PheagleAdler said:
Just because I have fantasies doesn't make them creepy.

Having fantasies is not, in general, creepy.

Insisting on proactively sharing with others what those fantasies are, on the other hand...

ikdind said:
Having fantasies is not, in general, creepy.

Insisting on proactively sharing with others what those fantasies are, on the other hand...

I think we can agree that "I'd like to feel her up" is not the same as "I'd like to be in her shoes" (figuratively of course). Saying you'd enjoy a situation is not in itself creepy.

PheagleAdler said:
I think we can agree that "I'd like to feel her up" is not the same as "I'd like to be in her shoes" (figuratively of course). Saying you'd enjoy a situation is not in itself creepy.

literally both of those are creepy.

Versperus said:

Just because you don't like my fantasies doesn't make them creepy. When I can't even say I'd enjoy a particular situation then censorship has gone too far.

PheagleAdler said:
I think we can agree that "I'd like to feel her up" is not the same as "I'd like to be in her shoes" (figuratively of course). Saying you'd enjoy a situation is not in itself creepy.

I'm perfectly content with defining both of those as creepy. I don't want to know your diverse sexual fantasies. I don't care what they are, whether they're perfectly mainstream or singularly niche. And, to be blunt, the more niche, the more I positively do not wish to know.

PheagleAdler said:
Just because you don't like my fantasies doesn't make them creepy. When I can't even say I'd enjoy a particular situation then censorship has gone too far.

We might share highly congruent fantasies. I still do not want to know. I really, truly, positively do not wish to know.

ikdind said:
I'm perfectly content with defining both of those as creepy. I don't want to know your diverse sexual fantasies.

May I ask where I said they were sexual? I think shoehorning sexual aspects into a transformation is rather unnecessary and I strongly dislike the concept.

Versperus said:
Just don't voice them, it's not complicated.

You know who you're talking to, right?

Given the contexts involved I'm imagining the confusion here is that commenting something "creepy" isn't on the same acceptability level as commissioning art of it.

Chaser said:
You wouldn't go to a museum and say out-loud "god i wish i could fuck Mona Lisa", or go to a library and announce you are fapping.

Honestly, at this point, I'm starting to think a couple of them would.

PheagleAdler said:
censorship

🤦‍♂️

hiekkapillu said:
臘‍♂️

TIL that enforcing rules about not allowing creepy commentary is censorship.

MissChu said:
TIL that enforcing rules about not allowing creepy commentary is censorship.

You didn't learn anything then because I didn't say that. I'm talking about misusing the term 'creepy' to get comments you personally disagree with removed.

MagnusEffect said:
You know who you're talking to, right?

Given the contexts involved I'm imagining the confusion here is that commenting something "creepy" isn't on the same acceptability level as commissioning art of it.

Y'know, considering I don't commission "creepy" things that comparison really doesn't work. I have no problem screening ACTUALLY creepy comments. I do have a problem when people label everything as creepy, including comments simply voicing that they wouldn't mind being in a similar situation.

You don't want to hear things like that? Why not? Because you cannot imagine that you'd ever want to be in that situation?

You know FA doesn't do crap like this and I know many of you aren't too fond of the site but I think taking more comments as creepy than there truly are is a problem.

PheagleAdler said:
You didn't learn anything then because I didn't say that. I'm talking about misusing the term 'creepy' to get comments you personally disagree with removed.

That's a bad argument, then. Weaponizing the reporting of comments is nigh impossible given the fact that the admins tend to rule impartially. Unless you assume that the admins themselves are biased, and I doubt anything I could say would sway your thoughts if that's how you feel.

MissChu said:
That's a bad argument, then. Weaponizing the reporting of comments is nigh impossible given the fact that the admins tend to rule impartially. Unless you assume that the admins themselves are biased, and I doubt anything I could say would sway your thoughts if that's how you feel.

You could say everyone has some bias, how much I cannot say.

I will say I was referring to a scenario involving a hypothetical TF piece, completely nonsexual, maybe where the "victim" was shown as having a negative reaction to the TF or what/who ever caused it. I felt that posting something like "I wouldn't mind being in that situation" or a variant of that wouldn't be over the top or creepy.

If I didn't get that point across, then I apologize for being unclear.

Guys if you can't say it to your parents then there's obviously something wrong...

PheagleAdler said:
You could say everyone has some bias, how much I cannot say.

