Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

mugenb16 · 08:05 AM

<deleted>
enjoy!

Adramelech · Feb 24, 2007, 05:52 AM

Nsfw?

icruise · Feb 24, 2007, 08:06 AM

Although those appeared to be CG renders and not actual photos, we don't generally allow pictures of nudity to be posted on the forums.

MetalSnake · Feb 24, 2007, 06:08 PM

Originally Posted by icruise

Although those appeared to be CG renders and not actual photos, we don't generally allow pictures of nudity to be posted on the forums.

aww too bad, I would love to see those pics.

aristotles · Feb 24, 2007, 06:11 PM

Thank you for ruining it for everyone. If it is a render, it is called "art", not pornography. Do you guys have a problem with the statue of David too?

Bloody anglos. The last time I checked, the Puritans were history.

roosta · Feb 24, 2007, 06:19 PM

what about all the screenshots labeled NSFW? are those to be censored too?

digitaljames · Feb 24, 2007, 06:22 PM

They (screenshots) have a NSFW tag, this guy just posted them inline without warning and they were of CG women in pr0n style poses...not artistic or even good renders at all.

glypht · Feb 25, 2007, 11:20 AM

So edit the thread with a NSFW tag rather than delete the link.

It's nice of you to try and protect me from these heretic links, but there are far worse things in the world than computer-generated boobies.

glypht · Feb 25, 2007, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by aristotles

Bloody anglos. The last time I checked, the Puritans were history.

As a brit I prefer you call 'em yanks as opposed to anglos, but you're point is still valid.

mugenb16 · Feb 26, 2007, 03:01 AM

bahaha

mugenb16 · Feb 26, 2007, 03:04 AM

Originally Posted by digitaljames

They (screenshots) have a NSFW tag, this guy just posted them inline without warning and they were of CG women in pr0n style poses...not artistic or even good renders at all.

good laugh. thanks james!

icruise · Feb 26, 2007, 03:41 AM

If you want to post a link to the images with the proper warning, that's probably OK. But not in-line.

Kate · Feb 26, 2007, 06:56 AM

Originally Posted by glypht

As a brit I prefer you call 'em yanks as opposed to anglos, but you're point is still valid.

The Puritans are history where they came from, not where they arrived. And the yanks suffer from that a great lot. Moral Majority and the like....

glypht · Feb 26, 2007, 07:53 AM

Originally Posted by Kate

The Puritans are history where they came from, not where they arrived. And the yanks suffer from that a great lot. Moral Majority and the like....

My (admittedly shaky) understanding of the history is that the Puritans left England (and the Anglos) to avoid persecution, therefore I should imagine that were you to travel back in time and ask a Puritan if he was an Anglo he would be most offended.

Caesar2099 · Feb 26, 2007, 12:25 PM

Originally Posted by glypht

My (admittedly shaky) understanding of the history is that the Puritans left England (and the Anglos) to avoid persecution, therefore I should imagine that were you to travel back in time and ask a Puritan if he was an Anglo he would be most offended.

The term "Anglo" just means english or "of English decent." So your use of the term "Anglos" is incorrectly appropriated as it is synonymous with England rather then a separate entity as you indicated. Most likely the term Anglos as we use it today differs greatly from the definition used during the time of the Puritans (although thats just speculation). During the period when the Puritans first headed for America, the church of England was Protestant, therefore the term Anglo (as it is defined today) was most likely associated with Protestants. However, the Puritans and a good number of the subsequent colonies founded in America continued to associate themselves as English (or Anglo) peoples, rather then separate.

OF COURSE if you were to actually travel back in time and even attempt to talk to a Puritan, you will most likely be met with complete and utter confusion, as the change in dialects and word usage would be entirely beyond either of our thresholds.

MetalSnake · Feb 26, 2007, 01:32 PM

Now can we finally repost the links? I want to see it!

btw: censorship sucks!

mugenb16 · Feb 26, 2007, 11:55 PM

alright. these were the images i originally posted. nothing special but I thought I'd share. hope u like.

WARNING!!! NSFW!! not safe for work!!! pr0n style poses

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/49492674/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/49417456/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/49491837/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/49277843/

roosta · Feb 27, 2007, 01:08 AM

Originally Posted by mugenb16

alright. these were the images i originally posted. nothing special but I thought I'd share. hope u like.

WARNING!!! NSFW!! not safe for work!!! pr0n style poses

you're kidding. the first two are unbelievably tame and the two nudes are nothing special at all.

this thread really ought to be closed and self righteous censor who deleted this post in the first place ought to get outside and take a good long look at the world around him. i'm sure they'll be surprised to find civilization hasn't come to a screeching halt because someone posted a couple of wallpapaers of cg nudes.

icruise · Feb 27, 2007, 01:23 AM

Folks, we had complaints about these and that's why they were removed. They don't offend me, but some people were obviously upset about them. In the end, I don't really think they're appropriate for posting here.