YOUR OPINION

[Channing]

Alright so earlier my signature was removed by the moderator Leeza apparently because it's over the limits in kb. I reposted my new signature with the link to the forum I post at. Now what I find funny is. The link I posted:

*link removed*

Now my signature was in regulation of the rules. Several minutes later my signature was removed once again. I'm told by another moderator that my signature link is inappropriate. Explain this to me once more? How is it that Leeza can have an image of Marilyn Manson, a man whom speaks of sodomy and other disturbing topics as her profile picture. But I cannot post a link to a forum that I post at.

I say you're either being geniune about it, or I'm being singled out because Leeza is pissed off. Not trying to cause drama so don't lock the thread. I can so tell already it'll be deleted and I'll recieve a PM but the hypocricy must be brought to light. Grow some balls and talk about the matter. The link I posted in my signature? Is not as inappropriate as some crude musician she has in her profile. There is nothing wrong with it.

So why am I forced to take it down when it's harming noone?

[Raistlin]

From looking at the main page, it looks like pornography is posted there. It is against the rule to post that sort of stuff here and also against the rules to link to places that contain it.

[Shoeberto]

The board you linked to refers to stickied threads as being cummed on. I mean, c'mon. We try to keep this place at a certain level of appropriateness.

If you had a picture of Slipknot in your sig, we wouldn't care, as long as the picture wasn't grotesquely violent. Her Marilyn Manson stuff is just pictures of the guy; nothing is said about sodomy in it. If she linked to a picture of him in his full-body woman suit naked we'd be upset. If she posted lyrics of his which referred to something overly disgusting, we'd be upset.

You weren't singled out about your signatures. Everyone gets their sigs tested; Leeza just happens to be the one who takes care of a lot of them.

I don't see why you're making such a big deal out of this.

[Channing]

The pornography is in a locked forum. Several livejournals are posted here and several links to personal things. I just feel like the community I choose to represent should be represented along with everyone elses freedom to represent what they want.

So "cummed on" sticky threads offend you to the point of making me remove this link? I'm sorry but these are very poor excuses. Noone is forcing you to post in the community I link to. Just as I am not forced to visit the links you are all advertising. It is breaking no rules.

I don't see why you're making a big deal out of it either. Let me represent the link in my signature. There is nothing wrong with it.

[Old Manus]

Who clicks on members' sigs, really

I don't see why you're making a big deal out of it either.

lol

[Yamaneko]

We look at content and not what something "represents". We also reserve the right to remove/alter any part of your profile for any reason. Most of the time we have a reason. This was one of those times. If you can't figure out that reason maybe you're not looking hard enough.

[Miriel]

You don't mean to cause drama? Oh please. You're making a big fuss over a link in a signature.

The CK people decided it's not right for this forum, so they removed. Deal with it and move on.

[Dreddz]

Awww man, who's cooler, Us or Them ?
The member God on that site likes Xenogears :D

[Raistlin]

I just feel like the community I choose to represent should be represented along with everyone elses freedom to represent what they want.

You don't have the freedom to represent what you want here. This is a private forum with private rules. The owner could say "I'm going to not allow sigs that link to FFO because I don't like the competition" and it would happen. The staff finds the content of that forum detestable to the point that they'd remove a link for it, and I'm having trouble coming up with a reason to disagree.

[-N-]

Don't confuse this with "Raistlin supports the staff".

[Raistlin]

Don't confuse this with "Raistlin supports the staff".

Yeah, because they really are a bunch of jerks.

[Loony BoB]

We feel it's an inappropriate link. Because of that, you shouldn't really be posting it into a thread. Link removed!

[Channing]

I just find it pretty funny that I've linked this in my signature for over a month and it's the content is not expressed until now. Even after my image as a signature was removed for being "over the limit."

This leads me to believe staff didn't remove the link because they don't like the content. They removed it because Leeza is pitching a temper tantrum about me being "pissy" with her. THAT'S what this boils down to.

If it's THIS bad then why do you even allow the link to stand in this thread alone? I could careless if I'm banned or not but I shall keep displaying how f___king retarded I feel your rule is.

[Jess]

Who clicks on members' sigs, really

lol

I do.

[Loony BoB]

From this small survey-thread, the public seem to agree with Staff. Also, we choose what is inappropriate. Also, I felt the link was inappropriate so it's not just Leeza. Seems other staffers also agreed. Also, we probably didn't remove it earlier because, well, we don't click every signature link on a regular basis. 20,000+ members, you know how it can be, I'm sure!

A couple of years in therapy and you'll get over it.