Time to face fact

[George Cumby]

If you were the censor at youtube, and you got emails from angry fundamentalists demanding that you take down "The innocence of Muslims", would you just do it?

There was no policy or justification for removing that .gif beyond taking the easy way out - giving-in to intolerance. The image didn't violate any policies. There is nothing wildly inappropriate about the images of the Kennedy assasination that have been shown on TV a thousand times - is the forum for elementary school children?

I am not knocking anybody who was offended - maybe people don't want to see ugly pictures in a football forum, I'm sorry I cbose it. But demanding censorship of something just because you don't like it stinks. Just speak your mind and be done with it.

Harlan,

In all sincerity, I appreciate your apology and the spirit in which it is offered.

I beg your forebearance, but in my comment when I detracted rep points from you (which I did as I was drinking my morning coffee, therefore my recollection is a bit off), I do believe I used "please" or "thank you". That's not a demand. Nor did I ask Zool or Madtown to remove the .gif.

"Values" is another term for a moral code shared by a group of people. Given the response to the .gif in question, I think that the group has spoken. And what the group has said is that that particular video crossed the boundary of what is acceptable here. i.e.: A violation of the shared moral code.

I, for one, have chosen this particular tribe to socialize with because the discussion is so robust and open. I have left other forums because I posted stuff that although run-of-the-mill here, was unacceptable and deleted.

It would be nice if we could all move on from this. Clearly, as others are still engaging you, you have not been kicked out of the Tribe. That alone tells you how truly open this particular society is. Thanks for reading.

Zool:

Thank you for deleting the post. I believe that was the only correct course of action.

[RashanGary]

Outside of last year, where the offense was amazing from day 1, this is typical MM/AR stuff. Lots of sacks early, drives sputter. . . . . They tend to pull their heads out of their asses when they're backs are against the wall.

It's hard to get a read on the defense. There are some flashes from Worthy, Hayward and McMillan. It would be nice to see the zone defense come together since we need some element of disguise as to what we're doing. Unfortunately, outside of Hayward, it doesn't seem like our CB's are cut out for zone coverage. Williams looks lost playing off the ball. Shields even more-so.

I don't see the defense becoming much more than average. It's going to be tough to win games in the playoffs. That group just doesn't seem to fit right. There are some excellent players, just something is missing in how it comes together.

[Iron Mike]

The only fact I'm seeing is that the AFC sucks monkey balls.

I know, right?? Shocker.....

[LegandofthePack15]

If you were the censor at youtube, and you got emails from angry fundamentalists demanding that you take down "The innocence of Muslims", would you just do it?

There was no policy or justification for removing that .gif beyond taking the easy way out - giving-in to intolerance. The image didn't violate any policies. There is nothing wildly inappropriate about the images of the Kennedy assasination that have been shown on TV a thousand times - is the forum for elementary school children?

I am not knocking anybody who was offended - maybe people don't want to see ugly pictures in a football forum, I'm sorry I cbose it. But demanding censorship of something just because you don't like it stinks. Just speak your mind and be done with it.

Agreed, especially the bold part.

[LegandofthePack15]

I know, right?? Shocker.....

WTF? Hawk is doing some kind of rapper hand signal. I find rap music extremely offensive. I mean all rappers do is sing about murder and drugs and women being bitches. Take it down.

[mraynrand]

If you were the censor at youtube, and you got emails from angry fundamentalists demanding that you take down "The innocence of Muslims", would you just do it?

There was no policy or justification for removing that .gif beyond taking the easy way out - giving-in to intolerance. The image didn't violate any policies. There is nothing wildly inappropriate about the images of the Kennedy assasination that have been shown on TV a thousand times - is the forum for elementary school children?

I am not knocking anybody who was offended - maybe people don't want to see ugly pictures in a football forum, I'm sorry I cbose it. But demanding censorship of something just because you don't like it stinks. Just speak your mind and be done with it.

Youtube and Packerrats can essentially do what they want, and it's tough titties for you and everyone else. Somehow, I suspect you will survive the injustice you've been dealt. You want to post snuff videos with impunity? Start your own website.

