NYJetsFan.com Forums: Appropriate/not Appropriate - NYJetsFan.com Forums

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

The long off season looms
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (02 February 2016 - 07:25 PM) Then they can re-sign Harrison, FItzpatrick, Ivory, and maybe Powell.
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (03 February 2016 - 09:59 AM) Kaepernick apparently wants out of SF and wants to join the Jets
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (03 February 2016 - 09:59 AM) Guess he sees the Jets as a team with a great WR tandem and a quality OC who builds a offense around the players
MikeGangGree... Icon : (03 February 2016 - 10:29 AM) No thanks
MikeGangGree... Icon : (03 February 2016 - 10:29 AM) Unless he's dirt cheap
MikeGangGree... Icon : (03 February 2016 - 10:30 AM) The jets would be fools to take on that contract
Jetsfan115 Icon : (03 February 2016 - 02:09 PM) keep powell, snakcs, wilkerson, and fitz. let ivory walk, trade richardson, cut cromartie, restructure brick
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (03 February 2016 - 04:18 PM) Marshall said no to Kaepnerick, he wants FItzpatrick as his QB
vjdbbq Icon : (04 February 2016 - 12:07 PM) Where's Rob ? I need some ass shots !!!!!
MikeGangGree... Icon : (07 February 2016 - 04:16 PM) its crazy how dead this site is
MikeGangGree... Icon : (07 February 2016 - 04:16 PM) its super bowl Sunday!!
vjdbbq Icon : (07 February 2016 - 04:47 PM) Everybody is at Rob's house ; checking out the asses !!!!!
Smedsthejet Icon : (07 February 2016 - 05:17 PM) Hope Cotchery gets a ring tonight
santana Icon : (07 February 2016 - 07:04 PM) Yeah I would rather see a panther win
santana Icon : (07 February 2016 - 07:25 PM) Zzzz
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (07 February 2016 - 09:03 PM) I want to see Manning go out on top
vjdbbq Icon : (07 February 2016 - 11:03 PM) Jerricho got screwed on the call in the first quarter but he dropped a few later on .
vjdbbq Icon : (07 February 2016 - 11:04 PM) Screw Manning and his chicken parm .
MikeGangGree... Icon : (07 February 2016 - 11:29 PM) We need a pass rushing LB!! Look at Denver.
MikeGangGree... Icon : (07 February 2016 - 11:30 PM) Nothing against manning but he wasn't good at all this year and gives me hope that we can reach a super bowl with Fitzpatrick
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (08 February 2016 - 06:42 AM) Denver has two future HOF edge rushers with Miller and Ware.
ganggreen2003 Icon : (08 February 2016 - 08:01 PM) NO to kapergimmick
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Yesterday, 11:37 AM) Yes to Kaepernick, he'd be great here!
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:28 PM) I cant stop thinking what are we going to do about Wilk
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:30 PM) right now we sit about 9 mill under the cap. we save 8 mil after we cut Cro
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:31 PM) I cant see us keeping Cro when we have Williams. Also we save 0 by cutting Milliner his 4 mil would just be dead money so we might not cut him
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:32 PM) so after we cut Cro we are 17 Million under the cap
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:32 PM) If we cut Brick we save another 9
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:35 PM) Mangold is owed 8.5 mil
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:35 PM) Maybe we redo Brick and Mangold deals to free up some room
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:37 PM) I just don't see us paying brick 14 mil next season. not when he wasn't good last season. so if we cut Brick and Cro we are 26 Mil under the cap
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:38 PM) Kerley and Cumberland save us 3 mil total
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:38 PM) that would be 29 Mil
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:40 PM) breno giacomini Saves us another 4 mil
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:40 PM) that's would be 33 mil under the cap
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:41 PM) Maybe we redo Bricks deal and move him to RT?
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:41 PM) idk....just saying
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:42 PM) I really think we need Snacks more than we need Wilk.... I'm not in no way saying hes better than Wilk
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:42 PM) We have Rich and Williams if we lose Wilk
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:43 PM) Before everyone starts saying "Mike wants us to trade Wilk" I want to say that I think we should keep the guy
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:44 PM) But if we are going to lose Wilk we better Tag and Trade him
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:44 PM) DO not let us lose him and get nothing back
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:46 PM) So if we trade Wilk we get a 1st rounder[at least] and we can Take a LT and a OLB in the 1st round.... Not sure who is out there to draft yet
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:47 PM) And maybe move Brick to RTA
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 03:47 PM) RT
Resize Shouts Area

