Users Sig

@Schumacher_Skaife
I completely understand and respect your reply. Also, I like your avatar, Christina is damn sexy.

@Dapadipz
Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by KrackHead2k@24 September 2003 - 05:36
@Schumacher_Skaife
I completely understand and respect your reply. Also, I like your avatar, Christina is damn sexy.

@Dapadipz
Thanks!

---

Thanks mate, most people would have flammed me for that, so thanks for taking it the right way, and yes Christina is quite a lovley looking lady! :P :D :P !

Dave

personaly i think nudity is diffren tfrom pornography nudity should be acceptibal its not like its anything we havent all seen before right ;) nudity can be beutiful and <_< :( nudity can also be very unacceptibal) eg kiddy, rape, agrresive sex or an acts of sex ingeneral these things are pornography so basicly i think nudity should be ok just pornigraphical images shouldnt be allwoed :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by DrunkeNStylE@24 September 2003 - 08:48
personaly i think nudity is diffren tfrom pornography nudity should be acceptibal its not like its anything we havent all seen before right ;) nudity can be beutiful and <_< :( nudity can also be very unacceptibal) eg kiddy, rape, agrresive sex or an acts of sex ingeneral these things are pornography so basicly i think nudity should be ok just pornigraphical images shouldnt be allwoed :)

---

I agree, nothing in-adequate like hardcore pornography, but say ... signatures like mine are fine (like NikkiD previously stated), and BTW, I fixed my signature size. ;)

;) alright i say every1 should vote toward nudity but non pornigraphical images in ava an dsig

Sure, let&#39;s just ignore all the rules.

Kinda like you&#39;re doing with your combined sig and avatar size again.

:rolleyes: by 1kb iil change now though

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Schumacher_Skaife@23 September 2003 - 13:34
Wizzandabe, your fine

Dave

---

:D

I think this user&#39;s avatar is gross: http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showuser=25756.
Why is it considered acceptable to show male genitalia but not female?

http://www.funpic.hu/ad/ad631.gif

http://www.mcbriens.net/liam/img/smilies/sneaky.gif

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AfterBurn@28 September 2003 - 18:46
I think this user&#39;s avatar is gross: http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showuser=25756.
Why is it considered acceptable to show male genitalia but not female?

http://www.funpic.hu/ad/ad631.gif

---

It&#39;s not&#33;&#33;&#33;

Fixed.

nice sig Amarjit :beerchug:

I finally got my scanner going and uploaded a Sig scanned from a holiday snap. This seemed like an appropriate thread to test it in.

Does it offend anyone?

edit: a question - how do you keep the text to the right of the image? I thought that I&#39;d done that, obviously I missed something.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BCCorn@5 October 2003 - 19:04
I finally got my scanner going and uploaded a Sig scanned from a holiday snap. This seemed like an appropriate thread to test it in.

Does it offend anyone?

edit: a question - how do you keep the text to the right of the image? I thought that I&#39;d done that, obviously I missed something.

---

It doesn&#39;t offend me at all, there isn&#39;t much that does, to be honest. I can see why some would be offended by hardcore porn images, but simple inoccuous photos of the human form are nothing to get upset about, in my opinion.

I don&#39;t know about how to keep your text to the right of the pic, but maybe add some html to the text? Or make the text into an image. The size of the window is obviously causing your text to wrap.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BCCorn@5 October 2003 - 19:04
I finally got my scanner going and uploaded a Sig scanned from a holiday snap. This seemed like an appropriate thread to test it in.

Does it offend anyone?

edit: a question - how do you keep the text to the right of the image? I thought that I&#39;d done that, obviously I missed something.

---

I am not offended by it,just think it looks poor and amateurish.That is just my opinion though. :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by N£MO@6 October 2003 - 00:24
I am not offended by it,just think it looks poor and amateurish.That is just my opinion though. :D

---

Yeah, I can see what you mean, compared to a lot of Sigs it IS poor and amateurish. Basically, I AM an amateur, both in IT and in photography.

The difference is that a lot of Sigs tend to be pictures of celebrities/porn stars that the user has never met. I took that picture in my hotel room last Christmas morning, it&#39;s of a Thai GoGo dancer that I was seeing at that time. That&#39;s the reason that her face isn&#39;t on the picture, she isn&#39;t a professional and wouldn&#39;t appreciate having her face on the net (I hav a LOT of photos of her, I just couldn&#39;t post most of them here). Now every time that I see it I&#39;m reminded of her. :)

To my mind that beats having an image of some star as a Sig. Look at the picture again and imagine waking up with her beside you on Christmas day, I did exactly that last year. There are worse ways to spend Christmas morning&#33;&#33;

enough with the sigs if they want to show tits then shoe em&#33;

i was told i could not show tits and had to remove my avatarhttp://smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/1/slookani.gif

BCCorn, is that ANOTHER NikkiD pic?

:lol: :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Rat Faced@6 October 2003 - 13:01
BCCorn, is that ANOTHER NikkiD pic?

:lol: :lol:

---

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: roflmao :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Rat Faced@6 October 2003 - 17:01
BCCorn, is that ANOTHER NikkiD pic?

:lol: :lol:

---

That isn&#39;t the name she was using at the time but..........

LOL :lol: