View active topics THE FALL ONLINE FORUM



Forum led by: Connor, Hanley Went To Every Gig, Divveygoodmod, buzzliteyr, Del Boy, dannynomates
 Odd news

Post #341 - 27 Feb 2020, 15:37

academichibernian » Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:43 pm wrote:
Greasy Roads » Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:17 pm wrote:Image

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/u ... 56126.html

Mary Poppins branded racist by US academic in 'blackface' row over scene where she gets covered in soot.

The vapidity of intellectual thought these days is boundless. Seeing racism in all things has become a cultural pareidolia and those so brainwashed cannot help but link all unrelated patterns into their own skewed prejudices. The true irony, if one really wished to take the time to intricately dissect a children’s tale, is that the history and brutality of master chimney sweeps was completely ignored and instead replaced by a jolly stereotype. In truth, if one were again to look into the history of this occupation, they would learn it required the labour of tiny children who were bought and sold as slaves. They were brutalised, beaten and forced to live in conditions unsuitable for the lowliest of animals. They were frequently starved so their diminutive bodies could be used in small enclosures. Most died young and those who did live to young adulthood were deformed and extremely sickly throughout their remaining short life. But we shouldn’t consider ourselves with such things because these children were white males.
This story was intended to be a whimsical fantasy and I’m not so much of an old curmudgeon to think that anyone should ruminate and wring their hands over the historical inaccuracies portrayed here but I would like to suggest that before anyone puts pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard) they take a moment to think. You complain about your crumbled cookies while millions have, and are still, starving. Now, can anyone tell me what film it was where Julie Andrews got her rather delightful baps out please?

Didn't she get her norks out in Torn Curtain or is that wishful thinking? :wtf:
User avatar
Butch Cassady
Members
 
Posts: 274
Joined: 4th Jan 2018
Location: Bell End, Fingringhoe

Post #342 - 27 Feb 2020, 16:23

Butch Cassady » Thu Feb 27, 2020 2:37 pm wrote:
academichibernian » Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:43 pm wrote:
Greasy Roads » Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:17 pm wrote:Image

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/u ... 56126.html

Mary Poppins branded racist by US academic in 'blackface' row over scene where she gets covered in soot.

The vapidity of intellectual thought these days is boundless. Seeing racism in all things has become a cultural pareidolia and those so brainwashed cannot help but link all unrelated patterns into their own skewed prejudices. The true irony, if one really wished to take the time to intricately dissect a children’s tale, is that the history and brutality of master chimney sweeps was completely ignored and instead replaced by a jolly stereotype. In truth, if one were again to look into the history of this occupation, they would learn it required the labour of tiny children who were bought and sold as slaves. They were brutalised, beaten and forced to live in conditions unsuitable for the lowliest of animals. They were frequently starved so their diminutive bodies could be used in small enclosures. Most died young and those who did live to young adulthood were deformed and extremely sickly throughout their remaining short life. But we shouldn’t consider ourselves with such things because these children were white males.
This story was intended to be a whimsical fantasy and I’m not so much of an old curmudgeon to think that anyone should ruminate and wring their hands over the historical inaccuracies portrayed here but I would like to suggest that before anyone puts pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard) they take a moment to think. You complain about your crumbled cookies while millions have, and are still, starving. Now, can anyone tell me what film it was where Julie Andrews got her rather delightful baps out please?

Didn't she get her norks out in Torn Curtain or is that wishful thinking? :wtf:


No she didn't. In the American film industry’s odd twilight period of the mid-sixties, before the full introduction of the modern MPAA film ratings system, motion pictures were still subject to moral evaluation by both state and religious censorship boards. One of the biggest and most influential was the Catholic Church’s Legion of Decency (renamed in 1965 the National Catholic Office for Motion Pictures) which was operative from 1933 to 1980. The function of the Board was to vet the ‘moral values’ of all motion pictures released in the United States and issue viewing guidelines for American Catholics. The Legion awarded films one of several possible ratings: “A-I” (general patronage); “A-II” (morally unobjectionable for adults and adolescents); “A-III” (morally unobjectionable for adults); “B” (morally objectionable in part or all); and “C” (condemned).

