What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

New Cartoon (1 Viewer)

Whoever suggested we get rid of Bang from these boards needs to grow a pair. Seriously. You guys are weak and I say that w/ the deepest conviction. Liberals. I swear.
Liberals? Liberals like the PTC? Or Liberals like the GOP?
 
What a joke!!You can find twice the suggestive content on many of the FFA posts or if that is the issue that it is posted in the Pool then move it to the FFAIt is a moderated board, but ban everything vaguely suggestive then and not just the posts that get reported.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok, I was warned because "kids" may visit these boards. May they not also visit the site? It is a double standard. Bang still exists and I still greatly appreciate his work but you can't have it both ways. If I'm an ### for that so be it. Ironicly enough I am for getting rid of censorship on the board.
:hophead: Bojang, I respectfully submit that if your initial concern was that kids might see this and somehow be jaded by the content that you have no clue what teenagers talk about. If you did you would spend less time complaining about victimless humor and more time paying attention to your children and what they’re doing. Any given conversation they have amongst themselves is far more offensive to prurient interests than any one of Bang’s cartoons.…….Long live Bang !!!!!!

* Self Censored*

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would like to lodge an official complaint about the content of Bojang0301's sig line. I find it even more offensive than he is. Or is that, I find him even more offensive than his sig line? No matter. The sexual inendo in his sig line is offensive. Please consider this a formal complaint. Thank you.

 
I would like to lodge an official complaint about the content of Bojang0301's sig line. I find it even more offensive than he is. Or is that, I find him even more offensive than his sig line? No matter. The sexual inendo in his sig line is offensive. Please consider this a formal complaint. Thank you.
Indeed Rover. His references to drunkeness, murder, and homo erotic behavior are most offensive to teenagers and those of impressionable mind. "Cunning Linguist's" screen name is also offensive to members of the bible belt and other orthodox religious sects. How ironic that these two championed Bang's demise while covorting and reveling in improper verbiage according to their own standards....
 
Ok I love Bang but how can you have a cartoon on your site with language like that and then filter the board. It's a double standard.
If anyone knows humor, it is Bojanghttp://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...opic=161502&hl=

Direct Link to his cartoon in his thread

Seriously, that might be the least funny thing I have ever been witness to
Am I correct then in thinking that Bojang is producing a line of cartoons which were not promoted on this site? The objection to Bang was sour grapes??!! <_<

 
I would like to lodge an official complaint about the content of Bojang0301's sig line. I find it even more offensive than he is. Or is that, I find him even more offensive than his sig line? No matter. The sexual inendo in his sig line is offensive. Please consider this a formal complaint. Thank you.
Indeed Rover. His references to drunkeness, murder, and homo erotic behavior are most offensive to teenagers and those of impressionable mind. "Cunning Linguist's" screen name is also offensive to members of the bible belt and other orthodox religious sects. How ironic that these two championed Bang's demise while covorting and reveling in improper verbiage according to their own standards....
You guys really are clueless, eh? I read his post to mean, "He couldn't care less about the content on the board/site/forums...but that there should be some semblance of symmetry." Basically, why should the boards be moderated so harshly...when the cartoon that is supported on the front page flies in the face of the rules set forth on the forums. When something is deleted/modified or someone is timed out/banned...a lot of times the excuse of "kids/teens/children also surf this board" was thrown about when the axe came down...I think bojang was wondering why would the boards be subject to such prurient screening...but the front page not? And to boot...a cartoon...what would appeal to kids more?Then the reason of "the boards are separate from the site" was used to explain why the boards are moderated so sternly.

But cocoa then trumped that with her post about half naked women being constantly promoted on the forums.

It's two trains of thought on bojangs motivations:

1. Have bang cartoons pulled and have us moderated even more harshly

or

2. Question why were so heavily moderated on the boards when bang cartoons are sitting on the front page and are in violation of the board rules

I believe it was his intent to hopefully loosen the noose around the boards...not constrict us even more. But if you disagree...carry on bashing him...Lord knows that's "being excellent to one another"...

 
:o

I know it's their ball, and they can walk home with it if they want to, but I would really like to see an explanation of the thought process behind this decision, particularly in light of Joe's initial response.

