Please Read - "Who's Hottest?" Type Threads - And An Apology (1 Viewer)

[Uruk-Hai]

I'm sure I'll ponder this for a while and come to this conclusion, but right now I can't help but find some comedic value in the recent enlightenment taking more than a decade to occur. 

I hear ya, but:

Joe backed himself into a corner many times with the "PG" thing. The links in the vast majority of these threads fall easily under that rating. I don't think there's been a recent epiphany; he never wanted those kind of threads, IMO

Plus, times change and things that were viewed as "okay" at one point fall out of fashion later on. 

 

[belljr]

I think there is even a spot in the FFA faq pinned at the top of the forum which talks about making sure posters include pics in the whose hottest threads  

Edited just now by Joe Bryant 
Edited For Hotter Polls

 

[Joe Bryant]

I hear ya, but:

Joe backed himself into a corner many times with the "PG" thing. The links in the vast majority of these threads fall easily under that rating. I don't think there's been a recent epiphany; he never wanted those kind of threads, IMO

Plus, times change and things that were viewed as "okay" at one point fall out of fashion later on. 

Thank you UH. You are correct here. 

 

[Godsbrother]

I assume that yoga pants, women you find oddly attractive, over 50+, etc. are all out of bounds too.  

 

[Joe Bryant]

Edited just now by Joe Bryant 
Edited For Hotter Polls

Correct. Edits should always visible like that. For good reason. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

I assume that yoga pants, women you find oddly attractive, over 50+, etc. are all out of bounds too.  

Yes. Thank you. 

 

[Koya]

I'm sure I'll ponder this for a while and come to this conclusion, but right now I can't help but find some comedic value in the recent enlightenment taking more than a decade to occur. 

I think there is even a spot in the FFA faq pinned at the top of the forum which talks about making sure posters include pics in the whose hottest threads  

So, because we didn't 'evolve' or recognize perhaps there's a better way in years prior means we shouldn't make an adjustment today?

It's a good move within the context of what this board is and where the world has evolved. Doesnt mean on some levels it doesn't suck, but nothing hypocritical in changing today what you felt was not right about yesterday.

 

[rockaction]

I have no problem with this move. I'll miss the occasional one, but it got to be too many and the tone was less innocent.  

eta* I changed my mind when I found out that certain threads weren't to be displayed. It's too puritanical/PC for my liking.  

 

[sbonomo]

These are not my favorite polls but getting rid of them all together....oh well, this place has seen diminishing participation for years.  I personally don't care that they are going away, it is more of the "PC" world we live in these days.  Some gal begging for attention (see all Halloween polls) will no longer be judged.  I hope we don't of the "good contributor" over this (i am sure we will).  

 

[Brony]

I'm fine with the move so long as I can still get my daily NSFW fix in the Looking for Leagues forum. 

 

[tonydead]

I assume that yoga pants, women you find oddly attractive, over 50+, etc. are all out of bounds too.  

That chip chip chipping sound you hear is political correctness chipping away at our humanity until we are all walking around like zombies afraid to do or say anything.

 

[JaxBill]

What if the poster is Indian (South Asian, not Native American)?

 

[belljr]

I assume that yoga pants, women you find oddly attractive, over 50+, etc. are all out of bounds too.  

HEY TEACHER YOU FORGOT TO GIVE US HOMEWORK

 

[Uruk-Hai]

Nah, way back someone got a TO for a comment with the standard "That's someone's daughter" excuse. I PM'd Joe and said if he was going to appoint himself the protector of the honor of every Someone's Daughter out there, why does he allow all the "Who's Hottest" threads. And Joe's reply was that appreciating the beauty of women, in PG pictures, was perfectly appropriate for the board.

Nothing you posted says Joe was comfortable with the "WH?" threads, just that they were appropriate for the board as he envisioned it whenever that was you guys had this conversation.

You clipped my 2nd paragraph. Context and appropriateness change, man.

 

[knowledge dropper]

The end of yoga pants?

 

[trident]

Yes. Thank you. 

Looks like deleting time.

 

[mquinnjr]

I assume that yoga pants, women you find oddly attractive, over 50+, etc. are all out of bounds too.  

:IBTL: != nuked...right?

 

[encaitar]

Probably should change the name of the forum from Free For All.

 

[trident]

I assume that yoga pants, women you find oddly attractive, over 50+, etc. are all out of bounds too.  

Yep.  Bella Throne thread as well.

 

[belljr]

Who's hottest - fine I kind of get it 

But celebrities over 50 ???   Really?

 

[mquinnjr]

What about threads where we judge men?

Pry the FFAWT from my cold, dead hands.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Who's hottest - find I kind of get it 

But celebrities over 50 ???   Really?

