Are there any DUers that find stuff offensive

[leftofthedial]

I mean don't we have a right to never be offended, no matter how overly sensitive we are?

Personally, I find cats to be disgusting and gross.

I think we should complain to the mods and the admins and to Skinner himself about all the catcrap here in the Lounge.

Maybe we should rename the Lounge the Litterbox.

I'm just SO offended.

:sarcasm:

[GOPisEvil]

1. Don't even start with this stuff.

Just give me a break.

[HEyHEY]

19. Your loss, this could get good!

:popcorn:

;-)

[DS1]

2. Nice try, but you fell flat

Incredibly so

[VelmaD]

3. Get bent

:eyes:

[mongo]

110. What an offensive comment n/t

[iconoclastic cat]

4. What the heck are talking about?

I missed something. Context?


Edit: I do sorta like the "litterbox" idea...

[name not needed]

6. It just doesn't sound as good as "The DLC Lounge"

:shrug:

[XemaSab]

10. You're very brave

to out yourself as a republican here.

No, no, you have my respect...

Carry on...

[leftofthedial]

50. Call me a Republican again

and I'll insult your sig line.

[XemaSab]

103. No, no

I was responding to "name not needed"'s sig line.

See? They're a republican. Says so right there.

Seems cool enough though.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

5. This is getting REALLY old

:eyes:

[blondeatlast]

7. When it's your bodily parts that are the butt of violent "jokes,"

go ahead and discuss it.

Until then, STFU.

[GOPisEvil]

8. Ohhhhh...NOW the sarcasm tag is added.

:eyes:

[leftofthedial]

60. and a couple of other typos were fixed

[CanuckAmok]

31. Okay...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=3730180&mesg_id=3730203

[CanuckAmok]

38. So, should we STFU now, or after the light-hearted Bobbit rermarks?

It's okay when it's male genitalia, because men are the oppressors, so frying our balls is just equalisation.

[BikeWriter]

54. Touché!

[leftofthedial]

52. my body parts have been the butt of worse than jokes

we're talking about WORDS

I don't think they're funny, but I also think it is a bad idea to start drawing subjective lines about what speech is and is not acceptable.

[redqueen]

104. Jesus!

What the hell did I miss?!

:(

edit: nevermind... followed some links... am now "overreacting" with the rest...

:banghead:

[Misunderestimator]

9. What's the point here?

Is it to minimize the fact that DU had a direct link on its homepage to a site that had this on the front page? "If I wanted to hear what you had to say, I'd take my cock out of your mouth." as a T-SHIRT slogan?

Why the hell would you laugh about someone being offended by that?

[leftofthedial]

11. I think too many DUers are way too sensitive

and a weird kind of correctness has developed

I think people should live and let live and quit worrying so much about what other people might say or do.

[Misunderestimator]

69. A weird kind of correctness? To object to DU allowing advertisements

of RAPE culture t-shirts? I think YOU should quit worrying so much about defending the "rights" of this merchant to ADVERTISE ON A PROGRESSIVE SITE.

As a friend of mine pointed out, we may as well link to a site that sells "GOD HATES FAGS" t-shirts.

[CanuckAmok]

25. Maybe because a shirt like that speaks volumes about the wearer...

...far more than the "subject".

God, this knee-jerk reactionary bullshit is so tiresome.

on edit: Yes, everything is offensive to somebody. Some things are more offensive than others. Somethings aren't appropriate.

Yes. Copy that. Roger. Over.

Now everybody shaddap!

[progmom]

30. i don't get where MisU was being a knee-jerk reactionary

:shrug:

[Misunderestimator]

70. Yes, your knee-jerk reactionary bullshit IS tiresome.

[leftofthedial]

53. BTW, I'm not laughing

I also would never say such a thing

but it is legal speech. why would progressives advocate restricting free speech? It's hypocritical IMHO.

[Terran]

77. I must have missed this...

While I don't think that phrase necessarily implies rape, as you state below, I do agree it was not appropriate to be linked to DU (especially given the no-sex rule we have in the Lounge). And it certainly has the potiential to offend a sizeable number of people (ony a complete asshole would say/think somerthing like that, after all).

Is that the Sim Nation site that has that? I went there but didn't look around much.

[Misunderestimator]

78. It's this site:

http://www.surrendermartha.com/

[Beware the Beast Man]

12. I think it's funny when people get offended by trivial shit.

Do people honestly think that one poorly-worded $17 t-shirt that no one is going to buy anyway is going to set back progress another 50 years? Misogyny didn't happen overnight, folks.

