Guest shadamehr Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 shadamehr, you went way OTT about all of this ^_^ i can understand your position though, but afterall its only an avatar. im certainly glad i choose not to have an avatar lol... people get too easily upset in this day and age! Zeta... You've got a BLOODY CHEEK... Your own avatar of the Invisible Man that you use is copyrighted by the original owner, yet you post it here as if it's your own... ;-) And I didn't really go way OTT so much as once again, get drawn in to a debate that raged a year ago mate. When that happens, it gets to sicken you, and when you get sick, you get angry and when you get angry you get.... Yes, that's right, OTT... His barb at my other half was the straw that broke the camel's back though, because it was carefully calculated to wind me up and there was no call for it, so I'm grateful to you for mentioning that to him - he can't deny it, because he already suspected it was someone close, or related to me, by saying so in his original post. Sadly, I am a man who believes in principles, and is driven by such. And it was the principle of it that got me - why did he feel it ok to say nothing for a year, then suddenly need to complain now...? Like you say, there was just no need. But, what is done is done... A noisy MINORITY of about ten, maybe twenty at max, that don't like it, have won against a democratic MAJORITY that DON'T feel the need to complain, running at 60700 (yup SIXTY THOUSAND, SEVEN HUNDRED), according to current site stats. I have no doubt at all that countless thousands of those will be long gone, dormant members. But that still leaves many many thousands of ACTIVE members, not one of whom have any complaint about my avatar. So, @ max (and one or two others) How does it feel knowing that under a democratic process, 20 feel it warrants complaint, against anything from 2000, through to SIXTY THOUSAND who DON'T feel it warrants any complaint, and yet you got your own way... Hope it gives you lots of pleasure... I have the dummy that you spat out here with me now, if you want it back anytime, just let me know... No hard feelings - I'll keep it safe for you. If you ever want to answer any of the questions I asked you back a few posts, I'd be more than keen to hear your reply also... @ zeta... Oh by the way zeta.... I notice that your own avatar of the invisible man is a bit, well, invisible... It just so happens as of today, I now happen to have a spare animated avatar lying about here on my PC, if you want it for free... it's seen regular use, but been well looked after and maintained, having run fine for nearly a year with NO PROBLEMS until it was retired last night... *lol*
Guest ferret Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 Wooo, calm down! PS: If the TRUTH be TOLD, I dislike the avatar too. However I just block it (along with the SanDisk etc adverts for the shop) using the Firefox Adblock.
Guest shadamehr Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 shadamehr: I'm not trying to put a bee in your bonnet or anything like that...but isn't your avatar representative of more revealing pics offered on a website or two that may or may not be in existance anymore? If that is the case, wouldnt the pics just be a lighter version of porn-ish pics offered there? Tell me if I'm wrong, It's been so long, I forget. Yup, ya wrong (or at least more than sufficiently well wide of the mark, though I know why you mention it)... *lol* Hence the very reason why I held my avatar with a certain pride of place. As for your other comments, as ever encece, you make a lot of sense, and I can't, and indeed, won't argue with you out of hand. I will just refer you to the post, also very well reasoned, by zeta above, where I think he covers how it is simply NOT porn by ANY loose or even draconian interpretation of what porn is. That's not to say you don't have some merit in mentioning kids etc on this site... But something needs saying... The mesh top was blurry at best... The other images - If it were a man and woman hugging and kissing, it would be fine. But because it's two woman, people take exception. Well let me mention something important... The USA laws will no doubt be differnet, though I am sure the ethos is similar. But in the UK, discriminating against anyone or anyones, on the ground of sexual orientation, became an offence in law, on the 4th December 2003. Thus, my point...? That if it were ok to look at a man and woman kissing and hugging, then it is very questionable indeed, to take exception to it if it be 2 women, or indeed even 2 men. That's not getting carried away and saying it's hard and fast, and as clear cut as all that. I'm not that stupid by any stretch and wouldn't dare insult your intelligence by so doing mate... But it IS food for thought, and something to indeed have relevant regard to. But I simply cannot, will not, and should not, in this day and age, have to accept it constituted porn. It did not by ANY loose definition of what porn is. That's my two pennorth's worth anyhow :-)
Guest ferret Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 I think the point being made was not that it's two women kissing, it's two NAKED women kissing.