 
Joe, and Co.,

Sorry that you felt the need to take down the cartoons. Complaining about these cartoons has got to be some of the most toolish behavior these boards get. Rather than stop the cartoons, you could have dismissed the complainers.

In English, slowly, so the even idiots can follow: Joe probably feels the need to be extra watchful regarding profanity on the boards, because, people being who they are, things would spiral out of control quickly. I have been on boards where cuss words were in every sentence, and it is just tiring to slog through filth. If Joe allowed the occassional bad word, depending on the situation, than we'd have tool's complaining about inconsistancy, such as right here. The cartoons, however, are known entitities. Joe need not worry about them "getting out of hand," he can just decline to show a particular cartoon.

Anyway, sorry to see this happen, Joe.

 
Maybe we can start a Ban Bojang thread? Or better yet a Threat? He's so useless he's the only poster I have on Ignore. :thumbdown:

 
how can someone be against censorship and then whine about this? Isn't that the true double standard?
Exactly...it would be like if an athlete felt he was getting picked on by the officials and then started pointing out all the fouls his own teammates were causing because he didn't feel they were mad enough at the refs too...And thumb down to bringing up the best hooters thread cg... boooo...

It's the last bastion of freedom left on these boards...

 
The cartoons, however, are known entitities. Joe need not worry about them "getting out of hand," he can just decline to show a particular cartoon.

Anyway, sorry to see this happen, Joe.
This has happened. I made a cartoon about Onterrio Smith that was deemed too over the top for the board. Frankly, I don't blame them, it was a bit close to the top, but with that subject, it was hard to NOT do something disgusting.While I sincerely appreciate the support, I say that this is Joe's board, and we must play by his rules, I have no problem with that at all. Am I happy with the way things have turned out? ..not exactly, but I understand and respect their decision. It's all a matter of continuity. To be fair to all means that occasionaly it appears unfair to some. I don't feel as if I've been treated unfairly. The staff has been very gracious in handling this, and have been vert forthright about everything.

This site has an image and a purpose it's trying to put forth, and the reason they paid me to host the cartoons is to help promote their site. If my cartoon goes against the grain of what they're trying to do, then I am not providing what they have paid for. And it's not up to me or anyone else to decide for them what their goals are and what kind of image they want to project.

I'll be around, and I'll continue to post links in the message board to new cartoons as long as they'll allow me. In fact, Since all this has happened, I'll post a new thread with a link to the Onterrio cartoon. (I didn't do it before, because that would be competing against my client. But since that isn't the case anymore.. look for it on the main board.)

There's a possibility I may be brought on to do a custom cartoon specific to footballguys.com. I'm excited about that, and the staff is as well. If that sounds good to you, let them know, and I'm sure together we'll come up with something everyone can enjoy.

~Bang

 
Ok I love Bang but how can you have a cartoon on your site with language like that and then filter the board. It's a double standard.
I agree as well. For Bang, we make the exception. Living in a world absolutes is not for me. However, I can't speak for Joe and David.
Only the Sith deal in absolutes!
 
Bad choice in taking the cartoons down... would love to hear an explanation from the powers that be... :popcorn:

 
:thumbdown: on removing Bang! from the site.BOOOOOOOO!The whiney tools who asked for this should cover their heads in shame :bag: You see far more suggestive content on prime time TV. Give me a break.
 
:( :thumbdown: What a shame. Wow. Two posts in the negative and Bang! -- they're all pulled. I haven't seen such arbitrary actions since my grade 4 field trip was cancelled because one guy belched the alphabet in class...All this does is distract people from the real crime -- no FBG magazine shipments to Canada! :rant:
 
(funny that this particular bang was about whiners)..
Ding ding dingWe have a winner!
Good call. A shame how a select few in the minority get to dictate what is to be deemed proper. It is the FBG's boards, my question is was it offensive to them? If not the others can gently remove the board link from their favorites. I come here for entertainment purposes not to be preached morality or what they perceive morality to be.

