The CBB

Posted: **18 Nov 2015 01:42**

DesEsseintes wrote:I'm not going to look in that spoiler...

Upon hearing about others looking at an image of an oromaxillary surgery (aka, the person's face was rent into two)

Posted: **18 Nov 2015 01:46**

qwed117 wrote:
DesEsseintes wrote:I'm not going to look in that spoiler...
Upon hearing about others looking at an image of an oromaxillary surgery (aka, the person's face was rent into two)

Could we please not post that sort of stuff directly as images even in spoilers? Sometimes the CSS might load slow or not at all and the image might be visible anyway. Better to just link it. And warn well.

Posted: **18 Nov 2015 02:26**

Prinsessa wrote:
qwed117 wrote:
DesEsseintes wrote:I'm not going to look in that spoiler...
Upon hearing about others looking at an image of an oromaxillary surgery (aka, the person's face was rent into two)
Could we please not post that sort of stuff directly as images even in spoilers? Sometimes the CSS might load slow or not at all and the image might be visible anyway. Better to just link it. And warn well.

So you want a picture?

Posted: **18 Nov 2015 02:41**

Lao Kou wrote:
Znex wrote:
shimobaatar wrote:I really am curious how this fits in with Mandarin slang.
Apparently a turtle head is slang for a certain part of male genitalia.
If that's where GrandPiano was going with this, it's not slang; it's the bona fide word for the glans penis (dictionaries have it, whereas they don't include vulgar slang). I can't see the Mandarin wikipedia "penis" page (perhaps the Central Committee feels it offends delicate Chinese sensibilities (though the Cantopage is viewable, go figger), but the Japanese page (which apparently has the same word) has a diagram with the term pointing at said portion.

Edit: There's also a "glans penis" page with similar viewability issues (though the Chinese link shows "turtle head"), but the Japanese page uses the term without any tee-hee-heeing ribaldry. (Presumably, those of you elsewhere can read the Chinese pages if you care to)
Given that,

Sḿtuval wrote:
shimobaatar wrote:
shimobaatar wrote:
Sḿtuval, out of context, wrote:Do you want to lick my turtle?
Absolutely.
Time to roll up my sleeves and fulfill my destiny, I suppose.
Oh god I see it now. Can someone stick a pencil in my eyes?
perhaps you should both close your eyes and think of Beijing.

CONLANGER'S FOX

SEX RING FOUND ON THE CBB
Highschoolers involved

INSANE PERSON SCREAMS THAT ALIGNMENT DOESN'T EXIST
Definitely a liberal

FIRE STARTED IN THE EVERYTHING ELSE
Refugees support pedophilia and more over, SAME SEX MARRAIGE

Posted: **18 Nov 2015 03:00**

qwed117 wrote:
Prinsessa wrote:
qwed117 wrote:
DesEsseintes wrote:I'm not going to look in that spoiler...
Upon hearing about others looking at an image of an oromaxillary surgery (aka, the person's face was rent into two)
Could we please not post that sort of stuff directly as images even in spoilers? Sometimes the CSS might load slow or not at all and the image might be visible anyway. Better to just link it. And warn well.
So you want a picture?

I do not.

Posted: **18 Nov 2015 07:02**

Prinsessa wrote:Could we please not post that sort of stuff directly as images even in spoilers? Sometimes the CSS might load slow or not at all and the image might be visible anyway. Better to just link it. And warn well.

...What is this, the 90s? Where do you have to be that CSS doesn't load fast enough that it will display the image BEFORE it realizes to put it in a spoiler... if anything wouldn't the spoiler load empty and THEN load the picture?

I think we're safe posting pics as long as they aren't illegal in spoilers. I don't see why we need to do so, but I know I am way more likely to open a spoiler that's maybe got a warning attached than I am to go to follow a URL that has a warning because literally anything can be attached to a webpage in terms of malicious code, viruses, etc. where an image in a spoiler is much less likely to cause those problems. And, honestly, I find medical images fascinating even if they are gross. Of course, others have a light trigger on the gag reflex, but forcing us to follow mystery links seems like an over-protective bridge too far.

Posted: **20 Nov 2015 10:27**

Please stop it with the condescending tone.

Yes, even in 2015 people may have shaky connections, even if only temporarily. I'd even say especially in 2015, what with everyone surfing on their mobile devices while in moving vehicles and so on.

Please don't do that. Just because you can handle it doesn't mean you get to downplay the impact it might have on others. I don't think I need to explain just how severe it can be to me and others in order to ask you to be nice and respect that.