Guest shadamehr Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 Wooo, calm down! PS: If the TRUTH be TOLD, I dislike the avatar too. However I just block it (along with the SanDisk etc adverts for the shop) using the Firefox Adblock. Hi ferret. Can i quantify... When you say 'dislike it'... Do you mean, you simply dislike it, as for many other zany or boring avatars on here. Or do you mean you feel it constitutes porn. Please understand, that's not a loaded question - it's just that I notice a FEW people now have said they DISLIKE it. But not actually said they feel it is outright pornographic. Hence why I ask you for clarification of what yourself mean when you say dislike it. Because if a number of uers DO dislike it, but by that I actually mean they simply just don't like it, then there are many many avatars on here that I don't like either, but I feel I have little right to tell someone to change his or her avatar, just because I simply don't like it! I don't like yours, but I wouldn;t ask you to change it on that basis! Nah, actually mate, I'm quite impressed with yours - for an animated, transparancy based gif, there is no white speckling at all to the image, which you would usually expect when the page background is a colour other than white. But I digress... Can you clarify 'dislike' in the manner in which you use it. Do you actually mean 'dislike' or do you mean 'constitutes outright pornography' ? Also, thanks a HUGE lot for the heads up about image blocking... I HAD mentioned that to the original complainant, but didn't realise there was an even better way - cheers!
Guest nickcornaglia Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 EDIT: I take back the word porn-ish. After looking at a related TextAmerica site linked from your site...I am reminded of the content of the previous sites mentioned...whew! Let's just replace it with "risque" ^_^ I edited my post before you posted. I should not have mentioned the PORN word. Risque was a better word. And you may have been typing while I was editing. In the end...my personal opinion...it doesnt bother me whether you keep it there or not, just like it shouldn't bother you whether I or anyone else like it or not. (Though it would be difficult to associate you with any other avatar at this point.) In the end, Paul/Mods never mentioned it in close to a year. Though they have mentioned and banned others avatars within that same time. That's the only opinion that matters. Everyone else has options for turning it off if the find it THAT offensive. PS. To the guy reading Modaco at work....GET BACK TO WORK AND STOP SURFING THE INTERNET ON COMPANY TIME!!!! :D PPS. I give you alot of credit for keeping your calm and composure during this whole debate without feeling attacked! Nice going! :P
Guest shadamehr Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 I think the point being made was not that it's two women kissing, it's two NAKED women kissing. Mmmm - I'm seriously struggling now mate... I can find you, from Universal rated sites, images far more risque than that. There's a new advert on tv right now, I think its for Irn Bru soft drink, of streakers, amale and female, chasing the police officer on a football field, in a kind of role reversal way. The woman in it,man she is HOT... she is entirely naked except for a pair of thigh lenght pvc boots - WOW!!! And how do they make this advert Universal rated...? They simply, for the entire advert, pixelate her breasts (individually, not just one big block), and her 'triangle' down below. What i am saying, is that it shows a million times more than what my image did... A million times more... To say that they were naked in my image, is actually absolutely and utterly true mate. But,er tell me, what exactly was on show... Er, wait... nothing..? Well, erm yes... Nah mate... I find that a bit much... How can full nakedness of a gorgoues babe entirely naked, full on, video, motion not just a still image, in sexy, kinky thigh lenght boots, and only the relevant parts pixelated, in a soft drinks advert universally rated, be acceptable to all censors, ITC, ASA etc. And then you say my picture, as they were naked, is inaproriate... Nope... not in a million years... I'm not even gonna debate it.