I think its the objectifying of women (and men if anyone started those threads) that Joe wants to eliminate from the collective conversation here.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Probably should change the name of the forum from Free For All.

Free For Some?

 

[Koya]

Free For Some?

None for anyone? (probably a more accurate depiction of us  )

 

[mquinnjr]

I think its the objectifying of women (and men if anyone started those threads) that Joe wants to eliminate from the collective conversation here.

By that logic, how is the entirety of the Shark Pool not off limits?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Probably should change the name of the forum from Free For All.

That's a fair point. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

I think its the objectifying of women (and men if anyone started those threads) that Joe wants to eliminate from the collective conversation here.

Yes. Thank you.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

I can still post multiple pics of myself for hottest though, right?

 

[Jaysus]

I can still post multiple pics of myself for hottest though, right?

If not, just PM them to me.

 

[Wrigley]

Tak:e: it :els:e:wh:e:r:e:

Still up? 

I’m coming home mom 

 

[arrow1]

Still up? 

I’m coming home mom 

yes, and it's been :crickets:

 

[Wrigley]

yes, and it's been :crickets:

That’s too bad 

:sad:

 

[SFBayDuck]

So @shuke can rate only all some manner of things?

 

[Worm]

Probably should change the name of the forum from Free For All.

"General Discussions Of Things Joe Could Talk To His Nana About"?

 

[Uruk-Hai]

The second paragraph was irrelevant since you used the word "never", which is obviously incorrect.

Sheesh....Would it be easier for you to understand if I wrote in runes?

I don't think Joe was ever comfortable with those types of threads. I think he allowed them because he (& the times) thought it was ok for the majority of the rest of us.

I think Joe's posting history, plus his comments in this very thread, would make those two comments reasonable to anyone who's been around a while. They don't cancel out or contradict.

Anyway, Bryant doesn't need me to defend him and that wasn't my intention with my comments....but I think things are being misrepresented by pedants and, being a pedant emeritus myself, I felt compelled to engage.

Carry on, y'all.

 

[tonydead]

"General Discussions Of Things Joe Could Talk To His Nana About"?

 

[tonydead]

By that logic, how is the entirety of the Shark Pool not off limits?

mindblown

 

[belljr]

By that logic, how is the entirety of the Shark Pool not off limits?

mindblown

It really is the entire basis of fantasy football........  

 

[Bob Sacamano]

General Discussion :salute:

 

[Nick Vermeil]

First they came for our political threads, and I did not speak out because johnmx.  Then they came for our T&A threads and damn.  That was disappointing.  

Thank goodness we still have "things you can say about sex and ....." threads.  And the Costco thread.  That's enough to keep me coming back.  

 

[Epic Problem]

It really is the entire basis of fantasy football........  

So say that we drafted these individuals and let them compete in some way, shape or form. That should be ok, right? 

 

[cockroach]

I don't open or participate in those threads, but this is dumb AF, IMO

 

[Don't Noonan]

No more Arizona Ron or Nathan Jessup stories?

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't open or participate in those threads, but this is dumb AF, IMO

I fully understand and accept that opinion. 

 

[abbottjamesr]

I don't get it.... I haven't been around here but for a couple years but I always thought of the FFA as kind of a group of guys sitting around the bar shooting the stuff.  I assume that on the forum side of a subscription based FF website in the FFA you could talk about all the stuff guys in the real world talk about.  This includes but is not limited to:  Girls, wives, GF's, sex, Music, other sports, Life, Death, medical issues, diets, beer, drugs and all that it means to be a guy.  Men talk about women and how they look.  It's not wrong or right, it is just the nature of the world and men.  If you get a group of them together and they aren't talking about women, my guess is they are all gay, and even then they will criticize what they wear.

I know there are women on the site that actively participate and for the most part I haven't seen anything that I wouldn't say in front of any women that would hang out with me and my friends at a bar.  At the end of the day it is your website and you can do what you want with it.  I don't think it will change my involvement, but at the same time I don't think it makes the forum or the world a better place or you any more deserving of praise by anyone real or imaginary.  

I am resisting the urge to ask smart ### questions, so I will leave it at... Peace.

 

 

[Binky The Doormat]

Objectification of owls has also been forbidden.  Apparently.

who?

 

[trident]

I wonder if we have the permission to speak freely without the chance of getting banned?

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Are you kidding me? The ONE place on the internet that you can see scantily clad females and comment on their appearance?

Thanks a lot, Joe. You just make the internet useless.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I wonder if we have the permission to speak freely without the chance of getting banned?

There's never a "say anything and won't get banned" time. If you've got a question or comment I trust you can write it and stay within what's allowed. 

 

[James Daulton]

It was Oats calling every girl fat wasn't it?

Damn you to hell Otis!