[mraynrand]

WTF? Hawk is doing some kind of rapper hand signal. I find rap music extremely offensive. I mean all rappers do is sing about murder and drugs and women being bitches. Take it down.

What about HOs and Niggas? They 'sing' about that too. BTW, that damn Hawk gif is slowing my computer to a crawl.

[LegandofthePack15]

What about HOs and Niggas? They 'sing' about that too. BTW, that damn Hawk gif is slowing my computer to a crawl.

Yep.

[pbmax]

http://packerrats.com/showthread.php...eeps-On-Giving

See censorship post at link above in Romper Room. I think we can try to put this thread back on topic. If we can remember what it was.

[mraynrand]

http://packerrats.com/showthread.php...eeps-On-Giving

See censorship post at link above in Romper Room. I think we can try to put this thread back on topic. If we can remember what it was.

It's about facing fact. I refuse to face fact.

[George Cumby]

I think we can try to put this thread back on topic. If we can remember what it was.

Fact to be faced:

Packers are 3-3 with the toughest part of the schedule behind them.

[pbmax]

Excellent. I have a question. One of ND's complaints was about the O line. They did a reasonable job versus a good front seven in Houston esp. with pass protection. Rodgers was sacked twice and he ran into JJ Watt's second sack. I watched Saturday and Newhouse mainly. While Newhouse occasionally got a little loose with his set and hands on his DE, Saturday seemed solid and Rodgers called out the protection only on a few occasions at it was their best game outside of the New Orleans game.

Did anyone see this differently? And how did Bulaga look?

[Joemailman]

Fact: Packers were 3-3 after 6 games in 2010.

Pact: Packers have faced 4 of the top 6 ranked defenses in the NFL so far.

Fact: Their next opponent is #7.

[denverYooper]

Fact to be faced:

Packers are 3-3 with the toughest part of the schedule behind them.

I think the Rams game will still be pretty tough. Hope they don't take that one off.

[pbmax]

Fact: Packers were 3-3 after 6 games in 2010.

Pact: Packers have faced 4 of the top 6 ranked defenses in the NFL so far.

Fact: Their next opponent is #7.

7th opponent AND seventh ranked D? Might need some voodoo for this road game.

[MadtownPacker]

Dont worry I got a chicken that will be choked 7 times before the Sunday. This will please the football Gods...

[MadtownPacker]

Sometimes, your wrongness is stunning even to me after all these years.

I was reacting to multiple requests to remove the post. If it were anywhere but in the Packer room it would have stayed. I wasn't permanently deleted in case someone decided I over-reacted. Also, I don't think I would ever do something to teach you a lesson. That would indicate you have the ability to learn about consequences for actions. I don't give you that much credit.

Dammit!! I shoulda known this would happen when I brought in moderators from the Lingerie forum!!

[Harlan Huckleby]

Youtube and Packerrats can essentially do what they want, and it's tough titties for you and everyone else..

Same strawman argument. I never disputed that websites can do what they want. Youtube chooses to set policies that balance decency standards with free speech, and they follow those standards.

Somehow, I suspect you will survive the injustice you've been dealt. You want to post snuff videos with impunity? Start your own website.

I did not post a snuff video. I post a .gif of the kennedy assasination, the Zapruder frames that have been seen by all hundreds of times. The purpose was as a prop for a joke related to the football topic. Nothing I did was against the policies of this website, AFAIK.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Harlan.

Fuck it.

What is this, the 5000th iteration of this shit?

Yes, same old stump speech. Yet ....... still no answers.

Maybe Officer Zool thought he was acting within the guidelines of this website. Maybe the guideline is that any image in the Packer section that causes anyone to complain should be removed. Well, if that is the rule, then the issue really is not recreational censorship. The problem is some reflexively tight sphincter muscles among the townfolk.

Why do people demand that an image be removed? To protect the children? To prevent outbreak of "snuff films"? I would say they want to validate their feelings, get officially sanction that they are OK and the other person is not.

[Joemailman]

Yes, same old stump speech. Yet ....... still no answers.

Enough. Take this conversation to the RR.