[Zuni]

13. hear hear

maybe i am thick skinned, but very little really offends me.

[progmom]

16. no, but it's painful to experience it on DU

:shrug:

[Beware the Beast Man]

20. Valid point.

But honestly, after looking at said website, I could not imagine any sane-minded DUer buying any of that crap anyway. Not only is the content rather cheesy, but it looks pretty low-quality anyway.
Point is, I will always defend freedom of expression, no matter how grating it may be.

[Pithlet]

26. And people have a right to not associate with that expression

Wouldn't you agree? It isn't censorship to refuse to associate with a message you don't like. No one who objected to those ads were stifling DU's freedom of expression any more than they were stifling Free Republic by not visiting that website. If Skinner had purposefully put those ads there and refused to remove them, I can tell you I would have reconsidered donating any money, and probably would have eventually left altogether. Someone could certainly think I was overreacting, but they can't say I was stifling anyone's free speech because that is just absurd. Why should I or anyone else here have to stay at DU, or anyplace for that matter, if they don't like it?

[HEyHEY]

32. PEOPLE THREATENED TO COOK MY BALLS!

;-)

[progmom]

35. you need to lock those bad boys away

keep 'em safe from the evil NSMA.

[HEyHEY]

36. Hey, they've safely tucked themselves away

[BikeWriter]

43. Yeah, but don't be so easily offended. :-)

[Pithlet]

57. Well, then.

I'm sure you've learned your lesson.

[leftofthedial]

63. sautee or boil?

attached or removed?

appetizer?

[DrGonzoLives]

111. Mr. T ate my balls!

:o

[Beware the Beast Man]

34. I totally agree.

But I also have bigger things in life to worry about than a FUCKING T-SHIRT that no one would buy in the first place, and now there's 17 threads dedicated to the subject.

[Pithlet]

58. I hope

you have bigger things to worry about than people who are offended by things that don't bother you. It seems rather silly to get offended by people who are offended. And before you say you aren't offended, it sure seems like it to me by your response in this thread. It does seem to bother you that the ads stirred up such a fuss.

[progmom]

27. totally

and so i am certain you will support my expression of dismay that there was an implied partnership between that site and DU. :) and, of course, my subsequent relief at having the ad pulled.

[leftofthedial]

62. take the money and run

I say

[Elidor]

14. Popcorn!

:popcorn:

The Lounge is PC?!? NO!!! :wow:

This thread will be locked in 5...4...3...2...1...

Might as well dedicate this thread to the handful of great DUers who have been banned over stupid shit.

[sundog]

15. if something pisses someone off, they should say it.

that is all.

[progmom]

51. thank you

:hug:

[CanuckAmok]

17. I often find I'm offended often by being offended. It offends me, often.

no offense.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

21. You know, I've always considered you a friend, but my friends wouldn't

minimize my concerns. Free speech is a good thing, but some people just don't get the distinction between free and cheap..you want to use your free speech to cheapen me as a human, then I'm gonna use my free speech to plough into you. Ain't free speech grand?

[CanuckAmok]

24. I suppose if it makes you feel good...

...but I guess I don't get it. :shrug:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

44. It just seems that you think advocating violence against women is a joke

:shrug:

[CanuckAmok]

46. But you know I don't.

so, respectfully, WTF?

[Misunderestimator]

71. But apparently you do, because you keep telling people to just

shut up and stop complaining about a little t-shirt. No, we're complaining about sexist t-shirts that encourage violence towards women being advertised on a progressive site. It has nothing to do with free speech, they can advertise on a thousand freeper sites. But if DU lets them advertise here, then DU's members have every right to complain.

How about if they had this shirt, and all sorts of other homophobic wares?

'THE BEST WAY TO A FAG'S HEART IS THRU THE FUCKING RIBCAGE'

[CanuckAmok]

72. There's no debating someone who uses histrionics and hyperbole

instead of measured reason.

But the ALL CAPS really hammers your point home.

Yes. You're outraged. We get it.

Some of us obviously don't agree that there's a direct correlation between a distasteful t-shirt and actual violence.

Wait, let me start your reply...

"But it's just that kind of message that perpetuates the belief that violence against women is acceptible...".

Yes. Got it. Don't agree.