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Appropriate/not Appropriate

#1 User is offline   Jetsfan115 Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Assistant Admin
  • Posts: 23,828
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cali

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 28 April 2005 - 03:40 PM

Due to the recent uproar over my signature and lack of action in the NFL till june 1st cuts I decided to open this topic. Whats appropriate and whats not. Where do we draw the line? I understand people could say would u want your kids to see it. But for someone like me who doesn’t have any kids and is only 20 (a different generation then the older people on here) its tough to say. Censorship has always been a hot topic everywhere you turn. Form music to movies to TV shows to forums to radio etc. like somebody like howard stern who makes a living off of it. Anybody could watch his show on TV but I think its inaapropriate for people under 16. to jerry springer where people marry horses and the ratings soar. I figured I’d open a discussion on censorship and your views on it.

Sound off
0

#2 Guest_a1elbow_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 28 April 2005 - 04:32 PM

hi.gif

Well I'm 23, but I don't see how age makes a difference. THe issue isn't what is appropriate, but what is appropriate here. If someone turns on late night (9pm or later) TV, they know there is a good chance of seeing something that might offend them on certain channels (MTV or COmedy Central, as opposed to NBC or Fox Family).
A lot of people defend whatever it is they do (music, TV, movies, etc) with the rhetorical "where are the parents?" nonsense. I think all of us here know from OUR childhoods that even the best parents can't always be around and that things pop up in places non of us expect. Two weeks ago my sister and nine year old nephew were on-line on the Star Wars website and porn popped up in a message board. She didn't see that coming, and was just lucky to be close enough to get rid of it before he really saw anything.

This is a Jets message board, and I don't think people can or should be expected to be prepared for sexually explicit images (even if it is a cartoon, that was still sex). You're new avatar (a woman holding...tomatoes?...near her brests I think) doesn't bother me, as there is nothing overtly dirty about it. It isn't any worse than many jokes in some PG movies anyway.

What about the images of women in signatures? I don't have any problem with any of them, although I DO find the thong one a little bit racy. Still, I don't think there are any that are too bad.

Basically, I don't think we should allow nudity or obviously sexual situations. But it is also Ron's board and he has the final say on what is okay or not, and we all have to respect that.
0

#3 User is offline   Jetsfan115 Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Assistant Admin
  • Posts: 23,828
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cali

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 28 April 2005 - 04:45 PM

QUOTE
Basically, I don't think we should allow nudity or obviously sexual situations. But it is also Ron's board and he has the final say on what is okay or not, and we all have to respect that.



i agree with that and i see what your saying its just we all have a different of opinion of whats Appropriate here. For instance I think the actual picture of the chick in a thong was more offensive being as it’s a person actually showing skin not a cartoon implying it. It didn’t actually show anything too bad so I didn’t think it was but a few people on here did. Everyone on here will have there own opinion about what is appropriate here that’s all I’m saying. That’s why we need the moderators and site admin to make the final decision. Anyway I did change it then changed it back for a vote. I just seen it and thought it was funny so I put it up there.
0

#4 User is offline   LocoJet Icon

  • LB Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,651
  • Joined: 30-March 05

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 28 April 2005 - 05:07 PM

i dont have a problem with anybody doing what they want to do in the privacy of their own home. i have a problem when people do these things in "public" where they could potentially expose "virgin" minds to such things. people will eventually be exposed to all these things but it just isn't good to expose children to some things. it's a scientific fact. i mostly believe in censorship from a childhood development standpoint. after a certain age the groundwork for that person is pretty much laid and you can expose them to alot of things without any problems developing.

alot of people think that the right wing is out to restrict the 1st amendment in america. it just isn't true. trying to get people to put warning labels on things isn't the same thing as trying to tell them that they cant say something at all. that is what alot of people say that the right wing is trying to do though.

i, for one, dont want to flip on my t.v. and see a bunch of stuff that i really dont like seeing. you can put that kind of thing on cable t.v. everyone should be happy with this. that way gays, for example, get to watch ass lust on hbo and i get to not order hbo ever and i dont have to watch it. everyone is happy. this is just one example. this is how people coexist in this country.

