Inappropriate imagery
Baguetten
04-07-2006, 00:21
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=490284
Kahanistan
04-07-2006, 01:06
I don't see anything inappropriate, and I'm one of the guys who, if you say, "Don't click on that link!" I'm gonna click on the link expecting gory pictures.
Baguetten
04-07-2006, 01:11
I don't see anything inappropriate
I'd call pictures of corpses and people getting shot quite inappropriate.
The Chinese Republics
04-07-2006, 01:50
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11284497&postcount=2
The 2nd and last pic definately breaks the TOS.
Frisbeeteria
04-07-2006, 02:57
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11284497&postcount=2
The 2nd and last pic definately breaks the TOS.
The last picture was on the cover of Life Magazine (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4517597.stm) and won photographer Nick Ut a Pulitzer Prize. I'm gonna call that one 'mainstream'. The 2nd pic, the My Lai shot, was often shown in the '70's papers during the Calley trial. If another mod wants to overrule me on this, feel free ... but those were part of being alive and even modestly politically aware in the 1970s. I don't think we need to censor them now.
Straughn
04-07-2006, 05:28
You rock, Fris.
*bows*
The principle of the thing.
Baguetten
04-07-2006, 11:29
I'm just saying that I've seen the Abu Ghurayb pictures (for instance) posted in a lot more reputable rags than "Life Magazine," and they're not exactly kosher to post, are they?
Katganistan
04-07-2006, 13:25
Life Mag. is a rag?
Credibility has plunged.
Have a nice day, Bag.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_magazine