I'll let you guess which one is me.
January 26th, 2006 7:55pm
I'm color blind. What color *is* your hair?
January 26th, 2006 7:55pm
"I'm color blind." > What's it matter then? :-}
January 26th, 2006 7:56pm
It doesn't matter. Just trying to get you to say it...
January 26th, 2006 7:57pm
damn. there goes that fantasy.
cute babe though :) yours I assume? how old is he?
How much for the cheeldren? And yer wimmin? How much fer the leetle girl?
January 26th, 2006 8:00pm
In that picture, uhh I don't remember. Here's one from just the other day, and he's 9 months old right now:
He seriously is one of the cutest babies on earth. His mom and I are working on plans to exploit it. :)
January 26th, 2006 8:05pm
Here is a smiley one:
January 26th, 2006 8:06pm
That expression is priceless.
wow, thats amazing. I think his dimples are bigger than his actual cheeks :)
that is a seriously happy baby.
Okay, let's knock off posting the child porn. Considering I'm already "borderline psychopath" I don't need Gonzales deciding to give me a proctology exam...
"et's knock off posting the child porn"
ack. bad joke philo. not even close to being funny.
Uh, who said I was joking?
I dont care whether you were joking or not philo. the depth of the insult you just offered to jeff is downright amazing.
I don't think it was meant as an insult, I think he was just trying to alert us to the potential legal ramifications of an otherwise innocent act.
How was that insulting to Jeff? People have been arrested for *processing* photos of kids in the bath. Jeff posted one to an internet message board.
I am *totally* missing the "insult" part.
then maybe philo could have found a better way to do that than to actually accuse us of posting child porn?
It's just an intent vs. result mixup. Philo was talking about the result, you're offended because you think he was talking about the intent.
how was it not? you just told him to stop posting child porn. of his kids.
none of whom were in the bath I might add.
it was an entirely innocent exchange, the pictures weren't even close to being borderline, but instead of just letting it pass you brought an accusation into the thread which tarnishes everything it touches.
[nod] to Notorious.
And seriously, I *was* trying to get a little attention/make a point. This isn't "oh it's a slippery slope" or "I think you're overreacting" - this is "people have been arrested, and this isn't just one edge case"
I was one step away from posting a pic of my own girls.
If I had done so and then you made that post I would have been simultaneously enraged and sickened.
its just a foul thing to suggest to any parent.
If you wanted to warn us, you should have found a better way.
ideally you should have just buggered off.
As parents its our responsibility to make the decisions about things like photos. not yours.
The real point here is that nudity is not pornography, something that has been upheld numerous times in the Federal courts. The fact is that people have been *wrongly* arrested over innocent family photos of their children. If people do not stand up for their rights, and for sanity, then society as a whole will be damaged.
I also believe the article that Philo linked to was incorrect. The interpretation of pornography is not outside the photo, it is inside the photo. The Federal code says the content has to be lewd or lascivious, and juries have acquitted when the photos submitted in evidence by the prosecution were obviously nothing of the sort.
Uh, FNR, you *do* know I have two teenage daughters, right?
So why don't you knock off the "as parents it's our responsibility" crap.
Obviously our sensitivities differ. My apologies if I offended BigJiggler.
"Uh, FNR, you *do* know I have two teenage daughters, right? "
you *do* know thats utterly irrelevant to the discussion at hand, right?
"So why don't you knock off the "as parents it's our responsibility" crap. "
because. as parents. it is. our. resposibility.
if you are happy to abdicate the responsibility of deciding what pictures of your children to distribute in what fashion to the opinions of others then go for it.
leave those of us with the ability to make such decisions as these by ourselves, to ourselves.
Sorry for the rant above, but the pictures of the cute baby were rather heartwarming, and for Philo to start throwing around totally unfounded accusations of pornography was completely out of order. Even if they were meant in jest, which I'm not sure about.
Philo is *not* a cool dude.
exactly. it really left a foul taste in what had up until that moment been a rather pleasant thread.
sod BigJigger. you offended the hell out of me philo.
As an adult, I think you're capable of dealing with the "taste in your mouth" just fine.
Yes the thread's tone changed after Philo's post, but he was doing what he thought was necessary.
Give it a rest, you big baby. You're the reason nobody helps anyone anymore.
"As an adult, I think you're capable of dealing with the "taste in your mouth" just fine. "
thats exactly what Im doing.
"Yes the thread's tone changed after Philo's post, but he was doing what he thought was necessary. "
thats my point. thats why Im unhappy. if he didn't like the thread he could have just fucked off and not ruined it for everyone else.
"Give it a rest, you big baby. You're the reason nobody helps anyone anymore."
yeah. thats me.
Or he was informing the poster of a potential breach of the law so he could decide and take proper action. Thus the "help" part of my post.
there are a thousand ways he could have done that without causing offence.
hence my initial assumption that it was just a really, really, bad joke.
which he refuted.
...which leaves the only option as being that he deliberately decided to be offensive to make his point...
now, ordinarily Id cheer on anyone with such a clear grasp of ?off etiquette, but in this case I what he said was genuinely offensive even to me...and thats saying something....especially since it wasn't me he was accusing of distributing child porn...
You're astounded by a geek's lack of ability to judge the response of the things they say and do?
philo? a geek? nah. well...presumably yes, but not in a 'too stupid to manage human interaction' kind of way.
I think a lot of people here take like taking offense when none is intended. :-)
I wasn't offended by what Philo said, I took it as a bit tongue in cheek but with a message attached. Namely, that you have to becareful of what pics you post of children, even if you mean nothing perverse.
Mostly, though, I think that some of you are missing the main point, which is that my son is cute enough to inspire world peace. (I'm sending some pics of him (fully dressed, of course) to the newly elected Hamas leaders first thing in the morning.)
"my son is cute enough to inspire world peace. "
heh, he really is.