The films of Alfred Hitchcock, himself a Catholic, had long courted the Legion’s censorial eye. All of his films were given at least an “A-II” warning, with most classified “A-III”. Several, starting with Secret Agent in 1936, were even stamped with the tsk-tsk-tsk ‘you’d-best-go-to-confession-if-you-see-it’ rating of “B”. Torn Curtain was one such “morally objectionable” reprobrate.

The source of the Catholic Church’s displeasure with Torn Curtain was twofold. It disapproved of the film’s “detailed treatment of a realistically brutal killing” but, above all, it objected to its “gratuitous introduction of premarital sex between its sympathetic protagonists.” That one of those protagonists was played by Julie Andrews motivated the Catholic Office to issue a further special warning: “Parents should be aware that the ‘Mary Poppins’ image of the female lead (Julie Andrews), shattered in this film, cannot serve as any criterion of the film’s acceptability for their children”.

The Church’s outraged admonishment was not exactly a PR misfortune for the film. Indeed, Hitchcock had something of a reputation for actively courting controversy with censors and using the resulting brouhaha as free publicity. In the case of Torn Curtain, there is ample evidence that the director had expressly planned the premarital sex scene as a calculated provocation. A widely syndicated AP article published during filming of Torn Curtain reported that Hitchcock “hopes to sizzle the screen” with a “sexy scene…involving Paul Newman and Julie Andrews.” “When Brigitte Bardot sees this scene,” he boasted, “she’ll turn in her towel”.

Hitchcock was also fully aware of the added ‘shock value’ of having Julie Andrews play this scene. “People expect the low-cut, bosomy gal to play the sex-pot,” he explained, “but when a high-class, cool-looking lady turns torrid, then you raise everybody’s eyebrows and eye-interest”. When they see the film, Hitchcock gleefully predicted, “fans of ‘Mary Poppins’…eyes will be poppin”.

To augment the full impact of the sex scene, Hitchcock positioned it at the very start of Torn Curtain – in much the same way as he had done six years earlier with Psycho (1960) which also opened with a controversial scene of ‘illicit’ premarital sex. The scene thus effectively functions as the audience’s entry point into the plot of Torn Curtain and the introduction to its star protagonists. The director underscored the scene’s significance even further by incorporating images from it as part of the film’s opening credit sequence and, of course, the trailer where it appears with giant superimposed red letters spelling out, “ECSTASY”

By 1966, however, American social and sexual mores were changing so rapidly and sex on screen was becoming so much more candid that Torn Curtain’s “sizzling” sex scene ultimately came across as a bit of a fizzer. In a move he described as a reaction against the rising explicitness of screen nudity, Hitchcock chose to stage the scene in a strikingly circumspect manner. Shot in the stateroom cabin of a Norwegian ship where the heating system has failed, the lovers are seen in bed trying to keep warm under “an awesome stack of covers, including blankets, comforters, coats, furs and jackets” so that “the only flesh visible” is “from the Adam’s apple up”.

It was of course a classic Hitchcock joke – “I did it as a spoof on the bed scenes in all those kitchen-sink pictures” he explained – but it made the whole affair seem rather tame and ultimately added to the sense of Torn Curtain as old-fashioned and out-of-touch. As Bosley Crowther of The New York Times wrote, “The scene of the two under covers at the beginning of the film—a scene as harmless as it is now notorious—is a fraud”. Compared to other more explicit films of the era, he added in a later follow-up commentary, Torn Curtain “looks no more novel or sensational than grandma’s old-knitted shawl" .

Viewed today, however, free from the historical pressure of modish demands, the opening sex scene of Torn Curtain actually seems rather charismatic and deeply sensual. Shot in a series of ever tighter close-ups, it obtains an engaging intimacy and spontaneity that the rest of the film never quite matches. Julie, in particular, plays the scene with a nice touch of levity, kissing Newman all over and, at one point, even sucking lightly on the end of his nose.

