty upset with things overall lately, but you bring up valid points. It's tough dealing with Ready because he's a team member and that puts him higher up on the pseudo-heirarchy than just forum staff.So what? DJ gets off free?
"Alright so basically anything sexually explicit is not allowed as you can see. So from here on out if you post a sexually explicit sig in this forum you will earn yourself an immediate warning from either the other mods/admins or myself and I will see to it personally that I check this section frequently for such infractions."
What about his warnings?
Oh right favoritisms, silly me.
Can we also get Clear Guidelines on what we can and cannot have in our sigs?
Is a female dressed in a swim suit considered sexually explicit?
And how is this:any different to this:
Is it because the angle is slightly different? If anything the first "acceptable" picture is more "sexually explicit" in content because of the context and expression of the featured character, where as the second looks to be a representation of a person caught unawares or off guard from an advantageous angle and shows a blank emotion and no signs of sexual expression.
The guidelines are incredibly blurred and for a matter that earns us "instant warnings" I think more clear cut rules need to be put into place.
That is exactly how we handle itPersonally, a change in the rules could be at hand.
The change I'd want to see is that people don't get immediate warnings, but rather, get PM'd to change it within a certain time frame (I.E. 24 hours, 12 hours etc.)
I am terribly upsetWow warren, you seem to be pretty upset with things overall lately, but you bring up valid points. It's tough dealing with Ready because he's a team member and that puts him higher up on the pseudo-heirarchy than just forum staff.
I can't seem to find the AUP at the moment(hope sky or Cuc has a backup) but essentially no nudity including "hand-bras" and camel toes is acceptable.
Want to know why you see the rules as blurry? It's hard to make a good set of functional rules in this situation. I see the bottom as more sexual even if it is a moment caught unaware due to the camel toe.
No, this is not alright, it's obviously focusing on the only part of the body, say, ***** would like.
Now is this suddenly plausible to be used?
The edit may not be obvious but the underwear in question that gives off that 'camel toe' look is not from them being skin tight, but they look rather snug.
So the crease there is obviously from the cloth folding over itself since it's also occurring from the eh, crack.
Which I'll add this is very odd talking about an anime character in this fashion.