|
|
#31
12-10-2005, 08:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Avatar pushing the limits....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] reading this thread: am i to understand that if somebody had an avatar that was ACTUALLY a swastika (black) on a while background on a red flag that we would be wrong to send that person a PM kindly asking them to change it??? [/ QUOTE ] Dude, it's a political party. Since when do/should we decide which of these parties are "good" and which are "bad"? [/ QUOTE ] We probably don't want the forum blocked in Germany, though. So there's an external reason to give Nazi paraphenalia the boot. [/ QUOTE ] So if GoT made his avatar the image below, Germany would block 2+2? I'm not sure that makes a whole lot of sense. 
|
|
#33
12-10-2005, 08:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Avatar pushing the limits....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] reading this thread: am i to understand that if somebody had an avatar that was ACTUALLY a swastika (black) on a while background on a red flag that we would be wrong to send that person a PM kindly asking them to change it??? [/ QUOTE ] Dude, it's a political party. Since when do/should we decide which of these parties are "good" and which are "bad"? [/ QUOTE ] We probably don't want the forum blocked in Germany, though. So there's an external reason to give Nazi paraphenalia the boot. [/ QUOTE ] So if GoT made his avatar the image below, Germany would block 2+2? I'm not sure that makes a whole lot of sense. [/ QUOTE ] I come out like this. Unless 2+2 (matt, etc) specifically decides to ban an avatar like that we should not be the ones deciding what type of political or cultural statements people make. The truth is there are people who look at a cross or a picture of Jesus Christ in the same light other's look at that swastika.
|
|
#34
12-10-2005, 08:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Avatar pushing the limits....
[ QUOTE ]
I come out like this. Unless 2+2 (matt, etc) specifically decides to ban an avatar like that we should not be the ones deciding what type of political or cultural statements people make. The truth is there are people who look at a cross or a picture of Jesus Christ in the same light other's look at that swastika. [/ QUOTE ] I think this is right on the money. I had an avatar at one point that contained swastika images and it was not revieved well by the mods. Maybe that should be taken as precedant and maybe not. I think it would be best it Mat just chimed in with his opinion.
|
|
#36
12-10-2005, 08:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Avatar pushing the limits....
Caesar does not usually opine on petty avatar matters, but this thread borders on ridiculous. What limit, exactly, does this avatar push? I have seen Cactuar on countless occasions and not once has it conjured visions of the Third Reich in my mind. I had never even come close to making this connection until this thread. Had the avatar looked something like this, you would probably have a case
 Those offended by the original image (as mentioned in an earlier post) are out searching desperately to be offended. We might as well ban the letter X while we're at it, because if I cock my head at the correct angle and squint long enough, I see a swastika. Caesar will not be associated with such ludicrous censorship. Am I not merciful?
|
|
#37
12-10-2005, 08:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Avatar pushing the limits....
Here is a link to the wikipedia page that contains some history of the swastika. I'm not sure if it has been mentioned that the symbol itself really didn't have any negative meaning for most of its history.
Wikipedia [ QUOTE ] I should add, I do understand if 2+2 would decide not to allow avatars of the Nazi symbol since this forum's main purpose is a marketing tool. [/ QUOTE ] I believe this is the main reason this site probably shouldn't want people using swastika avatars. Regardless of how much logical sense it makes, I think more people would be put off by that image than an avatar which contains nudity. The main base of 2+2 is overwhelmingly male. It's hard for me to imagine that (primarily young) men are more likely to be offended by a topless woman than a swastika. It just makes sense for 2+2 to play it safe with actual swastikas, IMO.
|
|
#38
12-10-2005, 08:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Avatar pushing the limits....
[ QUOTE ]
Why are pornographic or obscene avatars not allowed? [/ QUOTE ] Lloyd I think it's the same reason a magazine could have Swastika on its cover and be sold openly, but a pornagraphic cover would need to be sold within the same bookstore with something blocking the cover from public view. Additionally I believe the T&C's note material that is obscene or pornagraphic - is this right?
|
|
#39
12-10-2005, 08:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Avatar pushing the limits....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Why are pornographic or obscene avatars not allowed? [/ QUOTE ] Lloyd I think it's the same reason a magazine could have Swastika on its cover and be sold openly, but a pornagraphic cover would need to be sold within the same bookstore with something blocking the cover from public view. Additionally I believe the T&C's note material that is obscene or pornagraphic - is this right? [/ QUOTE ] Score another one for censored.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