do these people realize that real people do get offended by having to witness some of these things? do they really think that i'm just being a religious nut and i want to oppress them or keep it how it is or whatever they think? people really look at some things and go "great...now i need to get a lobotomy". just because they have given up on a lifestyle that most people call descent doesn't give them the right to expose it to me or my family. i dont have kids but i might someday and they will have the right to walk down the street and not look at some sort of debotchery just like i had that right. you're out of the closet. there's nothing wrong with it, in your eyes. good for you. other people have rights too.

whether its television, advertising, music, movies, video games or the internet there should be a standard or protocol about how to rate all this material. if it's below a certain standard there is nothing uncostitutional with making someone put a warning label on it. as long as it doesn't break any laws you should be able to do what you want to.

there is always the question of who decides the standards or protocols regarding how to rate all this material. i think that in the USA it should be by the people. the people being officials elected or oppointed by elected officials.
0

#5 User is offline   Maynard13 Icon

  • 2005 Best Signature
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,142
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 28 April 2005 - 05:41 PM

icon_question.gif :shout: I really don't care what anyone has in their thing, but I'm sure you should know what is over the line and not, icon_idea.gif


0

#6 User is offline   Jetsfan115 Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Assistant Admin
  • Posts: 23,828
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cali

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 29 April 2005 - 08:51 AM

Good post locojet. I agree with what your saying on warning labels but things like south park which does come on cable TV not HBO and use language like that is crazy. They give u a warning that its TV mature but is any kid gonna turn it off because of that? And what about sex in the city that nows comes on TBS and the stuff they talk about. I Understand that just cause we have free speech it doesn’t mean that you can walk around saying whatever you want. I mean u can’t walk up to a cop and say hey *beep* u. I mean u could but it wouldn’t be smart lol. It means we all have to understand each others concerns and come to an understanding so we can treat our fellow men and women with respect. That’s why I offered to change it when people got upset over it. I really didn’t think it would offend anyone but I was wrong appearently. I’m just saying if I had children that I knew came on here and I seen something I didn’t want them seeing I would ask the person to take it down. Freedom of speech gives us rights like voting for a president and buying whatever music we want and letting us voice our opinion. Its not a law allowing us to do anything we want.
0

#7 User is offline   ManginiIsMyHero Icon

  • Line Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 831
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Location:Brewster, NY. Currently PSU
  • Interests:Jets Football, Mets Baseball, parties, gaming, and programming.

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 29 April 2005 - 12:33 PM

JetFan115, could you please size your signature down to one picure? It's too big and as Ronny requested at the top of the main forum, you are supposed to do it. Thanks alot.
I changed my name, but I dont remember what it was... if anyone remembers please let me know.
0

#8 User is offline   Jetsfan115 Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Assistant Admin
  • Posts: 23,828
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cali

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 29 April 2005 - 12:40 PM

Sure. I never seen anything saying one pic only.
0

#9 User is offline   ManginiIsMyHero Icon

  • Line Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 831
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Location:Brewster, NY. Currently PSU
  • Interests:Jets Football, Mets Baseball, parties, gaming, and programming.

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 29 April 2005 - 12:46 PM

Go to talk Jets football. the Title is signatures. it's at the top of the page.
I changed my name, but I dont remember what it was... if anyone remembers please let me know.
0

#10 User is offline   Jetsfan115 Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Assistant Admin
  • Posts: 23,828
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cali

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 29 April 2005 - 12:57 PM

Thanks. I found it and adjusted accordingly
0

#11 User is offline   Jetme23 Icon

  • Drafted Rookie
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 86
  • Joined: 30-March 05

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 29 April 2005 - 01:42 PM

As far as your signatures being appropiate, personally I have no issue with them, certain forum "nazi's" do. For one I tend to enjoy funny and different signatures.
0

#12 User is offline   Jetsfan115 Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Assistant Admin
  • Posts: 23,828
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cali

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 29 April 2005 - 01:46 PM

People got offensed because it depicted an act of intercourse. It was shrek doing the princess from behind. I think u missed it
0

#13 User is offline   LocoJet Icon

  • LB Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,651
  • Joined: 30-March 05

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 29 April 2005 - 10:05 PM

i like that pic. the hunter becomes the hunted.

hysterical.gif
0

#14 User is offline   sdljets Icon

  • Drafted Rookie
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 189
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Location:jersey
  • Interests:lacrosse football jets girls music guitar

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 29 April 2005 - 11:12 PM

i muist say i read many boards and this is my favoirite because it is so classy and the community here is much more friendly. the moderators also put more work into it. YEAH RONNY
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users