Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

BrookM wrote:This old forum, what was it about?

I joined because one of the subforums was for a webcomic I used to read, but apart from that it was mainly general discussion. There was a pretty good roleplay section though.

Unfortunately the US is still stuck in the age of the puritans, who have had their prudishness taken up by the religious right

Little off there. It is more of the liberal political correctness crap that has been going around for years. Companies dont want to be sued so they dont allow anything to happen there heh.

But yes I turned off my Avatars at work so it is not an issue for me anymore. Once I realized I could do that problem solved but I still think some sensitivity to the issue is wise.

Sensitivity? Do guys even do sensitive?

Once every full moon, apparently...

I honestly have no problem with the risque avatars on this site. It's not like you don't see it on everything from cartoons to commercials. I have only seen one (very) questionable avatar on this site. I won't be an ass and say the person's username but I will note that their avatar involves the display of *cough* goatse.

Really, the avatars are no worse then what you would see anywhere else. Hell, I work at a library and we have stuff in the way of movies, books and magazines that is far worse then what I am seeing here. So if my library carries stuff worse then what I am seeing on here, it's not that bad...IMHO of course.

*Sorry keep finding spelling errors*

ProtoClone wrote:Really, the avatars are no worse then what you would see anywhere else.

I'd expect this from "Naked Man" Barney.

Or someone with a nipple showing through the thumb/forefinger.

Puritans? Wow. Why don't they just show Janet Jacksons boob during the Super Bowl....

Someone use this as their avatar , " Speedo Santas "

I want to. I really do.

But...I'm just not strong enough.

The part that makes me laugh most of all about the pic, Luna, is the words "Hunk Du Jour" in the bottom corner.

What suprises me more is this thread has lasted for 4 pages.

Maybe we're just waiting for more risky pics to show up?

Personally, I'd prefer to see more risque' one.

Yes, I agree, more "risky" avatars.

Too many girls though, we need some more naked men to balance things out. Luna's got the right idea, more "hunk du jour" please.

I won't be an ass and say the person's username but I will note that their avatar involves the display of *cough* goatse.

I think I know the one you're talking about, but I thought it was hilarious.

@Sid: did you not see the "Naked Man" Barney avatar above?

Having just one such avatar probably skews the avatar ratio well out of proportion to the likely M:F ratio of this site.

JohnHwangDD wrote:@Sid: did you not see the "Naked Man" Barney avatar above?

Having just one such avatar probably skews the avatar ratio well out of proportion to the likely M:F ratio of this site.

@Luna: I guess it's better than the zoomin' Hoff...

LunaHound wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:@Sid: did you not see the "Naked Man" Barney avatar above?

Having just one such avatar probably skews the avatar ratio well out of proportion to the likely M:F ratio of this site.

@JohnHwang You would look this up.

There's no need to look it up, as it's a non-scientific comment made in jest.

That said, 40k is well known to skew heavily male, so the likely M:F ratio is likely something like 10:1, while the "sexy" avatar ratio is probably more than 10:1.

But as I said, it was made in jest. I have no interest in trying to prove or disprove any of it.

If you can't take the joke, sorry.

Empchild wrote: As long as I stay within the guide lines it is afterall just an avater.

I agree.

jp400 wrote:No, I got that point. And I cant name a single workplace that ive ever been in that didn't have something of equal value or worse either tacked up on the wall, framed on a desktop, or on a computer as a screensaver.

All those places are running in danger of a sex discrimination case.

In little workshops and garages you can probably get away with it. Corporates have to be a lot more careful.

Conflicting...emotions...

I should join in too.

No need for compensation guys, MeanGreenStompa is BRIAN BLESSED, all the manliness we'll ever need around here!

Check tha size of me claymore!!!


HAZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

By far, the most Risky Avatars are not pornographic, or anythign sexist or remotely anything to do with the opposite sex..............

Its the ones containing GW images. You'll all get 'cease and desists' from GW leagal before 2010 is out, mark my words.

2010 - The Year of the Great GW Internet Purge - "Lets burn our fan base, because lets be honest, we just about screw them on everything else"!

You know, the C&D jokes are getting old now..

Not really. Not just yet at least.

I'm with Brook on this one.