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

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

Jets start voluntary offseason programs today
Jetsman05 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 03:48 PM) whatever that means
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 03:59 PM) Some talk that Dennard might slide to round 2 now
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:00 PM) Roby and Fuller are rising.
Jetsman05 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:00 PM) Roby absolute physical freak but really inconsistent as a player
Jetsman05 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:01 PM) loved him going into school but never grew into the player i thought he would become
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:01 PM) I don't want Roby, afraid we take him
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:01 PM) f***ing draft should be this week, not 2 weeks from now
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:02 PM) I rather go get a CB like Phillip Gaines in round 3.
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:02 PM) 1-Odell Beckham Jr WR, 2-Jace Amaro TE, 3-Phillip Gaines CB.
Jetsman05 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:04 PM) Where is Marcus Roberson being projected
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:05 PM) round 2 I think
Jetsman05 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:06 PM) he'll be a solid pro
santana Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:18 PM) solid pro
santana Icon : (22 April 2014 - 04:19 PM) boston. strong.
Jetsman05 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 06:14 PM) you're a clown
Jetsman05 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 06:14 PM) just for the record
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 06:27 PM) FIRE RAUL
Jetsman05 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 06:30 PM) agreed
Jetsman05 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 06:30 PM) EJ > Raul
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 06:38 PM) lmao
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 06:38 PM) I wouldn't go that far
Jetsman05 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 06:39 PM) true
Jetsman05 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 06:39 PM) but its closer by the day
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (22 April 2014 - 08:13 PM) LET'S GO RANGERS!
santana Icon : (22 April 2014 - 08:51 PM) Boo rangers
santana Icon : (22 April 2014 - 08:51 PM) boo the Knicks
santana Icon : (22 April 2014 - 08:51 PM) Let's go wizards!
santana Icon : (22 April 2014 - 08:52 PM) SANTANA DESERVES BETTER
santana Icon : (22 April 2014 - 08:56 PM) Just landed in Reagan jumping on the wizards bandwagon taxi right out the gate
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Yesterday, 01:47 PM) Tanaka looks good so far
santana Icon : (Yesterday, 03:45 PM) The title race is REAL
canuckfan Icon : (Yesterday, 04:36 PM) Teh Raptors!!!!!!!!!!
canuckfan Icon : (Yesterday, 04:37 PM) Let's go Habs!
Jetsman05 Icon : (Today, 05:18 AM) Pineda looks good so far
santana Icon : (Today, 07:18 AM) Pineda solid pro
santana Icon : (Today, 07:19 AM) Pineda went Boston strong on Boston
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Today, 07:57 AM) He has, except he is stupid for putting the shit on his neck. He has to hide that better.
Chaos Icon : (Today, 09:14 AM) @Bischoff_Scott: Per a source, the #Lions are having discussions about moving #Suh before the draft to move up as high as possible in the first round.
Chaos Icon : (Today, 09:14 AM) now that would be a fairly big move
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Today, 09:46 AM) If they trade Suh to get Watkins, I would laugh. That doesn't really make their team better, they already have a high yardage passing attack
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Today, 09:47 AM) They have the best WR in football and they signed Tate who will be a excellent #2 to Johnson
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Today, 09:53 AM) too many smokes screens. f*** the extra 2 weeks of this shit, the draft should be tonight!
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Today, 01:04 PM) The media is so dumb, Jon Gieger Revis' best friend tweets a pic from the Jets website and says it's revis, and all of the media goes along with it making fun of the Jets when it was really Jeremy Kerleyr.
Chaos Icon : (Today, 08:29 PM) uh oh - "Bradley Roby charged with operating a vehicle under the influence"
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Today, 10:56 PM) THE YANKEES
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: 23,539
  • 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
Get it done MT
Posted Image
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: 23,539
  • 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.
Get it done MT
Posted Image
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: 23,539
  • 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.
Get it done MT
Posted Image
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: 23,539
  • 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.
Get it done MT
Posted Image
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: 23,539
  • 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
Get it done MT
Posted Image
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: 23,539
  • 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
Get it done MT
Posted Image
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