Dallas Cowboys rule. :pics:

 
I would like to lodge an official complaint about the content of Bojang0301's sig line. I find it even more offensive than he is. Or is that, I find him even more offensive than his sig line? No matter. The sexual inendo in his sig line is offensive. Please consider this a formal complaint. Thank you.
Indeed Rover. His references to drunkeness, murder, and homo erotic behavior are most offensive to teenagers and those of impressionable mind. "Cunning Linguist's" screen name is also offensive to members of the bible belt and other orthodox religious sects. How ironic that these two championed Bang's demise while covorting and reveling in improper verbiage according to their own standards....
You guys really are clueless, eh? I read his post to mean, "He couldn't care less about the content on the board/site/forums...but that there should be some semblance of symmetry." Basically, why should the boards be moderated so harshly...when the cartoon that is supported on the front page flies in the face of the rules set forth on the forums. When something is deleted/modified or someone is timed out/banned...a lot of times the excuse of "kids/teens/children also surf this board" was thrown about when the axe came down...I think bojang was wondering why would the boards be subject to such prurient screening...but the front page not? And to boot...a cartoon...what would appeal to kids more?Then the reason of "the boards are separate from the site" was used to explain why the boards are moderated so sternly.

But cocoa then trumped that with her post about half naked women being constantly promoted on the forums.

It's two trains of thought on bojangs motivations:

1. Have bang cartoons pulled and have us moderated even more harshly

or

2. Question why were so heavily moderated on the boards when bang cartoons are sitting on the front page and are in violation of the board rules

I believe it was his intent to hopefully loosen the noose around the boards...not constrict us even more. But if you disagree...carry on bashing him...Lord knows that's "being excellent to one another"...
No sir, I am not clueless nor do I need to buy a vowel. Because you and I chose to interpret Bojang's postings and motives differently does not make either one of us correct. I choose not interpret his postings as a noble crusade against censorship and oppression, but rather I subscribe to the "Sour Grapes/Whiny Tool” theory. Either way, without knowing the individual or interviewing him it would be frivolous for me to presume to know his intent.To suggest that there are only two possible motives for his actions is limited and flawed logic IMHO. The only point I do concur with is that continuing to bash Bojang would not only be pointless and a waste of energy, it would also violate the code of "being excellent to one another". :coffee:

 
:( :thumbdown: What a shame. Wow. Two posts in the negative and Bang! -- they're all pulled. I haven't seen such arbitrary actions since my grade 4 field trip was cancelled because one guy belched the alphabet in class...

All this does is distract people from the real crime -- no FBG magazine shipments to Canada! :rant:
In fairness to Joe and Co., they probably got a slew of PMs. They insinuated as much in the other thread.
 
What a shame.  Wow.  Two posts in the negative and Bang! -- they're all pulled... 
In fairness to Joe and Co., they probably got a slew of PMs. They insinuated as much in the other thread.
Fair enough -- I didn't consider that. I keep forgetting about the PM route.But then I ask -- what about all (both?) the PM's about them not shipping magazines to Canada? :D

 
Just one more voice here upset that they are taking Bang! off FBG. Hoping with all of these posters saying Boooo, Joe and Co. might reconsider.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
:shock: I wish I didn't work so much so I could have seen this develop. First off I do not produce a cartoon. My buddy sent that but got a good laugh for someone thinking that. You people don't like my sig turn them off you have the option just like you suggesting I have the option not to watch. I like Bang Cartoons and always get a pretty decent laugh from them. I am allowed to question a staff that says members on this board have to follow their guidlines and then have questionable content on their site (however small the qustionable material is). That's pretty much it because a lot of my words always seem to be twisted or interpreted a different way then I intend.... :popcorn:Edit to add: I did not want Bang removed from the site on my questioning. I'm sure I'll be made into a hypocrit if I try to defend that stance so whatever.Oh and also my sig was removed by the staff so goes to show that your complains do matter to them. I suppose this is being excellent to one another though. I did not insult anyone and have continued not to on this thread but the removal of Bang and any actions being held against others because of one person is sad, disgraceful moves by the staff.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok, I was warned because "kids" may visit these boards. May they not also visit the site? It is a double standard. Bang still exists and I still greatly appreciate his work but you can't have it both ways. If I'm an ### for that so be it. Ironicly enough I am for getting rid of censorship on the board.
So basically this is all because you got pissy because you were slapped on the wrist for violating the published board rules that you agreed to abide by when you joined? As to your comment that "you can't have it both ways"...yes you can. Or more specifically Joe and David can. They can set whatever rule they want for these boards and they don't have to follow a single one of them - on the boards or the main site. They can let some people break the rules and go unpunished while others are dealt with under a zero-tolerance policy. It's their prerogative as owners of this site. Is that a double standard...yeah, probably. Does that make it wrong? No. It's good to be the King. So be it.