[Misunderestimator]

73. And there's no debating someone who reduces everything someone

says to histrionics and hyperbole.

Thanks for assuming what I was going to say... but since you were way off, allow me to correct you.

The problem I have is with a progressive site that I contribute a fair amount of money to, linking to a RW sexist site. That is all.

How cute to make fun of my using caps. The caps are on the original site advertising the original shirt.

[CanuckAmok]

74. They don't appear to be RW. They appear to be completely mercenary,

ie non-partisan.

For the same reason I don't buy t-shirts from "T-Shirt Hell" despite liking some of their graphics, I wouldn't buy from the company who advertised here; they have no particular agenda but to sell to everyone. I wouldn't by anti-Bush merchandise from a company that also sells pro-Bush merchandise.

And I'm saying that, yes, it was a good idea for the Admins to remove the ad, because they misrepresented themselves, and because it clearly upset a vast majority of DUers found it objectionable.

What I'm saying is, basically, that "offensive" is a personal decision. Seeing someonewearing the ribcage shirt isn't going to make me objectify women or justify killing some; it's going to make me think the person wearing it is an asshole. And I, personally, like to see people with that mindset expose themselves for the assholes they are. It's one of the things which is going to make me decide if I should give them the time of day or not.

I'll also go out on a limb and say that nobody on this site would buy or wear that shirt.

You're preaching to the choir, here. And that choir, dare I jump to this conclusion, includes every man who subscribes to DU.

If you find advocating violence against women/gays/anybody objectionable to post those same objections over and over on this forum, then I dare say you're not doing all you can to heighten public awareness of these issues. Try volunteering in a shelter, or at an anger management seminar, or somewhere where people need to learn that violence against (X group) shouldn't be tolerated (you probably already do, and I say "good"... now do more). I think everybody reading these posts already agrees on that point.

If you find free-market advertising on DU so objectionable, contribute, in whole or in part, enough donations to ensure DU doesn't need to advertise.

The irony of this whole situation is that (I speculate) one of the reasons DU's costs have increased is because so many people are on here everyday, reading about and discussing Progressive ideology, and working to get the PNACs out.

(added on edit: would you help facilitate the potential sale a ribcage t-shirt if it meant the proceeds would make DU conveniently accessible to ten more people? I would.)

I didn't bother to check, but I'm going to state, quite plainly, that anyone who didn't have a star beside his name (and obviously that doesn't include you)in last night's advertising debacle has absolutely no justification in complaining about advertising policy here.

So, help raise some money, or make another donation.

Or just whine about what you don't like.

Either way is fine.

[Misunderestimator]

75. "Or just whine about what you don't like."

Ending a post that way hardly opens up the conversation.

Not sure why you are still arguing about this. Or why you keep turning the argument into whether someone has a right to sell this filth. Of course they do. You know it's not about that, it's about this site promoting it.

I wonder if the hundreds of dollars I've given DU and continue to give them would make up for the cost of that ad. But it's all moot now, Skinner did the right thing and removed the RW advertiser that tricked them into almost making DU a laughingstock.

On edit, in answer to your question: "would you help facilitate the potential sale a ribcage t-shirt if it meant the proceeds would make DU conveniently accessible to ten more people?" Absolutely not!

[CanuckAmok]

76. I know... and that's the fundamental difference in our opinions...

n/t

[leftofthedial]

65. I don't minimize misogyny

at all

at all at all. I have two incredible daughters who deserve respect.

I'm sorry I drug the sexism thing and then (even stupider) the cat thing into it.

what set me off in the first place was just a pattern of behavior here that seemed to be increasingly oriented toward a perceived right to never be offended in the slightest.

I think being offended occasionally is good for you.

No one at DU uses free speech better than you, nsma.

but frying someone's balls? . . .

[leftofthedial]

64. that is so offensive

[mykpart]

18. Why would cats offend you?

A little pussy never hurt anyone!

[HEyHEY]

29. You've obviously never had the dose

[BikeWriter]

40. You haven't met the pussy downstairs! That effin' **** hurt me!

She was in killing mode and I wasn't.

[leftofthedial]

66. never met my ex

I trust

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

22. Wow! Why are some men so threatened by women standing up for

themselves? Are you afraid?

[Beware the Beast Man]

23. Umm, no.

:shrug:

[leftofthedial]

49. I'm certainly not. I love women.

But whether it is women (or men), or cats, or certain Democratic politicians, or certain sexual preferences I think we should allow discourse, talk to one another, state our opinions and LEAVE THE ADMINS AND MODS OUT OF IT.

