Goodbyte all - the Liquidaor

Originally posted by Very Rusty
I believe any photo of ANY Man, regardless of what color they happen to be, with a collar around his neck and in chains is not suitable for a chess site.

It actually looks revolting to many, racist to others, and I fail to see how you do not see this. Then again it is Saturday evening, and we know what you like to do on Saturdays don't we.

Why is so oo, like a broken record, but you are consistant, and sounding like a parrot when you do that.

Was the same picture too offensive to be put in Wal-Mart or any of the other retail outlets where the Roots DVD was sold?

Why should this site have more hypersensitive standards than a retail store?

Originally posted by Very Rusty
I believe any photo of ANY Man, regardless of what color they happen to be, with a collar around his neck and in chains is not suitable for a chess site.

It actually looks revolting to many, racist to others, and I fail to see how you do not see this. Then again it is Saturday evening, and we know what you like to do on Saturdays don't we.

Why is so ...[text shortened]... oo, like a broken record, but you are consistant, and sounding like a parrot when you do that.

I think you are being deliberately sexist here. I happen to like photo's of women in collars and chains.

Originally posted by cadwah
I think you are being deliberately sexist here. I happen to like photo's of women in collars and chains.

Nice avatar. I'm sure it flies over the head of the hypersensitives here though.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Was the same picture too offensive to be put in Wal-Mart or any of the other retail outlets where the Roots DVD was sold?

Why should this site have more hypersensitive standards than a retail store?

I alerted your post before you changed it, good job!

You are talking apples and oranges again 'no one'.

You are talking about a contraversial movie. I think the intent of the movie was a good one to show the hardships of a race, personally. It was actually banned from playing in some places, did you know that?

Do we know the intent of the picture in an avatar, no we do not. Obviously the Admins agreed, and good on them I say!

Originally posted by cadwah
I think you are being deliberately sexist here. I happen to like photo's of women in collars and chains.

This is the wrong site to be looking for that. I am betting you already have better addys for that than I could find for you. 😛

Originally posted by Very Rusty
I alerted your post before you changed it, good job!

You are talking apples and oranges again 'no one'.

You are talking about a contraversial movie. I think the intent of the movie was a good one to show the hardships of a race, personally. It was actually banned from playing in some places, did you know that?

Do we know the intent of the picture in an avatar, no we do not. Obviously the Admins agreed, and good on them I say!

Only a tried and true racist would consider Roots "controversial". Overall, it was considered a ground breaking treatment of slavery; Vernon Jordan, former president of the Urban League and official in the Carter administration, called it "the single most spectacular educational experience in race relations in America." . The image in the avatar was the most well known image from the mini-series; a variant of it was on the cover of the 30th anniversary DVD. No retail store that I know of pulled it as "racist" and/or "offensive". I fail to see why that image is "offensive" here by any reasonable standard.

The Admins made a foolish mistake based on others' and their own ignorance.

Originally posted by no1marauder


The Admins made a foolish mistake based on others' and their own ignorance.[/b]

Due to a message received from a Moderator, this will be the end of our discussion.

You continue to call the Admins foolish and ignorant. I Strongly disagree with you on that. So we shall agree to disagree on this issue.

The Moderator is correct it takes two to tango, I like that way of putting it actually. We shall live to tango another day the good Lord willing. I shall remember you in my prayers as always ' no one ' !

Have a great evening.

Originally posted by Very Rusty
Due to a message received from a Moderator, this will be the end of our discussion.

You continue to call the Admins foolish and ignorant. I Strongly disagree with you on that. So we shall agree to disagree on this issue.

The Moderator is correct it takes two to tango, I like that way of putting it actually. We shall live to tango another day the goo ...[text shortened]... rd willing. I shall remember you in my prayers as always ' no one ' !

Have a great evening.

No, I didn't call the Admins "foolish and ignorant". I said they made a foolish decision based on their and others' ignorance (ignorance they and others admitted). There's a big difference.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Is putting a black man in chains on the DVD cover of Roots offensive, too? For that matter, is Roots offensive because it has images of blacks in chains?

We've went through this; your position is beyond stupid.

Movies can be offensive yes. I bet this one especially made some people cry. Being put on a chess site out of context by a bunch of white guys pretending to be black is offensive. You're really slow sometimes.

Originally posted by no1marauder
[bWe've went through this; your position is beyond stupid.[/b]

And it looks like the stupid guys win again. That must really irk you to know that.

Almost as stupid as Forest Gump? Stupid, successful and right. Ever think of being on the right side of an issue. Like the Grandma zapper issue. You actually surprised me. I applaud you for that.

Originally posted by cashthetrash
Movies can be offensive yes. I bet this one especially made some people cry. Being put on a chess site out of context by a bunch of white guys pretending to be black is offensive. Your are really slow sometimes.

So it was only "offensive" because a member of the BWA used it as his avatar? If anybody else had, it would have been OK?

Are you saying Roots was "offensive" or not?

Originally posted by cashthetrash
And it looks like the stupid guys win again. That must really irk you to know that.

Almost as stupid as Forest Gump? Stupid, successful and right. Ever think of being on the right side of an issue. Like the Grandma zapper issue. You actually surprised me. I applaud you for that.

Your personal attacks are uninteresting.

The fact that the Site Admins made a bad decision doesn't make your position "the right side of the issue". It remains a poorly reasoned one.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Was the same picture too offensive to be put in Wal-Mart or any of the other retail outlets where the Roots DVD was sold?

Why should this site have more hypersensitive standards than a retail store?

This isn't walmart, RHP isn't advertising Roots for free.

LOSER~!!!!!

Originally posted by no1marauder
Only a tried and true racist would consider Roots "controversial". Overall, it was considered a ground breaking treatment of slavery; Vernon Jordan, former president of the Urban League and official in the Carter administration, called it "the single most spectacular educational experience in race relations in America." . The image in the avatar ...[text shortened]... The Admins made a foolish mistake based on others' and their own ignorance.

So you saying that Chris is ignorant?

Originally posted by no1marauder
So it was only "offensive" because a member of the BWA used it as his avatar? If anybody else had, it would have been OK?

Are you saying Roots was "offensive" or not?

I never said that was the "only reason", you really are being dense. Whether Roots is offensive or not has no bearing in this disagreement. A black man in chains is offensive. Chris himself was offended as anyone should be in this matter. If you are not then I, suggest you go find a more racist chess site.