In his book-length reevaluation of Hitchcock’s “least celebrated films,” Marc Raymond Strauss (2007) singles out the opening sex scene of Torn Curtain as one of “Hitchcock’s warmest and [most] endearing moments.” It’s “a delicious scene,” he writes, “full of charm and sweetness and playful love”. He expounds:

Nowhere else in the entire Hitchcock canon is such a love more obviously implied…Hitchcock often reserved ECUs of faces for those rarest of moments of the most intense of intimacies…At the start of Torn Curtain, the lovers are so tightly entwined beneath the sheets of their stateroom bed that Hitchcock privileges us with just the barest glimpses of their faces, everything else mostly hidden or suggested by moving bodies under covers and sharply edited camera angles. In showing us so little and implying so much the whole sequence becomes much more sensuous…And, to have the sexy, blue-eyed stud Hud implicitly naked next to the prim and proper Mary Poppins…was certainly an intentionally ironic (and humorous) titillation for Hitchcock
User avatar
academichibernian
Members
 
Posts: 174
Joined: 5th Jan 2018
Etiolated since 2018.

Post #343 - 27 Feb 2020, 16:27

academichibernian » Thu Feb 27, 2020 3:23 pm wrote:
Butch Cassady » Thu Feb 27, 2020 2:37 pm wrote:
academichibernian » Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:43 pm wrote:
Greasy Roads » Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:17 pm wrote:Image

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/u ... 56126.html

Mary Poppins branded racist by US academic in 'blackface' row over scene where she gets covered in soot.

The vapidity of intellectual thought these days is boundless. Seeing racism in all things has become a cultural pareidolia and those so brainwashed cannot help but link all unrelated patterns into their own skewed prejudices. The true irony, if one really wished to take the time to intricately dissect a children’s tale, is that the history and brutality of master chimney sweeps was completely ignored and instead replaced by a jolly stereotype. In truth, if one were again to look into the history of this occupation, they would learn it required the labour of tiny children who were bought and sold as slaves. They were brutalised, beaten and forced to live in conditions unsuitable for the lowliest of animals. They were frequently starved so their diminutive bodies could be used in small enclosures. Most died young and those who did live to young adulthood were deformed and extremely sickly throughout their remaining short life. But we shouldn’t consider ourselves with such things because these children were white males.
This story was intended to be a whimsical fantasy and I’m not so much of an old curmudgeon to think that anyone should ruminate and wring their hands over the historical inaccuracies portrayed here but I would like to suggest that before anyone puts pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard) they take a moment to think. You complain about your crumbled cookies while millions have, and are still, starving. Now, can anyone tell me what film it was where Julie Andrews got her rather delightful baps out please?

Didn't she get her norks out in Torn Curtain or is that wishful thinking? :wtf:


No she didn't. In the American film industry’s odd twilight period of the mid-sixties, before the full introduction of the modern MPAA film ratings system, motion pictures were still subject to moral evaluation by both state and religious censorship boards. One of the biggest and most influential was the Catholic Church’s Legion of Decency (renamed in 1965 the National Catholic Office for Motion Pictures) which was operative from 1933 to 1980. The function of the Board was to vet the ‘moral values’ of all motion pictures released in the United States and issue viewing guidelines for American Catholics. The Legion awarded films one of several possible ratings: “A-I” (general patronage); “A-II” (morally unobjectionable for adults and adolescents); “A-III” (morally unobjectionable for adults); “B” (morally objectionable in part or all); and “C” (condemned).

The films of Alfred Hitchcock, himself a Catholic, had long courted the Legion’s censorial eye. All of his films were given at least an “A-II” warning, with most classified “A-III”. Several, starting with Secret Agent in 1936, were even stamped with the tsk-tsk-tsk ‘you’d-best-go-to-confession-if-you-see-it’ rating of “B”. Torn Curtain was one such “morally objectionable” reprobrate.

The source of the Catholic Church’s displeasure with Torn Curtain was twofold. It disapproved of the film’s “detailed treatment of a realistically brutal killing” but, above all, it objected to its “gratuitous introduction of premarital sex between its sympathetic protagonists.” That one of those protagonists was played by Julie Andrews motivated the Catholic Office to issue a further special warning: “Parents should be aware that the ‘Mary Poppins’ image of the female lead (Julie Andrews), shattered in this film, cannot serve as any criterion of the film’s acceptability for their children”.

The Church’s outraged admonishment was not exactly a PR misfortune for the film. Indeed, Hitchcock had something of a reputation for actively courting controversy with censors and using the resulting brouhaha as free publicity. In the case of Torn Curtain, there is ample evidence that the director had expressly planned the premarital sex scene as a calculated provocation. A widely syndicated AP article published during filming of Torn Curtain reported that Hitchcock “hopes to sizzle the screen” with a “sexy scene…involving Paul Newman and Julie Andrews.” “When Brigitte Bardot sees this scene,” he boasted, “she’ll turn in her towel”.