I will say I was referring to a scenario involving a hypothetical TF piece, completely nonsexual, maybe where the "victim" was shown as having a negative reaction to the TF or what/who ever caused it. I felt that posting something like "I wouldn't mind being in that situation" or a variant of that wouldn't be over the top or creepy.

If I didn't get that point across, then I apologize for being unclear.

That makes a bit more sense and to be fair, I'm pretty sure context matters as well when it comes to commentary. If you were looking at a non-sexual picture of two characters hugging and commented about how you wished you could get a hug from one of the characters, that wouldn't constitute as creepy. Saying you want to pork an imaginary character isn't the same as saying you want to hug an imaginary character.

MissChu said:
That makes a bit more sense and to be fair, I'm pretty sure context matters as well when it comes to commentary. If you were looking at a non-sexual picture of two characters hugging and commented about how you wished you could get a hug from one of the characters, that wouldn't constitute as creepy. Saying you want to pork an imaginary character isn't the same as saying you want to hug an imaginary character.

Alright, I guess we're on the same page then. Cool.

Also one more thing that popped up in my mind, to the people who say let users upvotes decide on what's creepy or not:

https://e621.net/comment/show/2145987

Also

haxxx said:
Creepy comments are a furry tradition at this point.

And here I was wondering why people make jokes and distance themselves from people who are furries.

PheagleAdler said:
Y'know, considering I don't commission "creepy" things that comparison really doesn't work.

Hey, all I'm saying is you have a track record of commissioning art of what I assume are your fantasies, and that your arguments may be based around some people's opinions that those are "creepy." ^{<-quotemarks for a reason}
I'm not trying to put my opinions out, just giving my hypothesis on why you're not likely to budge on your positions in this thread.

Denix said:
Also one more thing that popped up in my mind, to the people who say let users upvotes decide on what's creepy or not:

https://e621.net/comment/show/2145987

...

Denix said:
Also one more thing that popped up in my mind, to the people who say let users upvotes decide on what's creepy or not:

https://e621.net/comment/show/2145987

The other side of that thread has some good score examples too

AlsoAnd here I was wondering why people make jokes and distance themselves from people who are furries.

How integrated the zoophile community is sure doesn't help there.

PheagleAdler said:
You could say everyone has some bias, how much I cannot say.

I will say I was referring to a scenario involving a hypothetical TF piece, completely nonsexual, maybe where the "victim" was shown as having a negative reaction to the TF or what/who ever caused it. I felt that posting something like "I wouldn't mind being in that situation" or a variant of that wouldn't be over the top or creepy.

If I didn't get that point across, then I apologize for being unclear.

Well, I do feel that rating:s is not the natural conclusion to draw from transformation... or any other single descriptor of the images on this site. And honestly, looking at some of the rating:s transformation results, I'm not entirely sure it's clear that we're talking about something sans sexual undertones, especially in the overlap with tom_fischbach (not a majority contributor, but I did notice he appeared on each of the first 4 pages of my results).

Contextualized into your relatively narrow margin, I would agree that a self-inserting comment wouldn't necessarily be creepy.

Lol somebody just got a creepy comment record for saying "I love those tits". Same admin who tagged me. I think this needs looking into now, honestly. https://i.imgur.com/OfrtGir.png

Fluffy_Tail said:
Lol somebody just got a creepy comment record for saying "I love those tits". Same admin who tagged me. I think this needs looking into now, honestly. https://i.imgur.com/OfrtGir.png

They didn't only say "I love those tits" they said "Love those fat milky teats". There's quite a bit of a difference between the two statements.

BlackLicorice said:
They didn't only say "I love those tits" they said "Love those fat milky teats". There's quite a bit of a difference between the two statements.

Keeping it tame for the forums. Do those adjectives really change my point?

Fluffy_Tail said:
Lol somebody just got a creepy comment record for saying "I love those tits". Same admin who tagged me. I think this needs looking into now, honestly. https://i.imgur.com/OfrtGir.png

You do realize that this admin has been lately handling like 90% of all reports. It kinda tends to lead to same admin's name being stamped on multiple user records. Also especially making point to describe the teats as "fat and milky" kinda changes the tone into very different tone from something like "I love those tits"

Fluffy_Tail said:
Keeping it tame for the forums. Do those adjectives really change my point?

They do because they are not the same statement. "fat milky teats" is much more detailed than just "tits".

