Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team
Certainly. I could not make my avatar a pornographic photo even if I claimed it was because I am scientist studying sexual imagery, because people who have no idea what's going on won't realize I was trying to make a particular point - they'll just see the image (and potentially be offended).trapyoung wrote:Issue of first impression eh? Would you like the C&A mods to crucify him?Metsfanmax wrote:All these posts miss the point. It's not about whether saying the word "f*ck" is allowed; it's about whether saying "f*ck Jesus" is allowed. The policy regarding whether that message is allowed obviously ought to be unaffected by the intent of the user who made the avatar.
I would like to say that they are completely different avatars and while i find her avatar to be comical i find yours to be highly offensive based on the other aspects of the avatar. Combinations of two things you can put in your avatar can make something that you cant put in your avatar.owenshooter wrote:the precedent...
Subject: Calidrmr / avatar abuse [closed]lv
the word f*ck is not offensive on an avatar... good luck...-the black jesus
Well played.trapyoung wrote:Issue of first impression eh? Would you like the C&A mods to crucify him?Metsfanmax wrote:All these posts miss the point. It's not about whether saying the word "f*ck" is allowed; it's about whether saying "f*ck Jesus" is allowed. The policy regarding whether that message is allowed obviously ought to be unaffected by the intent of the user who made the avatar.
This was due to Calidrmr's avatar. He found it offensive, but since it didn't get overturned, it set the precedent that the 'f' word is ok if used, erm, correctly?bigpash wrote:If I remember correctly, the picture did not use to have f%&£ embossed across the front of it.
But I seem to remember owenshooter starting a C&A thread against an avatar with f%&£ on it which was cleared I think.
So therefore he may believe that this is acceptable.
but don't you see? by placing it there he's forcing us to consider why we're offended.RedFlyingGolf wrote:Ah, but he has not used it correctly. Using the word f*ck in front of a picture of Jesus? (Well, a black Jesus, but that is a whole 'nother story.) That is wrong.

Robinette wrote:Depends on what metric you use...Kaskavel wrote:Seriously. Who is the female conqueror of CC?
The coolest is squishyg
squishyg wrote:but don't you see? by placing it there he's forcing us to consider why we're offended.RedFlyingGolf wrote:Ah, but he has not used it correctly. Using the word f*ck in front of a picture of Jesus? (Well, a black Jesus, but that is a whole 'nother story.) That is wrong.
You do realize that based on where Jesus was born, he would have been a lot closer to black than white... right? He's only portrayed as fair skinned because of the popularity of Christianity that spread into Europe. So of course artists are going to depict their deity as themselves.RedFlyingGolf wrote: (Well, a black Jesus, but that is a whole 'nother story.)
Mr. Squirrel wrote:One fool reporting for duty!pmchugh wrote:BUMP- one more fool needed
But Jesus is white because the Bible tells me that blacks are sinners...Bones2484 wrote:You do realize that based on where Jesus was born, he would have been a lot closer to black than white... right? He's only portrayed as fair skinned because of the popularity of Christianity that spread into Europe. So of course artists are going to depict their deity as themselves.RedFlyingGolf wrote: (Well, a black Jesus, but that is a whole 'nother story.)
But then again, if you're offended by someone referring to Jesus as "black", you have deeper issues to worry about.
I believe it ranks second only to protesting against the f*ck black jesus avatar.army of nobunaga wrote:There are many wrongs in the world... protesting with a f*ck black jesus avatar is one of the dumbest biggest wastes of time)s= in the history of protesting.

I never thought his avatar was insulting or offending or anything until he added the word f*ck. Heck, I don't care if Jesus was black or white. I just think it is stupid how he put it there to protest and in his way he insulted others.Bones2484 wrote:You do realize that based on where Jesus was born, he would have been a lot closer to black than white... right? He's only portrayed as fair skinned because of the popularity of Christianity that spread into Europe. So of course artists are going to depict their deity as themselves.RedFlyingGolf wrote: (Well, a black Jesus, but that is a whole 'nother story.)
But then again, if you're offended by someone referring to Jesus as "black", you have deeper issues to worry about.

the word 'f*ck' and the word 'f*ck' on a background of jesus are two different thingsowenshooter wrote:the question is if f*ck is offensive within an avatar and the previous ruling is f*ck is not offensive within the forums or on an avatar
owenshooter wrote:go ahead and report me, you will get nowhere...-0
He clearly is not saying "f*ck Jesus" in his avatar. I'm not sure how you get the idea that he is.Metsfanmax wrote:All these posts miss the point. It's not about whether saying the word "f*ck" is allowed; it's about whether saying "f*ck Jesus" is allowed. The policy regarding whether that message is allowed obviously ought to be unaffected by the intent of the user who made the avatar.
Strong feelings don't make something illegal. Standing on an American flag evokes very strong feelings in me, but it's still (thankfully) legal.hairy potter wrote:the word 'f*ck' and the word 'f*ck' on a background of jesus are two different thingsowenshooter wrote:the question is if f*ck is offensive within an avatar and the previous ruling is f*ck is not offensive within the forums or on an avatar
just like the word 'lol' is no problem whatsoever but the word 'lol' on a picture of the twin towers would probably provoke some strong feelings
hairy potter is right. You're missing the point. Having multis isn't illegal but still gets you banned, doesn't it? It isn't a matter of it is illegal, it is if it breaks conquer club rules.Woodruff wrote:He clearly is not saying "f*ck Jesus" in his avatar. I'm not sure how you get the idea that he is.Metsfanmax wrote:All these posts miss the point. It's not about whether saying the word "f*ck" is allowed; it's about whether saying "f*ck Jesus" is allowed. The policy regarding whether that message is allowed obviously ought to be unaffected by the intent of the user who made the avatar.
Strong feelings don't make something illegal. Standing on an American flag evokes very strong feelings in me, but it's still (thankfully) legal.hairy potter wrote:the word 'f*ck' and the word 'f*ck' on a background of jesus are two different thingsowenshooter wrote:the question is if f*ck is offensive within an avatar and the previous ruling is f*ck is not offensive within the forums or on an avatar
just like the word 'lol' is no problem whatsoever but the word 'lol' on a picture of the twin towers would probably provoke some strong feelings
and if this somehow doesn't fall under this category, what about this:Twill wrote:In no circumstances is bigotry allowed.
* Bigotry includes racism, sexism, ageism, homophobia, religion bashing, lack of religion bashing, or wishing violence on any minority group, etc.
Twill wrote:Posting controversial or irrelevant messages or topics with the intent to provoke someone else into a pissing match, emotional response, flame fest or to generally disrupt the discussion, community or user is not cool. Prompting or provoking others to do that is just as bad.
Well stated woody. You are now off my foe list.Woodruff wrote: He clearly is not saying "f*ck Jesus" in his avatar. I'm not sure how you get the idea that he is.
Strong feelings don't make something illegal. Standing on an American flag evokes very strong feelings in me, but it's still (thankfully) legal.
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
I didn't say he intended to say "f*ck Jesus" in his avatar. I said only that someone who didn't know him and his peculiarities might think he was saying that, and be offended by that.Woodruff wrote:He clearly is not saying "f*ck Jesus" in his avatar. I'm not sure how you get the idea that he is.Metsfanmax wrote:All these posts miss the point. It's not about whether saying the word "f*ck" is allowed; it's about whether saying "f*ck Jesus" is allowed. The policy regarding whether that message is allowed obviously ought to be unaffected by the intent of the user who made the avatar.