Guest shadamehr Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 I edited my post before you posted. I should not have mentioned the PORN word. Risque was a better word. And you may have been typing while I was editing. In the end...my personal opinion...it doesnt bother me whether you keep it there or not, just like it shouldn't bother you whether I or anyone else like it or not. (Though it would be difficult to associate you with any other avatar at this point.) In the end, Paul/Mods never mentioned it in close to a year. Though they have mentioned and banned others avatars within that same time. That's the only opinion that matters. Everyone else has options for turning it off if the find it THAT offensive. PS. To the guy reading Modaco at work....GET BACK TO WORK AND STOP SURFING THE INTERNET ON COMPANY TIME!!!! PPS. I give you alot of credit for keeping your calm and composure during this whole debate without feeling attacked! Nice going! :D encece, if that last bolded comment was to me, then can I firstly say a BIG thank you for it, BUT, also apologise, because having now GAVE IN to the tiny minority and changed my avatar to a more bland one, I STILL find I am having to defend myself from others. And as such, I'm probably reaching boiling point, or breaking point, whichever is most relevant. So not only have the tiny minority won out over a majority of thousands, and even then after NOT SAYING A WORD FOR A YEAR AND THEN LEAVING IT TIL NOW... But they are STILL having a go, and still putting me through it... So I'm a bit sick. And that's a BIT of an understatment. Thanks for NOT taking sides overly mate, and thanks for the voice of reason and calm - it DOES help me try and keep my cool over it all. And never mind chastising the guy who should be at work... When you gonna chastise me for being up debating all this with people, at 3am Uk time *lol* Thanks mate. Take care, and all the best
Guest nickcornaglia Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 Not to change the subject (maybe a little bit) but maybe it will make you feel better.... ...I thing the Audiovox Cleartype font does look better/different. I dont know if it's due to an updated Nina font, a better screen, or better drivers for the screen...but it does look alot cleaner and easier to read. I noticed this more on the built in homescreens that I've been looking at for about 6 phones now. So it IS noticable. I have never personally seen or held a C500...so I cant say if it's differnt from that...but it is certainly differnt from my previous phones.
Guest shadamehr Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 Not to change the subject (maybe a little bit) but maybe it will make you feel better.... ...I thing the Audiovox Cleartype font does look better/different. I dont know if it's due to an updated Nina font, a better screen, or better drivers for the screen...but it does look alot cleaner and easier to read. I noticed this more on the built in http://smartphone.modaco.com/viewforum.php?f=43>homescreens that I've been looking at for about 6 phones now. So it IS noticable. I have never personally seen or held a C500...so I cant say if it's differnt from that...but it is certainly differnt from my previous phones. Please mate DO change the subject - please do *lol* Interesting encece, because the funny thing is, in the comparative screenshots posted by, I 'think' it was brody, could be wrong, the fonts are clearly MUCH different, and the one shown for the new Audiovox is MUCH nicer. BUTTTTTTTT.... The strange thing is that this screenshot was actually not necessarily a proper scrren shot at all, but an art picture perhaps, by microsoft. Because from talkig to someone else who had posted PROPER screenshots now, of the Audiovox, the font is the SAME as that of the C500, and does NOT look like the font in the screenshots Brody posted, of the new WMP 10. And apologies again encece - because it might even have been YOU that posted the new REAL screenshots - I am so battered these past two days defending myself on here, I'm not sure if i am coming or going... But certainly, the mock up shot of Audiovox LOOKED much nicer a font... What it really uses however, you are best placed to say... Mmmmmm
Guest ferret Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 And then you say my picture, as they were naked, is inaproriate Nope, all I said was that they were naked. I've never stated that your avatar is inappropriate. This is getting silly now, I'm off to bed and maybe this thread should be locked by the morning.
Guest shadamehr Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 And encece, Where do you get those extra questions in your profile info at the side - shoe size, carrier etc etc from...? Never seen those before...
Guest ferret Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 They've been around for a while, it's just a long location.
