StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I would like an official response please. I have received PMs from some members of this board complaining that my sig is offensive. So, should I change or remove my sig?

I rather enjoy it...

Dargos wrote:I would like an official response please. I have received PMs from some members of this board complaining that my sig is offensive. So, should I change or remove my sig?

Well, it can be seen as mildy offensive. My problem is that it's friggin' humongous, and I have 1152x864 resolution!

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote: Well, it can be seen as mildy offensive. My problem is that it's friggin' humongous, and I have 1152x864 resolution!

Yes I know it could be seen as very mildly offensive, but come on..its not that bad. As to the size, if it is causeing problems for people I will change or remove it.

I don't find it offensive, it's not as if it shows pain and suffering or torture of animals or anything like that.

it puts me in a happy mood....

Stormbringer wrote:And please no, animated sigs unless they are kept to avatar size.

Does no one read the announcements?

Your sig is small for me.


p.s. I <3 your sig.

I can't see the pic. What is it?

Captain tycho wrote:I can't see the pic. What is it?

Its like God smiling at you. xD

aphexmonster wrote:

Captain tycho wrote:I can't see the pic. What is it?

Its like God smiling at you. xD

but with knockers bouncin' all over the place

keep it. its hilarious. -sends link to mom-

http://www.angelfire.com/wi3/bonaire/fairy_bounce12.gif

Ironically, it's from the same series ofanimated .gifs that I was going to borrow one from and use to tell GhostRider was 'one of the many forms of the Sky Pixie'. Still could be, for all I know.

And what's so offensive about that? The damn baord has anal sex discussions, and people are worried about a coverer-up pixie? Odd.

I have no problems with the sig, though when I view this site at school I have to try to hide it.

. . . is she wearing any pants?

i say we all just put the gif in our sigs and then see what people have to say about it.

maybe she's wearing a thong. .

and, Id put it in the sig. it amuses.

Dargos wrote:

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote: Well, it can be seen as mildy offensive. My problem is that it's friggin' humongous, and I have 1152x864 resolution!

Yes I know it could be seen as very mildly offensive, but come on..its not that bad. As to the size, if it is causeing problems for people I will change or remove it.

It's not offensive to me at all. In fact, it's really kinda cute. It's just that it's rather big for a sig image.

Enforcer Talen wrote:maybe she's wearing a thong. .

and, Id put it in the sig. it amuses.

No, she's nude except for the sash, trust me.

how you so sure?

Dargos wrote:I would like an official response please. I have received PMs from some members of this board complaining that my sig is offensive. So, should I change or remove my sig?

After looking in the 'Announcements' forum, I have located the board's policy on sig pictures.

Right from the mods themselves.

Here's the text:

When putting pictures in your sigs keep in mind we have a lot members here that use dial-up. Keep your pics to a reasonable size. Any complaints will be handled by the mods. If any one refuses, the Admin will alter your sig forcibley. And please no, animated sigs unless they are kept to avatar size.

Enforcer Talen wrote:how you so sure?

Because the whole point is that the only thing keeping her from being buck nekkid is that she's holding onto a floating sash while bouncing?

Trust me, I know how my Ecchi works.

Keep it, I like it.

Now if you could only find one with out the sash...

Just resize it so it fits within the 100x100 pixel avatar limit.

Dargos wrote:I would like an official response please. I have received PMs from some members of this board complaining that my sig is offensive. So, should I change or remove my sig?

Just resize it down to about 65x100 (reduction by 58%), which should keep the proportions the same and get it to the Avatar size stipulated.

I'm curious as to who's been complianing and what about, bandwidth/load times or just prudishness?

ADDENDUM:

Like so