Sometimes I feel like the tattletale bus just dumped a load here.

That's all I'm saying.

[HEyHEY]

28. I wouldn't say I get offended... I just know what I don't like

ANd I don't make a big deal out of it and attempt to censor other people from it.
As far as getting indignant in a "My word!" kind of way... only for really severe things.

[Pithlet]

42. No one on DU is censoring anything

They're expressing their opinions and feelings, just like most people do on DU. I don't always think everything is worth getting upset over. But I would never tell another person who is upset or offended at something that I'm not that they are censoring people.

There are all kinds of things that I find hilarious that many people here would find utterly offensive. I've even said things here that have unintentionally offended. There is absolutely nothing wrong with someone expressing their feelings about something they've deemed offensive. You may not be offended yourself, and you make feel the other person is overreacting. But all of this talk about censorship will do nothing but make some people feel that they cannot speak their mind when they're upset about something without someone making accusations. Accusing the offended of censorship is an attempt to stifle others, whether you see it that way or not. It really is ironic that those who are screaming censorship are doing the exact same thing as the people they're accusing. Expressing an opposing opinion/feeling/thought. Nothing more.

[HEyHEY]

61. Many aren't but some try

[I Know How To Do it]

33. I'm offended by people who drink light beer!

[HEyHEY]

37. This is the begining of a beautiful friendship - I can tell

[I Know How To Do it]

39. are you a boy robot or a girl robot?

[HEyHEY]

41. You're a dirty dirty.....whatever gender you are

I'm a boy

[I Know How To Do it]

45. well I guess that's ok.

[leftofthedial]

55. you and me both

[Dukkha]

47. there's being offended

and then there's "phony outrage" as Bill Mahr once put it. One can make their point without all the melodramatic grandstanding and regard a minor disagreement as devastating personal assaults which often dissolve into complete hysteria. Hell if this lighthearted humor thread about all the flame assaults the past week upsets you then it's time to get off the cross and realign your focus on the many serious issues in the world today.

[Beware the Beast Man]

48. You rule!

:thumbsup: :patriot:

[Pithlet]

56. I don't buy for a second

that those who are so upset that people got offended by those ads being at DU have never been offended by anything. Because someone who is never offended is someone who doesn't really give a flying fuck about whatever is going on around them. And that is definitely NOT the impression I get from a vast majority of DUers here. If someone is offended by something that you deem trivial, then get over it and move on. Chalk it up to the fact that not everyone thinks and feels like you do. Something that most people learn by the time they're 3 or 4 years old.

While we're at it, get used to the fact that if you try to trivialize something that another person is hurt or angered by, they're going to lash back at you. That is also human nature. No one likes to be told that their pain doesn't matter. That lesson might take place a little later in life, but knowing that is still part of learning basic social skill that makes it easier to co-exist with others, and it is best learned before one grows up.

[Tsiyu]

59. Guess I wouldn't waste a thread

defending moronic sayings on T-shirts, or *yawn* going into Flat Affect Mode while simultaneously feigning outrage that some people might take offense to those moronic sayings.

It's all connected and interrelated: that attitude is the beginning. The end is what we all hate.

Some day, maybe what I just said will become clear....until then, I'm happy Skinner made the right choice, and


there is cheese to go with the whine.....

[leftofthedial]

98. it's not about the T-shirts

[Mike Niendorff]

67. Hard to say. Let's all fight about it :)

I mean, what harm could it do?


MDN

[noamnety]

68. I don't feel the need

to be tolerant of racism, sexism, or bigotry in general. I prefer to take a stand against such things, and I admire others that do the same.

Thin-skinned is an easy insult to toss around, but it goes both ways. You can point to someone that hits the alert button and say they need thicker skin. Or someone can point to a person complaining about that, and point out that it's just the internet, it's not like we knocked you down and stole your lunch money. You don't need to start thread after thread after thread complaining because someone objected to one of your posts. Suck it up and move on.

If you're looking for a place you can kick back with fellow progressives, you should understand, as progressives, a fair number of them will be sensitive to human rights issues, including sexism, racism, and torture. In other words, don't be surprised if you make a joke about wishing you were in on raping the Abu Ghraib prisoners, and people ask to have it removed.