I am allowed to question a staff that says members on this board have to follow their guidlines and then have questionable content on their site (however small the qustionable material is).
Actually I didn't think you were "allowed to" do that. Haven't the Mods made it clear numerous times that we aren't supposed to question their administrative decisions publicly on the forums?Although, you're doing it again...

Oh and also my sig was removed by the staff... sad, disgraceful moves by the staff.
Edit to add: I did not want Bang removed from the site on my questioning.
But honestly it doesn't take more than a drop of foresight to realize that would be a likely outcome.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
this is JUST like a fantasy football league...a couple cranky woosies, and the league is in up heaval....to quote the pelican in Nemo "Nice..."

 
:shock: I wish I didn't work so much so I could have seen this develop. First off I do not produce a cartoon. My buddy sent that but got a good laugh for someone thinking that. You people don't like my sig turn them off you have the option just like you suggesting I have the option not to watch. I like Bang Cartoons and always get a pretty decent laugh from them. I am allowed to question a staff that says members on this board have to follow their guidlines and then have questionable content on their site (however small the qustionable material is). That's pretty much it because a lot of my words always seem to be twisted or interpreted a different way then I intend.... :popcorn:

Edit to add: I did not want Bang removed from the site on my questioning. I'm sure I'll be made into a hypocrit if I try to defend that stance so whatever.

Oh and also my sig was removed by the staff so goes to show that your complains do matter to them. I suppose this is being excellent to one another though. I did not insult anyone and have continued not to on this thread but the removal of Bang and any actions being held against others because of one person is sad, disgraceful moves by the staff.
And now your sig makes absolutely no sense."Kind of sad when the actions of one can make an impact on others. That is how the world works though. "

Sad? :confused:

 
Just when I thought the posters here couldn't get any more pathetic, the shark tank comes through again. It's bad enough to have to read through the sheep's postings to find some real verbage, but now this? Thankfully I can add more posters to the ignore feature and get through the garbage quicker. :thumbdown:

 
I would like to lodge an official complaint about the content of Bojang0301's sig line. I find it even more offensive than he is. Or is that, I find him even more offensive than his sig line? No matter. The sexual inendo in his sig line is offensive. Please consider this a formal complaint. Thank you.
Indeed Rover. His references to drunkeness, murder, and homo erotic behavior are most offensive to teenagers and those of impressionable mind. "Cunning Linguist's" screen name is also offensive to members of the bible belt and other orthodox religious sects. How ironic that these two championed Bang's demise while covorting and reveling in improper verbiage according to their own standards....
You guys really are clueless, eh? I read his post to mean, "He couldn't care less about the content on the board/site/forums...but that there should be some semblance of symmetry." Basically, why should the boards be moderated so harshly...when the cartoon that is supported on the front page flies in the face of the rules set forth on the forums. When something is deleted/modified or someone is timed out/banned...a lot of times the excuse of "kids/teens/children also surf this board" was thrown about when the axe came down...I think bojang was wondering why would the boards be subject to such prurient screening...but the front page not? And to boot...a cartoon...what would appeal to kids more?Then the reason of "the boards are separate from the site" was used to explain why the boards are moderated so sternly.

But cocoa then trumped that with her post about half naked women being constantly promoted on the forums.

It's two trains of thought on bojangs motivations:

1. Have bang cartoons pulled and have us moderated even more harshly

or

2. Question why were so heavily moderated on the boards when bang cartoons are sitting on the front page and are in violation of the board rules

I believe it was his intent to hopefully loosen the noose around the boards...not constrict us even more. But if you disagree...carry on bashing him...Lord knows that's "being excellent to one another"...
No, actually, you seem to be clueless. What I did was dripping with :sarcasm: and was done to prove a point to the whiner, which I am sure was just as lost on him as it was on you.

