You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Head, I can understand you feel the need to edit offensive comments left on a submission/folio but innofensive editing too?
My comment to Arwen_Explorer folio went something like this:
Gimme_Danger says...
nice start arwen...please include more body shots in your reload. great 'kitty'. lovely.
1:33AM Apr 27th 2005
Nothing there that is offensive, denegrating or otherwise. There were many face shots in the folio and I suggested more wide angled shots is all. The 'kitty' remark was a compliment and nothing that hasn't been said before.
If you have to edit my remarks I would prefer that you delete the whole thing rather than dilute or sanitise it because what I ended up with was:
Gimme_Danger says...
nice start arwen...please reload. lovely
1:33AM Apr 27th 2005
not quite what I meant
Offline
gimme_danger,
that is suprising. i went as far as telling an artist last week that she had a "cute vagina". it wasn't edited. neither was a post that read, on another folio "great taco", also not deleted. clearly two extremes.
but "nice kitty"? that is suprising...
wscott
_________________________________________________
that's the way it goes. but don't forget, it goes the other way too.
Offline
Head, I can understand you feel the need to edit offensive comments left on a submission/folio but innofensive editing too?
My comment to Arwen_Explorer folio went something like this:
Gimme_Danger says...
nice start arwen...please include more body shots in your reload. great 'kitty'. lovely.
1:33AM Apr 27th 2005Nothing there that is offensive, denegrating or otherwise. There were many face shots in the folio and I suggested more wide angled shots is all. The 'kitty' remark was a compliment and nothing that hasn't been said before.
If you have to edit my remarks I would prefer that you delete the whole thing rather than dilute or sanitise it because what I ended up with was:
Gimme_Danger says...
nice start arwen...please reload. lovely
1:33AM Apr 27th 2005not quite what I meant
The deletion was not about the "kitty", it was about your request for the girl to show more of her body. The site credo is "girls getting naked on their own terms". To participate in the Project they need to get naked, any more than that is at their discretion. Our policy is to delete requests for girls to "go further", but I will admit we probably misinterpreted your comment in this case.
Offline
my interest is in seeing the human form...the way the light plays on the skin and the textures and shadows. I was strictly encouraging Arwen to go away from the face shots. I am not interested in gynecology if thats what your concern was
Offline
Hmmmm I have been chatting outside of ISM with a few friends who I met here and was wondering if we need to get a few others in on these edits Head makes? In light of Gimme Dangers comments being cut.
Stew
The universe is unfolding as it should, and so are the girls on ISM. I love them all.
Offline
you mean like a mutiny, Stew?
do not anger Head. Head gives us sooo much. (huhhuh, i said "head"...)
_________________________________________________
that's the way it goes. but don't forget, it goes the other way too.
Offline
you mean like a mutiny, Stew?
do not anger Head. Head gives us sooo much. (huhhuh, i said "head"...)
Head!!! Don't talk to me about head, its obvious you get it, I dont get any!! LMAO
Stew
The universe is unfolding as it should, and so are the girls on ISM. I love them all.
Offline
Is the coping saw 'Head's favorite editing tool?
:-)
PS: Speaking of 'TOOL', thank you "Wantingscott" for sending me that vid. I checked my files for the afore mentioned starlets, but only came up with "Seashore". Thanks for taking me back down that memory lane!!!
Offline
Head!!! Don't talk to me about head, its obvious you get it, I dont get any!! LMAO
Stew
that's crazy, Stu. half the "professionals" in NYC are Canadian... they're learning their craft somewhere...
_________________________________________________
that's the way it goes. but don't forget, it goes the other way too.
Offline
Pages: 1