BlackLicorice said:
They do because they are not the same statement. "fat milky teats" is much more detailed than just "tits".

Seems like you're being willfully ignorant here. Where is the line? I see literally nothing wrong with that comment. He wasn't talking about himself, or his fantasies at all. He just described a thing in the picture, and said he liked it.

But seriously tho, if you truly believe that some admin is doing something wrong, contact the head admin or file a report instead of posting vague passive aggressive posts about them on forums.

Fluffy_Tail said:
Seems like you're being willfully ignorant here. Where is the line? I see literally nothing wrong with that comment. He wasn't talking about himself, or his fantasies at all. He just described a thing in the picture, and said he liked it.

No dude, you're the one being ignorant here. You KNOW the comment has a different tone than just "love those tits", which is what you tried to say it was. The fact they described it in detail as "fat milky teats" is what makes it count as a creepy comment; it has an overtly sexual tone to it. Just because *you* don't see anything wrong with creepy comments doesn't magically make the rules go away.

Fluffy_Tail said:
Seems like you're being willfully ignorant here. Where is the line? I see literally nothing wrong with that comment. He wasn't talking about himself, or his fantasies at all. He just described a thing in the picture, and said he liked it.

Of course you see nothing wrong, cause you also got a record, so obviously you don’t see the problem?

Fluffy_Tail said:
Seems like you're being willfully ignorant here. Where is the line? I see literally nothing wrong with that comment. He wasn't talking about himself, or his fantasies at all. He just described a thing in the picture, and said he liked it.

You are trying too hard. There is an absolute difference you are pretending does not exist to try and force a fake point.

And luckily what *you* consider creepy is not the standard. God if it was up to the average furry this place would be in the dark ages of pre bad dragon ownership

Oh goodie, more people trying to argue about "MAH FREE SPEECH" to say disturbing things without any repercussions.

If you wouldn't want to say it in front of your parents, then don't post it online. Literally nobody gives a shit that you want to splooge all over that hot herms tiddies and stick your fingers inside her nipples while she fucks your ass, and we'd REALLY rather not hear about how you've fucked (aka abused) your cat or how this post reminds you about how your uncle fingered you as a kid.

And also, consider this: The admins... Are admins! They created the site! So, surprise surprise, even if what they do is "unfair", doesn't matter. They made the rules, and complaining about how the rules are "soooooo unfair" after people repeatedly explain why it's NOT is probably gonna get you banned if you keep this up. Fair or not, that's how things go. Get used to it, it's their site so they CAN do whatever they want, provided it's not illegal. Which this isn't.

Clitheroe said:
Oh goodie, more people trying to argue about "MAH FREE SPEECH" to say disturbing things without any repercussions.

If you wouldn't want to say it in front of your parents, then don't post it online. Literally nobody gives a shit that you want to splooge all over that hot herms tiddies and stick your fingers inside her nipples while she fucks your ass, and we'd REALLY rather not hear about how you've fucked (aka abused) your cat or how this post reminds you about how your uncle fingered you as a kid.

And also, consider this: The admins... Are admins! They created the site! So, surprise surprise, even if what they do is "unfair", doesn't matter. They made the rules, and complaining about how the rules are "soooooo unfair" after people repeatedly explain why it's NOT is probably gonna get you banned if you keep this up. Fair or not, that's how things go. Get used to it, it's their site so they CAN do whatever they want, provided it's not illegal. Which this isn't.

You sound really upset.

Fluffy_Tail said:
You sound really upset.

Now that's a hot take, given your literally dozens of petulant posts in this thread about how getting a slap on the wrist for your creepy comment "hurt your feelings".

hanzai said:
Now that's a hot take, given your literally dozens of petulant posts in this thread about how getting a slap on the wrist for your creepy comment "hurt your feelings".

Never posted anything as long-winded and butthurt as that though, lmao.

Fluffy_Tail said:
Never posted anything as long-winded and butthurt as that though, lmao.

Again, calling other people "long-winded and butthurt" is very much a "pot calling the kettle black" situation, given that you made a 4-page (thus far) thread about the total non-punishment of being told not to break the rules of the site.

hanzai said:
Again, calling other people "long-winded and butthurt" is very much a "pot calling the kettle black" situation, given that you made a 4-page (thus far) thread about the total non-punishment of being told not to break the rules of the site.