 
I posted this in the FFA, but I don't think it will get a response there.I can't help but ask myself this question: Would I be surprised to see any of the BANG! cartoons posted at ESPN? TSN? Yahoo Sports? How about on network TV? During halftime of an NFL game?Yeah, I think that would be a surprise.

 
I posted this in the FFA, but I don't think it will get a response there.

I can't help but ask myself this question: Would I be surprised to see any of the BANG! cartoons posted at ESPN? TSN? Yahoo Sports? How about on network TV? During halftime of an NFL game?

Yeah, I think that would be a surprise.
I gotta admit, No, but... aren't there enough ESPN, TSNs and the such? maybe if FBG is trying to go "mainstream" the cartoons or other risque items can be delivered in the members only area, where you know yo are dealing with a more mature audience??

 
Been in this forum for years and never had a complaint. Always enjoyed the cartoons - no big deal - but the way the whole thing went down stinks. :thumbdown: At least I learned how to use the "ignore user" function - guess who will make the top 10 list by the end of the day!

 
I posted this in the FFA, but I don't think it will get a response there.

I can't help but ask myself this question: Would I be surprised to see any of the BANG! cartoons posted at ESPN? TSN? Yahoo Sports? How about on network TV? During halftime of an NFL game?

Yeah, I think that would be a surprise.
I gotta admit, No, but... aren't there enough ESPN, TSNs and the such? maybe if FBG is trying to go "mainstream" the cartoons or other risque items can be delivered in the members only area, where you know yo are dealing with a more mature audience??
Joe has been pretty clear for a long time that if it can't fly on ESPN, he doesn't want to allow it here. He has also been clear that he's not going to set up "separate" areas for more risque stuff.Dave, you absolutely have a good point. I think people would have reacted differently if Joe posted the cartoon, and then slept on it, and in the morning though, "nah, this one is probably too much." -- a reasonable conclusion.

I think people are reacting less to the comic coming down, and more to the people complaining about the comic. Two very different things.

 
I think people are reacting less to the comic coming down, and more to the people complaining about the comic. Two very different things.
yes, I am not a big fan of the "squeeky wheel" winning, and I respect Joe's right to run his stuff the way he sees fit... I would, even if others and I were to have differences..
 
I posted this in the FFA, but I don't think it will get a response there.

I can't help but ask myself this question: Would I be surprised to see any of the BANG! cartoons posted at ESPN? TSN? Yahoo Sports? How about on network TV? During halftime of an NFL game?

Yeah, I think that would be a surprise.
I can't wait to see the next edition of the Colonblow diaries on ESPN.com Page3 ;)

 
The cartoons, however, are known entitities.  Joe need not worry about them "getting out of hand," he can just decline to show a particular cartoon.

Anyway, sorry to see this happen, Joe.
This has happened. I made a cartoon about Onterrio Smith that was deemed too over the top for the board. Frankly, I don't blame them, it was a bit close to the top, but with that subject, it was hard to NOT do something disgusting.While I sincerely appreciate the support, I say that this is Joe's board, and we must play by his rules, I have no problem with that at all. Am I happy with the way things have turned out? ..not exactly, but I understand and respect their decision. It's all a matter of continuity. To be fair to all means that occasionaly it appears unfair to some. I don't feel as if I've been treated unfairly. The staff has been very gracious in handling this, and have been vert forthright about everything.

This site has an image and a purpose it's trying to put forth, and the reason they paid me to host the cartoons is to help promote their site. If my cartoon goes against the grain of what they're trying to do, then I am not providing what they have paid for. And it's not up to me or anyone else to decide for them what their goals are and what kind of image they want to project.

I'll be around, and I'll continue to post links in the message board to new cartoons as long as they'll allow me. In fact, Since all this has happened, I'll post a new thread with a link to the Onterrio cartoon. (I didn't do it before, because that would be competing against my client. But since that isn't the case anymore.. look for it on the main board.)

There's a possibility I may be brought on to do a custom cartoon specific to footballguys.com. I'm excited about that, and the staff is as well. If that sounds good to you, let them know, and I'm sure together we'll come up with something everyone can enjoy.

~Bang
Thanks John,I look forward to seeing what we can do on the custom cartoon. Let's talk about that soon - I'll shoot you something to kick around.

J

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top