The General Conversation Area

She's wearing very revealing pants and is obviously posed in a sexual provacative way and she's obviously under the age of 10. It's in extremely poor taste and it's very discomforting. Grow up and get over "lolis". It's sad. ;]
 
ayase said:
Acceptable? Y/N?
Click to expand...

Strawberry Marshmellow is obviously not acceptable. That title is pretty infamous as being in horribly bad taste and the cover really just shows it. But I understand you seek to trivialise this issue so you can feel better about enjoy sexuall provocative lolis. How sad for you.
 
Good lord. I don't notice a trademark wink after that statement so I presume I'll have to take it seriously. we almost did it CG, we almost had a decent discussion without it getting personal.

Now that is sad. :(
 
You're clearly insulting me and my thinking by undermining it with that kind of trivialisation. Oh no, but I guess you're the "victim" again because "big bad CitizenGeek called me names, cry cry". This is getting so tired and stale now ;]

/waits for warning from admins being singled out for bad behaviour
 
CitizenGeek said:
She's wearing very revealing pants and is obviously posed in a sexual provacative way and she's obviously under the age of 10. It's in extremely poor taste and it's very discomforting. Grow up and get over "lolis". It's sad. ;]
Click to expand...

they're bloomers, not pants, common practice with school girls in America. this arguement is getting silly now, think it's time for both sides to just ignore the other
 
Are you really trying to deny that the picture is a "loli" (i.e., a sexualised pre-pubescent girl)? That fact is even referred to in the image itself :s
 
serious-cat.jpg


Let's all chill.
 
So, it says "loli" in the actual image itself, it conforms to loli standards of obviously VERY under-age girls in revealing clothes and I'm being unreasonable for saying it like it is? Eh ... :s
 
You can't goad me into responding aggresively anymore CG. It was a decent discussion until your comment on Otaku-san's second image, which for me undid any kind of relevance continuing the discussion might have had (and it was all but over by that point anyway - we'd both said our piece and understood each other's position).

That is by far one of the tamest, least sexual images you could possibly imagine (only the word "loli" really made it seem that way) - Hence my wanting to gauge your opinion of a mainstream manga title. Your overreaction proved that there really is nothing more for us to discuss.
 
It's clearly an image of a minor with sexual overtones which is exactly what we arguing about at that point in time. I don't doubt that Otaku-san is extremely socially inept and unable to guess that using another such image right in the middle of a heated debate on the topic would of course inflame the argument further, but it was obviously going to do that and that's what it did. Maybe you should quit sulking about things and just talk about them instead? :s

Sy said:
Damn. Well this has gone past the point of discussion.
Click to expand...

Of course it has. Just like it always does on AUKN, because the admin have to interrupt and inject a kind of bad spirited tone into the whole discussion by forcing the idea that what is really a good natured debate is in fact, according to them, BAD, BAD, VERY BAD, dampening the mood of general good spirits. And then the usual people decide they want to play the victim again and then the admin end up punishing people unnecessarily, stunting any potential debates in the future and creating a mood of ill feeling. And of course, then this will be locked which will prevent the argument sorting itself out like it almost always does. Like I said, please bring Paul and rid of the interventionist control freaks. It was much more fun without them! :'[
 
CitizenGeek said:
Sy said:
Damn. Well this has gone past the point of discussion.
Click to expand...

Of course it has. Just like it always does on AUKN, because the admin have to interrupt and inject a kind of bad spirited tone into the whole discussion by forcing the idea that what is really a good natured debate is in fact, according to them, BAD, BAD, VERY BAD,
Click to expand...

i was unaware Rui or Chaos moaned

or that u'd been punished
 
Ryo Chan said:
i was unaware Rui or Chaos moaned
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure all of three have pointed out your apparent unity as admins (again, artificially and unconvincingly inflating your supposed 'importance') before.

or that u'd been punished
Click to expand...

If I wasn't demonstrating how absurdly unfair and hypocritical your past singling out of me for punishment was, I'm almost certain I'd have a few PMs waiting in my inbox scolding me for "... err ... debating or .... er ... something along those lines."
 
CitizenGeek said:
I'm pretty sure all of three have pointed out your apparent unity as admins (again, artificially and unconvincingly inflating your supposed 'importance') before.
Click to expand...

think your misunderstanding the chain of command here

Admins

Mods

Users

honestly if you want to insult people, atleast hit the right target
 
Paul is gone. You can ask for him back all you want; I miss him too, however he's not coming back just for you wanting it to happen and this is precisely the kind of situation which hastened his departure.

This isn't the site you are trying to make it be. Paul is gone and times have changed. Please deal with it and stop taking out your anger on a rose-tinted view of the past on other people. You can't make the site into something it isn't anymore just by attacking people until they fold.

R
 
Back
Top