All of your comments are either complaining or bitching at people lmao

https://i.imgur.com/DEYmRPK.png
lol, it's turning out that a lot of you who are so high and mighty have some demons of your own, huh? You're not better than us. You're not above anyone. You're not any "less creepy" cause you don't like the comment. You're just thin-skinned, and want to see someone else get hurt because you got upset.

Fluffy_Tail said:
https://i.imgur.com/DEYmRPK.png
lol, it's turning out that a lot of you who are so high and mighty have some demons of your own, huh? You're not better than us. You're not above anyone. You're not any "less creepy" cause you don't like the comment. You're just thin-skinned, and want to see someone else get hurt because you got upset.

We have a rule against personal attacks, are you sure you want to go down that route?

NotMeNotYou said:
We have a rule against personal attacks, are you sure you want to go down that route?

Can one of you please close this thread, he’ll obviously say something he’ll regret.

NotMeNotYou said:
We have a rule against personal attacks, are you sure you want to go down that route?

Wasn't trying to personally attack anyone. I was just trying to show that the sentiment is shared. Sorry if it came off that way, I won't go down that road.

@Fluffy_Tail this why I no comment. what is comment made you?

Fluffy_Tail said:
You sound really upset.

Mark this as the moment you finally lost the last shred of credibility in this discussion.

You had it right when you said you were wrong and would stop making creepy comments. Go back to that point and just stop.

MagnusEffect said:
Hey, all I'm saying is you have a track record of commissioning art of what I assume are your fantasies, and that your arguments may be based around some people's opinions that those are "creepy." ^{<-quotemarks for a reason}
I'm not trying to put my opinions out, just giving my hypothesis on why you're not likely to budge on your positions in this thread.

I don't think anyone has ever argued that what i commission is 'creepy' so I dunno?

PheagleAdler said:
I don't think anyone has ever argued that what i commission is 'creepy' so I dunno?

But you are this passionate about your stance due to comments your art receives, yes?

MagnusEffect said:
But you are this passionate about your stance due to comments your art receives, yes?

I usually don't react kindly to judgmental bitches. I don't think this site is against transformation, so why would one get upset about it, especially to the point it pisses me off?

PheagleAdler said:
I usually don't react kindly to judgmental bitches. I don't think this site is against transformation, so why would one get upset about it, especially to the point it pisses me off?

Right.

This is just analysis, but the reasons I think you have for your activity in this thread are:

• Protecting your ability to post what you want, regardless of what others think
• In the form of artwork
• In commentary and related responses on such artwork
• The ideal that rules are to be applied equally to all users

You're here to protect what you could post, regardless of whether you actually would; because if somebody else can't say it, you can't either.
Am I right? I can dig it.

Going back to my original comment
The intent was to offer an explanation on their line of argument being wholly ineffective on you, because your typical commission themes appear to be based on self-insertion, and I can use your apparent viewpoints to logically construct an argument of "if I'm allowed to post art of it, why aren't I allowed to post comments of it?" even if you haven't made that direct statement.

A big trouble with forum discussions is participants don't often consider every relevant piece of information for their posts, and to complicate things further it's very easy to say things in a way that can be misread, or misrepresent what they're actually trying to get across. You can probably tell I have trouble getting points across myself without getting excessively wordy, often to the point that people won't bother reading it anyway.

I'm amazed this hasn't been locked yet, but more amazed at how hard it is for some people to not be weird and creepy on the internet.

Fluffy_Tail said:
Who else has been warned for a "creepy comment" that was vastly upvoted/agreed with? This is becoming a problem. Everybody else likes it, but staff calls you creepy? Obviously, a very subjective and rude thing to do, that is only possible because of the staff's position of power and ego.

Yeah it is completely subjective. They give out bans way too easily. They probably get a power trip.

chromos7 said:
Yeah it is completely subjective. They give out bans way too easily. They probably get a power trip.

It's... really not that hard to avoid getting banned. You have to break same rule multiple times within 6 months to get banned (3 for temp, and 4 for perma. Sometimes more if whoever is handing it is lenient and chooses to give just a warning message). And I bet my whole ass that if someone breaks same rule that many times and fails to learn how to not do it again, the problem is most likely in user end.

hiekkapillu said:
It's... really not that hard to avoid getting banned. You have to break same rule multiple times within 6 months to get banned (3 for temp, and 4 for perma. Sometimes more if whoever is handing it is lenient and chooses to give just a warning message). And I bet my whole ass that if someone breaks same rule that many times and fails to learn how to not do it again, the problem is most likely in user end.