Hitchcock was also fully aware of the added ‘shock value’ of having Julie Andrews play this scene. “People expect the low-cut, bosomy gal to play the sex-pot,” he explained, “but when a high-class, cool-looking lady turns torrid, then you raise everybody’s eyebrows and eye-interest”. When they see the film, Hitchcock gleefully predicted, “fans of ‘Mary Poppins’…eyes will be poppin”.

To augment the full impact of the sex scene, Hitchcock positioned it at the very start of Torn Curtain – in much the same way as he had done six years earlier with Psycho (1960) which also opened with a controversial scene of ‘illicit’ premarital sex. The scene thus effectively functions as the audience’s entry point into the plot of Torn Curtain and the introduction to its star protagonists. The director underscored the scene’s significance even further by incorporating images from it as part of the film’s opening credit sequence and, of course, the trailer where it appears with giant superimposed red letters spelling out, “ECSTASY”

By 1966, however, American social and sexual mores were changing so rapidly and sex on screen was becoming so much more candid that Torn Curtain’s “sizzling” sex scene ultimately came across as a bit of a fizzer. In a move he described as a reaction against the rising explicitness of screen nudity, Hitchcock chose to stage the scene in a strikingly circumspect manner. Shot in the stateroom cabin of a Norwegian ship where the heating system has failed, the lovers are seen in bed trying to keep warm under “an awesome stack of covers, including blankets, comforters, coats, furs and jackets” so that “the only flesh visible” is “from the Adam’s apple up”.

It was of course a classic Hitchcock joke – “I did it as a spoof on the bed scenes in all those kitchen-sink pictures” he explained – but it made the whole affair seem rather tame and ultimately added to the sense of Torn Curtain as old-fashioned and out-of-touch. As Bosley Crowther of The New York Times wrote, “The scene of the two under covers at the beginning of the film—a scene as harmless as it is now notorious—is a fraud”. Compared to other more explicit films of the era, he added in a later follow-up commentary, Torn Curtain “looks no more novel or sensational than grandma’s old-knitted shawl" .

Viewed today, however, free from the historical pressure of modish demands, the opening sex scene of Torn Curtain actually seems rather charismatic and deeply sensual. Shot in a series of ever tighter close-ups, it obtains an engaging intimacy and spontaneity that the rest of the film never quite matches. Julie, in particular, plays the scene with a nice touch of levity, kissing Newman all over and, at one point, even sucking lightly on the end of his nose.

In his book-length reevaluation of Hitchcock’s “least celebrated films,” Marc Raymond Strauss (2007) singles out the opening sex scene of Torn Curtain as one of “Hitchcock’s warmest and [most] endearing moments.” It’s “a delicious scene,” he writes, “full of charm and sweetness and playful love”. He expounds:

Nowhere else in the entire Hitchcock canon is such a love more obviously implied…Hitchcock often reserved ECUs of faces for those rarest of moments of the most intense of intimacies…At the start of Torn Curtain, the lovers are so tightly entwined beneath the sheets of their stateroom bed that Hitchcock privileges us with just the barest glimpses of their faces, everything else mostly hidden or suggested by moving bodies under covers and sharply edited camera angles. In showing us so little and implying so much the whole sequence becomes much more sensuous…And, to have the sexy, blue-eyed stud Hud implicitly naked next to the prim and proper Mary Poppins…was certainly an intentionally ironic (and humorous) titillation for Hitchcock

Jesus fucking wept.
User avatar
Gruff
Members
 
Posts: 286
Joined: 5th Jan 2018
Location: Up The Gorbals

Post #344 - 02 Mar 2020, 01:01

Beatles guitar valued at £400,000 on Antiques Roadshow.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-m ... e-51698031


Image


You'd be a cloth-eared cunt to even like The Beatles let alone give £400,000 for one of their guitars. :wtf:
User avatar
Gruff
Members
 
Posts: 286
Joined: 5th Jan 2018
Location: Up The Gorbals

Post #345 - 07 Mar 2020, 22:04

Woman Tried Making Dead Possum 'Repent' In Waukesha: Police
A witness reported that the woman was throwing goldfish and windshield washer fluid on the dead animal in the middle of the road.
Police said a woman was performing a "spiritual ritual" on a dead animal in the road in the right-hand lane.
WAUKESHA, WI — Police in Waukesha say they received reports of a woman who was performing a "spiritual ritual" on a dead possum in the middle of a Waukesha street.