There are a million forums on the internet where you can hang out with people that aren't concerned with those issues, and have a good laugh about prison rape if you are in the mood for that. But it's silly to come here, of all places, and do it - and then be SHOCKED AND AWED that people take offense.

If somebody here said something you didn't like about those tee shirts, if you are mad they got pulled down, either argue your case with the mods or get some thicker skin.

[leftofthedial]

97. it's not about the T-shirts

[noamnety]

105. It's about not accepting the sentiments

that are on the tee shirts.

If blacks were consistently belittled and mocked on DU, I would not feel obligated to tolerate it. If gays were consistently belittled and mocked, I would not feel obligated to tolerate it. If women are consistently belittled and mocked, I don't feel obligated to tolerate it.

I don't have any obligation to shut up and accept any sort of bigotry, no matter who the target is. I have no obligation to accept that women have second class status in this society, and it's not infringing on other people's rights for me to demand that they not be treated disrespectfully based on their gender.

It's everyone's responsibility here to ensure that people are treated with respect. If we think someone's crossed a line, it's up to skinner and the mods to make the ultimate call. If we don't like their decision, it's our choice to leave. But it is certainly well within our rights to make our views known to them, and unless they request me to stop voicing my opinion, I reject anyone telling me I don't have a right to make my views known to them, either through debating, messaging, or alerting.

I would hope that you'd do the same, if you saw bigotry here.

[Bunny]

106. YAAAAAAAAY!! Well put!

:applause:

[youspeakmylanguage]

79. What I find hilarious...

...is the automatic knee-jerk reaction by some who claim to be offended by something to be just as offensive in return:

<EDIT: The following is an EXAGERATED EXAMPLE.>
"If you think all women are whores who should be burned at the stake, then I think all men are pigs who should be castrated and hung from trees! So there!"

I seem to remember, as a kid, an adult passing along the wisdom that two wrongs don't make a right. Taking the high road and all of that.

Does making an equally offensive statement in return make you a better person? At least the other guy is profiting from his as*hole-ishness.

I haven't seen this ad or this shirt, and after hearing what it says I can't remember the last time that I saw someone wearing a shirt that was equally as offensive. Of course, I live in the south, which might have something to do with it. Or it might just be that this is a fringe product that's only attractive to a certain sub-class of people that live under rocks, or in basements. Who knows?

But now thousands of more people have seen it and heard of it, and a handful might have actually bought one based on the controversy that the company or individual who created it were literally banking on.

2 Live Crew didn't become rich and famous until they offended the right people.

[progmom]

80. where the hell did you get "all men are pigs"??

where, in all of the myriad threads obsessing over these t-shirts and our reactions to them, did you see people saying that all men are pigs????

[VelmaD]

81. Haven't you figured out by now...

they don't have to have actual sources. Not when making shit up is so much more fun.

[youspeakmylanguage]

84. Look high above to the heavens...

...and you might see my point arching over the sky, like a comet or a flying star.

[VelmaD]

87. Well, I would think having to invent a quote...

pretty much blew whatever point you were trying to make. You wanted to prove that women were being unreasonable in this situation and you had to make shit up to do so. Using an admittedly exaggerated example (aka "making shit up") is not a particularly effective debate tactic. So don't be surprised if people blow your "point" off.

[youspeakmylanguage]

89. LOL. I seem to remember last time I referenced a direct quote...

...I was reported to a mod for breaking the rule that says debates can't be carried over into separate threads and "calling people out" was a no-no.

Where, exactly, did I say that "women" were being unreasonable?

I forgot that I have to manipulate the rules to get anywhere on DU anymore.

[VelmaD]

92. You can quote people without calling them out...

so I have no idea what you're going on about.

And it's really pretty damn easy to get "anywhere" on DU...make cogent and well-thought out arguments instead of making shit up.

And "unreasonable" was just me paraphrasing you refering to women's "knee-jerk" and "offensive" reactions.

[youspeakmylanguage]

93. Or you can refuse to even acknowledge someone's point...

...by nitpicking over the structure of their post.

Do not "stalk" another member from one discussion thread to another. Do not follow someone into another thread to try to continue a disagreement you had elsewhere. Do not talk negatively about an individual in a thread where they are not participating. Do not post messages with the purpose of "calling out" another member or picking a fight with another member. Do not use your signature line to draw negative attention to another member of the board.

I didn't notice a mod icon next to your name. Are you offering a personal interpretation of these rules?