I'm going to be honest, I hate to generalize but it seems like a lot of the people who are in agreement with Fluffy_Tail also have grey or red marks for creepy commentary or whatever. Hmm.

chromos7 said:
Yeah it is completely subjective. They give out bans way too easily. They probably get a power trip.

The rule explicitly state that the Mods reserve the right to ban anyone from the site for any reason. That being the case, the idea that the mods are on some kind of power trip and use "creepy comments" as an exuse to hand out bans is frankly moronic.

The "reserve the right to ban anyone for any reason" is rarely used and is there to prevent people from abusing loopholes.
There is a simple solution to the whole argument. Don't want to be banned? Follow the rules and don't be creepy.

Yes: comment about the art, techniques, story, lore, give constructive criticism, or ask how they did something.
No: comment about how you want to fuck a character, wish you were a character, role play with images, etc.

Remember, some characters are extensions of other people.

hiekkapillu said:
It's... really not that hard to avoid getting banned. You have to break same rule multiple times within 6 months to get banned (3 for temp, and 4 for perma. Sometimes more if whoever is handing it is lenient and chooses to give just a warning message). And I bet my whole ass that if someone breaks same rule that many times and fails to learn how to not do it again, the problem is most likely in user end.

Gonna clarify, it's 6 months per record. If you break a rule, it will "decay" after 6 months; if you break the rule again, it both refreshes the time you need to wait and adds another record to wait on. It'll take a year and a half to go from a temp-ban to no record, and assuming you break the rule multiple times, it takes at most a year and a half to get permanently banned.

So, to OP: if you don't want that record, waiting it off is an option. Everyone else has at least tried to explain how the rule works, and you have the option of time to get rid of the record... but that does no good if you break the rule again, that 6 months can help you learn about the rule as well.

Concerning creepy comments, since there's no set in stone definition, it will help to check moderator actions. Searching for other records involving creepy comments may give you examples, so you can avoid breaking the rule in the future.

Siral_Exan said:
Gonna clarify, it's 6 months per record. If you break a rule, it will "decay" after 6 months; if you break the rule again, it both refreshes the time you need to wait and adds another record to wait on. It'll take a year and a half to go from a temp-ban to no record, and assuming you break the rule multiple times, it takes at most a year and a half to get permanently banned.

So, to OP: if you don't want that record, waiting it off is an option. Everyone else has at least tried to explain how the rule works, and you have the option of time to get rid of the record... but that does no good if you break the rule again, that 6 months can help you learn about the rule as well.

Concerning creepy comments, since there's no set in stone definition, it will help to check moderator actions. Searching for other records involving creepy comments may give you examples, so you can avoid breaking the rule in the future.

6 months is what applies for neutrals, negatives decay after a year I'm pretty sure.

Versperus said:
6 months is what applies for neutrals, negatives decay after a year I'm pretty sure.

No, they also decay in 6 months unless that has changed. They fully decay after a consecutive year. Your neutral goes away, and then it decays into a neutral. After another 6 months, it's gone. You need a year's worth of a clean record to get rid of it, but it still decays at the same rate as the others.

To even cite myself: https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/442088963960733698/600799081115156481/image0.png

If anyone reading has an old record or records that they would like decayed and has not gotten a record in the last 6 months then please feel free to [click this]

Title: Decay request
Body: (anything)

NotMeNotYou said:
The line we draw for creepy comments is mostly centered around self-insertion. Saying you want to do X to Y, saying you'd like to be in Y's position, etc.

If you like a pair of tits saying they're neat, awesome, bombastic, or similar is not going to count as creepy, saying you want to lick them will be.

A bit late in responding, but I do appreciate this clarification, thank you. Hopefully the rules page can be updated with this kind of information so we don't have to refer to forum posts in the middle of argumentative threads when issues come up.

Millcore said:
If anyone reading has an old record or records that they would like decayed and has not gotten a record in the last 6 months then please feel free to [click this]

Title: Decay request
Body: (anything)

I thought records decayed naturally. Is this not the case?

Kodanis said:
I thought records decayed naturally. Is this not the case?

I believe it has to do with extremely old records. I forget what the threshold date is.

MagnusEffect said:
Right.