According to Waukesha Police call logs, officers were sent to the intersection of Springdale Road and Bluemound Road just after 1 p.m. on Feb. 24 on a report of a suspicious person.

Police said a woman was performing a "spiritual ritual" on a dead animal in the road in the right-hand lane.

According to police, the woman opened the driver's side door of her silver car, stood near the animal and began throwing water up into the air.

Police call logs detailed the woman's activities further, indicating that a witness reported that the woman was throwing goldfish and windshield washer fluid on the dead animal.

"She then pulled out a green bay packer lawn chair and yelling 'repent' at the dead animal, police call logs stated. The person who called police said they followed the woman after she drove from the scene of the dead animal, noting that she was driving erratically, according to police call logs.

When police arrived at the scene, the woman was not there, though the animal, later determined to be a possum, was removed from the roadway.


https://patch.com/wisconsin/waukesha/wo ... sha-police
User avatar
Mushshrooms
Members
 
Posts: 688
Joined: 20th Jan 2018
Location: Erpingham Heights

Post #346 - 07 Mar 2020, 22:17

This goes a long way to explaining who is, and has been, in The White House, and those running to replace the current occupant. Most tourist guidebooks leave out the best parts of the USA both because of State Department directives and for the safety and well being of visitors.

"Nothing to see here: Keep moving: Thank youse"
User avatar
Father Hasil Cocteau, SJ;
BOQ Lay Preacher
 
Posts: 5631
Joined: 28th Jul 2019
Location: Way back in the hills
...before you the wimpled past, behind you the hallooing future...

...Zoom! There goes the gay fuckerteer chasing the tail of light.....

...The habitual myth has an eagerness to quit...

...Visionary Tics Shivering In The Chest...

Post #347 - 07 Mar 2020, 22:22

Greasy Roads » 27 Feb 2020, 12:17 wrote:Image

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/u ... 56126.html

Mary Poppins branded racist by US academic in 'blackface' row over scene where she gets covered in soot.



Let's see: White skin, thin lips and straight hair. Yeah that a great imitation of a person whose ancestors came from Africa below the Sahara desert. Next to academic economics, Black Studies is a poor second...but they are trying to close the gap!!
User avatar
Father Hasil Cocteau, SJ;
BOQ Lay Preacher
 
Posts: 5631
Joined: 28th Jul 2019
Location: Way back in the hills
...before you the wimpled past, behind you the hallooing future...

...Zoom! There goes the gay fuckerteer chasing the tail of light.....

...The habitual myth has an eagerness to quit...

...Visionary Tics Shivering In The Chest...

Post #348 - 31 Mar 2020, 08:14

Image

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... rus-device

Australian astrophysicist gets magnets stuck up nose while inventing coronavirus device. What a cunt. :snigger:
User avatar
Greasy Roads
Country Member
 
Posts: 4287
Joined: 4th Jan 2018
Location: In splendid isolation
Cogito ergo cogito routemaster cunnus est.

Post #349 - 31 Mar 2020, 11:26

It looks like he has a #8 head on a #4 body too. The genetic deck was stacked against him.
User avatar
Father Hasil Cocteau, SJ;
BOQ Lay Preacher
 
Posts: 5631
Joined: 28th Jul 2019
Location: Way back in the hills
...before you the wimpled past, behind you the hallooing future...

...Zoom! There goes the gay fuckerteer chasing the tail of light.....

...The habitual myth has an eagerness to quit...

...Visionary Tics Shivering In The Chest...

Post #350 - 10 Apr 2020, 07:12

Image

https://metro.co.uk/2020/04/09/zoom-mee ... -12531970/

South Somerset District Council zoom meeting hijacked by Mike Coxlong, Ben Dover and porn. :devil:
User avatar
Greasy Roads
Country Member
 
Posts: 4287
Joined: 4th Jan 2018
Location: In splendid isolation
Cogito ergo cogito routemaster cunnus est.