[VelmaD]

94. Not an interpretation...just several years of experience...

I've quoted people in posts more times than I can count and rarely, if ever, gotten one deleted just for that.

Amd I'm not "acknowledging" your "point" because it's poorly made and because you couldn't be bothered to come up with actual examples of the behavior you disagreed with...instead you made shit up and only edited your post to reflect that after you got called on it.

[youspeakmylanguage]

95. Maybe if you use the phrase "made sh*t up" a few more times...

...you'll sound more relevant to this discussion.

I had to be back and re-edit my post because it became clear that many here decided to pretend they couldn't figure out it was an exaggerated example of another post.

If my point was so poorly made, why the hell has every response to it focused on how I made the point and not on the point itself? Why don't you spell out exactly what you find disagreeable with my point?

[VelmaD]

96. It's really quite simple...

You tried to assert that the people who were offended last night by the t-shirt ads were just as offensive in expressing their displeasure. But your example to prove your point was made up. That pretty much invalidates your point right there.

[youspeakmylanguage]

100. And I already explained this...

...the quote was an exaggerated example of another quote. I used an exaggerated example of another quote simply because I wanted to be sure I did not violate the rules outlined above. If you refuse to acknowledge this or think that the multiple alerts I get anytime a flamewar breaks out around me are a figment of my imagination, then go right ahead.

I don't think your nitpicking and diversions invalidate anything, but hey, that's just my opinion.

[VelmaD]

101. If you get multiple alerts...

and flamewars tend to break out around you...you might want to consider why that is.

And at this point I can only conclude that this conversation is pointless. You obviously aren't gettign my point...I'm going to state it one more time for you as clearly as possible. If you have to exaggerate to prove your point...then you clearly have a very weak point.

[youspeakmylanguage]

102. Flamewars break out around me...

...because I have refuted and will continue to refute a particular groupthink here at DU and because I have defended certain DUers that other DUers don't think deserve friendship, defense, or even civility based on their professions and opinions regarding the First Amendment. Since the flamewars are fueled by what appear to be the same posters each time, the best solution would probably be to put all of these posters on ignore. But that would be the easy way out since they could continue to attack those other DUers and I wouldn't know to defend them.

As far as the alerts go, some people would rather silence me than debate me. Some even attempt to lure me into breaking rules.

Yeah, this conversation is pointless. Peace! :hi:

[redqueen]

107. Nobody tried to lure you into breaking rules.

If you meant to refer to an actual comment, post it.

As long as you're not saying "look whan an idiot so and so is! they said this!", as long as you're posting it to illustrate a point, then it's not against the rules.

[youspeakmylanguage]

109. It's up to the mods to make that distinction...

A while back someone asked me for an example of a point I was trying to make, and I quoted and linked a post from another thread - no further comment at all, just a link and a quote. Three DUers came out of nowhere and began shrieking that I had called that person out and I had broken the rules.

After that little incident, I don't try to bend that particular rule. I also learned that people here gang up and if I'm being attacked from multiple angles, it's better to stay straight and narrow.

[redqueen]

112. Did the post get deleted?

People saying it breaks the rules doesn't really automatically guarantee that it does, y'know.

[youspeakmylanguage]

82. I never said that was an actual statement!

OK, I'll go back and edit so it is 100% absolutely clear that this is an exaggerated example of some of the BS flying around here.

[VelmaD]

83. You're the one who put it in quotes

n/t

[progmom]

85. your point is still way off

Most of the shit flying back and forth has been a lot more personal. But your attempts to pour gasoline on the embers of this argument are duly noted. :hi:

[youspeakmylanguage]

86. I thought it was clear that I was commenting on the original post...

..and not stiring up "personal sh*t". I apologize for thinking I had the right to comment on this just like everyone else.

See post #84.

[progmom]

90. i didn't say you were stirring up personal shit

but i love the way you put random things in quotes. :rofl:

[youspeakmylanguage]

91. How else, exactly...

...would you have distinguished that comment from my own comments? Should I have made up some ASCII cartoon characters to demonstrate that the hypothetical statement was being attributed to someone else?

I figured adding the "...so there!" would be indicative enough that this was an exagerated example, but I guessed wrong. I shall remember to be completely literal from now on.

[Misunderestimator]

88. LOL, ok... that makes it all better.

[StopTheMorans]

99. haha, people are offended

*points and laughs* :popcorn:

[TrogL]

108. Yes. Stuff is offensive. Get over it.