Guest shadamehr Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 Nope, all I said was that they were naked. I've never stated that your avatar is inappropriate. This is getting silly now, I'm off to bed and maybe this thread should be locked by the morning. That's the very reason WHY, in my other post to you, I ASKED waht you meant by it... I never stated you meant that - there is a whole post by me ASKING what you actually meant. Your right, it's silly, it's late, and it's getting me bloody sick - especially as the minority won and the avatar was changed a while ago now. So, Night night, enjoy ya zzzzz's Me's off too.
Guest shadamehr Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 They've been around for a while, it's just a long location. Got ya - cheers for that.
Guest nickcornaglia Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 Without having a C500 side by side with the Audiovox...I cant say for sure. I have my e200 all packaged up to eventually sell or I would check with that. (I may have to rip the package open again!) It WAS me who posted the screenshot. I'll let you know if I find out more. I app unlocked the phone now so I can copy the nina file if you want to check if that makes the difference. And the extra questions in my profile are really just a loooong location. A trick learned from Crispy's profile ^_^ Now I'm going to bed to dream about two women kissing!!! Thanks..REALLY! :Dnina.zip
Guest Paul [MVP] Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 Not wanting to get dragged in to this one... I don't have a problem with the content of the avatar, but will second the person who said it can be a little annoying when viewing MoDaCo in the office ;-) P
Guest Vector Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 I also use the Adblock extension for Firefox, just right click the avatar, choose adblock, and you're done ^_^
Guest pisquee Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 Or, you could do the same with firewall software
Guest Disco Stu Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 Can I just say it's Shadamehr's ugly mug that offends me :wink: ^_^ :D (I'll be the one at the meet with the false beard and fake ID...)
Guest blewer Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 When I am at work I always use the mobile site. Solves all problems ^_^ mobile.modaco.com
Guest shadamehr Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 "]Not wanting to get dragged in to this one... I don't have a problem with the content of the avatar, but will second the person who said it can be a little annoying when viewing MoDaCo in the office ;-) P I therefore trust the new one, whilst still not about floating clouds or magical unicorns, is nevertheless a bit more bland and timid Paul, and causes you a lot less embarrasment at work... ;-) And I trust that my changing it of my own volition demonstrates above all else, and absent the rights or wrongs of this debate, that I ultimately have the best interests of Modaco at heart Paul - I guess that's what it has to come down to in the end. Besides, there is no need for me to get TOO worked up over it now, because I will be releasing my pent up frustrations on a dodgy looking man in a false beard and fake ID at the Modaco Meet next month. /DiscoStu rushes out to hire a Paddington Bear costume instead, without telling anyone... ;-)
Guest drblow Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 ^_^ This could well be the most bizarre thread I have ever taken the time to read!! I guess I could make some comments ... like, I don't personally like the avatar, but then, it's not like it really upsets me or anything ... or, if you or someone in your office considers the avatar to be 'porn' then what a sheltered life you must live ... :D Ultimately though, the thing that comes shining forth to me is the articulate & restrained manner in which shadamehr has conducted the entire discussion. There have been several comments made which were purley designed to be thinly disguised antagonism, and I think the fact that at no time whatsoever has shadamehr been as petty in retort speaks volumes about the man! :wink: Quality sunday afternoon entertainment tho! :P
Guest shadamehr Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 Hey... I never said at any point that even I MYSELF like wor lass folks, but I know what you mean. ;-) DrBlow - thanks man... it's a good bunch in here, it's a good place, and I sure as hell don't want to be the ultimate cause of discord, hence the modified avatar. So I appreciate the VERY kind words, and I hope that we can all go back to having a laugh, a rant, a natter, a question or two (or ten), and above all, those things that make modaco something special... The people that belong to it!
Guest Monolithix [MVP] Posted October 17, 2004 Report Posted October 17, 2004 Four pages over an avatar?! If this thread overtakes the meet thread in length i'm locking it off! ;p
Recommended Posts