Post #351 - 12 Apr 2020, 07:43

Image

https://metro.co.uk/2020/03/22/vicar-se ... -12437443/

Vicar sets himself on fire during first online coronavirus church service. :devil:
User avatar
StuckupPercy
Members
 
Posts: 659
Joined: 6th Jan 2018
Location: Booze Busters

Post #352 - 13 Apr 2020, 07:59

Image

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... 500ft.html

Pensioner who was given a surprise flight in a fighter jet as a retirement present was flung out at 2500ft after grabbing the ejector seat handle to 'steady himself'. :(
User avatar
Greasy Roads
Country Member
 
Posts: 4287
Joined: 4th Jan 2018
Location: In splendid isolation
Cogito ergo cogito routemaster cunnus est.

Post #353 - 13 Apr 2020, 09:38

Greasy Roads » Mon Apr 13, 2020 7:59 am wrote:Image

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... 500ft.html

Pensioner who was given a surprise flight in a fighter jet as a retirement present was flung out at 2500ft after grabbing the ejector seat handle to 'steady himself'. :(

Ignoring the French aspect for now, all pensioners should be flung from their seats at great speed. :devil:
User avatar
routemaster
Essential Key Worker
 
Posts: 336392
Joined: 4th Jan 2018
Location: Out among the diseased masses
Hit after hit! Image

Southampton 0-9 LCFC - the biggest ever away victory in the 131-year history of the Football League :lcfc:

Post #354 - 13 Apr 2020, 23:33

I wonder what the dark object is that's either heading between his legs or was expelled from between his legs. :wtf:
User avatar
Father Hasil Cocteau, SJ;
BOQ Lay Preacher
 
Posts: 5631
Joined: 28th Jul 2019
Location: Way back in the hills
...before you the wimpled past, behind you the hallooing future...

...Zoom! There goes the gay fuckerteer chasing the tail of light.....

...The habitual myth has an eagerness to quit...

...Visionary Tics Shivering In The Chest...

Post #355 - 13 Apr 2020, 23:37

Father Hasil Cocteau, SJ; » Mon Apr 13, 2020 11:33 pm wrote:I wonder what the dark object is that's either heading between his legs or was expelled from between his legs. :wtf:

Coronavirus? :D

Stay home, stay safe, FFS. :(
User avatar
A Worthless Man
Members
 
Posts: 253
Joined: 5th Jan 2018
Location: Death's Door
GR is being a cunt

Post #356 - 13 Apr 2020, 23:39

Sound advice. For What it's worth, I was thinking along those lines. - Thanks.
User avatar
Father Hasil Cocteau, SJ;
BOQ Lay Preacher
 
Posts: 5631
Joined: 28th Jul 2019
Location: Way back in the hills
...before you the wimpled past, behind you the hallooing future...

...Zoom! There goes the gay fuckerteer chasing the tail of light.....

...The habitual myth has an eagerness to quit...

...Visionary Tics Shivering In The Chest...

Post #357 - 14 Apr 2020, 06:29

Father Hasil Cocteau, SJ; » Mon Apr 13, 2020 11:39 pm wrote:Sound advice. For What it's worth, I was thinking along those lines. - Thanks.

I was thinking that he shat himself. Understandable really. :wtf:
User avatar
Chavahoy
Members
 
Posts: 125
Joined: 20th Aug 2018

Post #358 - 14 Apr 2020, 11:54

Another viable guess...the shock factor, eh?
User avatar
Father Hasil Cocteau, SJ;
BOQ Lay Preacher
 
Posts: 5631
Joined: 28th Jul 2019
Location: Way back in the hills
...before you the wimpled past, behind you the hallooing future...

...Zoom! There goes the gay fuckerteer chasing the tail of light.....

...The habitual myth has an eagerness to quit...

...Visionary Tics Shivering In The Chest...

Post #359 - 20 Apr 2020, 07:37

Image
User avatar
Chavahoy
Members
 
Posts: 125
Joined: 20th Aug 2018

Post #360 - 20 Apr 2020, 10:31


Before anyone has any bright ideas, it is still frowned upon on my forum. I will not have this place overrun with excessive profanity, and the 1.53 obscene words per post rule stands.

Dan
User avatar
dannynomates
Chief Moderator
 
Posts: 1876
Joined: 1st Dec 2017
Location: Locked down in my library

PreviousNext

Return to General Chat

Website Security Test