Board censorship and Kim Morgan's review of "Without A Paddle"
09-01-04, 10:31 PM
#26
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sitting on a beach, earning 20%
Posts: 9,917
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Originally posted by Jason Bovberg
Come on, guys, how about a little decorum? Kim is a respected member of the DVD Talk staff.
Come on, guys, how about a little decorum? Kim is a respected member of the DVD Talk staff.
09-02-04, 01:23 AM
#27
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The Last House on the Left
Posts: 12,332
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Re: Board censorship and Kim Morgan's review of "Without A Paddle"
Originally posted by DonnachaOne
HOM<beef>O!
Censored on the forum, yet it still gets used in Kim's review of Without A Paddle. Kim even goes one worse and says "****".
So reviewers can use potentially offensive terms to illustrate a point, but woe to those who do the same in the forum?
HOM<beef>O!
Censored on the forum, yet it still gets used in Kim's review of Without A Paddle. Kim even goes one worse and says "****".
So reviewers can use potentially offensive terms to illustrate a point, but woe to those who do the same in the forum?
And you're right. We should be allowed to say the same content on the forum that is allowed on the site. I believe the logic behind banning those words is that they can only be used in a negative context. Like a$$hole. Odds are you aren't gonna be talking about a real physical a$$hole, you're probably calling someone that. Like Bandoman. What an assh...
Anyway, I don't agree with it...I'm just reitterating what I heard before. I think you should be able to say '****' and 'ho-mo' simply on the fact that they have an innocent meaning, too. Like when I buy milk at the store and the abbreviation on the receipt says 'ho-mo milk.' Hehehe.. I always get a snicker out of that.