This is just analysis, but the reasons I think you have for your activity in this thread are:

• Protecting your ability to post what you want, regardless of what others think
• In the form of artwork
• In commentary and related responses on such artwork
• The ideal that rules are to be applied equally to all users

You're here to protect what you could post, regardless of whether you actually would; because if somebody else can't say it, you can't either.
Am I right? I can dig it.

Going back to my original comment
The intent was to offer an explanation on their line of argument being wholly ineffective on you, because your typical commission themes appear to be based on self-insertion, and I can use your apparent viewpoints to logically construct an argument of "if I'm allowed to post art of it, why aren't I allowed to post comments of it?" even if you haven't made that direct statement.

A big trouble with forum discussions is participants don't often consider every relevant piece of information for their posts, and to complicate things further it's very easy to say things in a way that can be misread, or misrepresent what they're actually trying to get across. You can probably tell I have trouble getting points across myself without getting excessively wordy, often to the point that people won't bother reading it anyway.

My involvement in this thread mostly revolves around whether or not I think certain types of comments are actually 'creepy' and what I believe could be overreactions to hypothetical comments.

I was already discussing this with MissChu and I got the feeling from them that comments I might consider posting probably wouldn't be an issue.

ikdind said:
I believe it has to do with extremely old records. I forget what the threshold date is.

This is correct I believe. Decaying was introduced later on, so ld stuff might not apply it

CamKitty said:
This is correct I believe. Decaying was introduced later on, so ld stuff might not apply it

Ah, here we are:

NotMeNotYou said:

Rather significant update: All records will now slowly "decay" in 6 month intervals. This means that any negative record old enough will become a neutral, and then eventually being deleted. So if you haven't broken the rules in a couple years you're actually now able to get back to a pristine account.

Actual text on the CoC:

Decay of Records:

• Any record for a suspension will be turned into a negative record after 6 months of no new infractions
• Any negative record will be turned into a neutral record after 6 months of no new infractions
• Any neutral record will be removed after 6 months of no new infractions

Permanent bans will never expire but may be appealed through email.

This is not something that is performed by the page itself but instead must be done manually by a member of staff, so if you have old records that qualify please let one of us know and we'll clean them up for you.

This was posted 2 years ago. Give-or-take, my understanding is that any records since then should decay automatically, but older records have to be decayed manually by staff.

The policy for staff manually decaying old records on request has been a thing for years and years, so it seems automatic decay is just an improvement.

Kodanis said:
I thought records decayed naturally. Is this not the case?

Records are decayed by hand. If someone goes unnoticed with old records they won't be decayed/removed.

Millcore said:
Records are decayed by hand. If someone goes unnoticed with old records they won't be decayed/removed.

Thanks for the clarification.

Fluffy_Tail said:
Wow, that's weird, cause I see it almost every day and it doesn't bother me, or anyone else in the comments at all. Seems like a very small minority is being catered to here.

You mean our artists and/or character owners, the ones that create our content and can have it taken down because of comments? Yeah, geez, fuck em

Knotty_Curls said:
You mean our artists and/or character owners, the ones that create our content and can have it taken down because of comments? Yeah, geez, fuck em

Them and a good majority of the users, they just don't comment as much :P

Truth is we don't care about creepy comments. The rule is just a convenient way to eventually ban all boring one-note users.

Users who survive until next mating season typically choose mates who craft the most interesting, funny or sensible comments. Ideally, their offspring will inherit their superior comment writing genes and grow up to make e621's comment sections a better place.

Knotty_Curls said:
Truth is we don't care about creepy comments. The rule is just a convenient way to eventually ban all boring one-note users.

Users who survive until next mating season typically choose mates who craft the most interesting, funny or sensible comments. Ideally, their offspring will inherit their superior comment writing genes and grow up to make e621's comment sections a better place.

Hahaha, what a story, Knotty.

Furrin_Gok said:
What? Saying the artist drew a delicious looking taco, that you'd want a taco like that, isn't creepy. Saying that about a pussy is.

If you say that on a picture were a female spread her legs and that is cleary exposed and visible, the comment fit to the pic. The comment is'nt creepy more than the picture himself.

Lerrmot said:
The comment is'nt creepy more than the picture himself.

If your records are any indication, that doesn't matter.

Lerrmot said:
If you say that on a picture were a female spread her legs and that is cleary exposed and visible, the comment fit to the pic. The comment is'nt creepy more than the picture himself.

Gonna have to disagree with you. The picture can be as grotesque or normal as possible, we don't need you talking about what you want to do with it.