Not sure why you think people would post malware, and anyway I did mean direct links to the images instead of embedding them anyway. But isn't the simplest thing just to mention the relevant condition and allow anybody who might find it fascinating (I don't) to google it for themselves, or ask for it in a PM, eh? I think that's pretty basic etiquette when you know something is likely to be upsetting to others even if it isn't to yourself.

Time and place. This isn't the place for snuff, even in a spoiler. And quite frankly, not many places are. And you know that.

Posted: **20 Nov 2015 13:27**

Prinsessa wrote:
Thrice Xandvii wrote:What is this, the 90s? Where do you have to be that CSS doesn't load fast enough that it will display the image BEFORE it realizes to put it in a spoiler... if anything wouldn't the spoiler load empty and THEN load the picture?
Please stop it with the condescending tone.

I fail to see a difference in the ("in this day and age") tone with this:

Prinsessa wrote:In 2015, surely OS X can't be the only system to offer a quick to use character map that's almost as efficient as dead keys?

But the crux of the issue seems to be here:

Prinsessa wrote:Please don't do that. Just because you can handle it doesn't mean you get to downplay the impact it might have on others. I don't think I need to explain just how severe it can be to me and others in order to ask you to be nice and respect that.

I haven't heard "others" weigh in. Are you speaking on their behalf?

Prinsessa wrote:But isn't the simplest thing just to mention the relevant condition and allow anybody who might find it fascinating (I don't) to google it for themselves, or ask for it in a PM, eh? I think that's pretty basic etiquette when you know something is likely to be upsetting to others even if it isn't to yourself.

"Isn't it the simplest thing..." isn't condescending? The image in question had a bunch of spoilers and "Ew's" (not to mention a Modicone edit-in) surrounding it at the time. Me, I've never seen the image (I know myself), and I assume when DesEsseintes said:

DesEsseintes wrote:I'm not going to look in that spoiler...

he meant it. One always opens spoilers at one's own risk. (That moderators did not remove this image (maybe they did; I haven't looked, though there's no indication) indicates to me that, while perhaps discomforting, it did not cross a line.) If you didn't believe the "wet paint" sign and sat down, it's not the forum's fault.

Prinsessa wrote:Time and place.

I myself am confused as to why qwed117 would choose to resurrect this now, but that's neither here nor there. Why are you taking exception to this now? Where was your concern at the time about a possibly disturbing image (10 months ago)?

This isn't the place for snuff, even in a spoiler.

Color me a cranky old man who doesn't know what the kids mean by "snuff", but by any definition I know and from what I gather the picture to be (a picture of facial surgery where the face is opened like a boiled lobster), this is not snuff. If it were, I would expect our moderators to act posthaste.

Prinsessa wrote:And quite frankly, not many places are. And you know that.

I find that rather condescending.

This is not one's personal sensitivity fiefdom. I'm all for consideration of others' feelings in discourse and hope I espouse that as a daily ethic, but free expression means expressing oneself at the risk of offending others (and a medical photo may receive an array of reactions from scientific interest to "Ew! Gross!")(or attempting humor that falls flat). Don't have confidence in the moderators? Run for office. But you don't hold an enlightened monopoly on what is appropriate in framing a sensitive and considerate discussion.

Posted: **20 Nov 2015 15:22**

Why is this discussion taking place here and not in the thread where the photo was actually posted, all those months ago?

I also quite agree with everything Lao Kou said.

Posted: **21 Nov 2015 10:51**

DesEsseintes wrote:Why is this discussion taking place here and not in the thread where the photo was actually posted, all those months ago?

I also quite agree with everything Lao Kou said.

No idea, but the outrage happened here for some reason. As such, so do the responses.

To be fair to Prinsessa, there definitely was a touch of condescension in my reply... But only because her point seemed to be that one mustn't post anything that offends anyone's sensitive sensibilities. Which, seemed to me to be a bit much. I understand being respectful in discourse, but essentially exercising a ban on images you don't like because feelings is hypersensitive but also unenforceable. In fact, it wasn't even the suggestion that got me riled, but the attitude that we are beholden to comply, for no other reason than her opinon demands we do.

Posted: **21 Nov 2015 11:31**

Thrice Xandvii wrote:
DesEsseintes wrote:Why is this discussion taking place here and not in the thread where the photo was actually posted, all those months ago?
No idea, but the outrage happened here for some reason. As such, so do the responses.

qwed117, apparently, sought to immortalize DesEsseintes' quote and brought it here (perhaps it has a "That's what she said." or "I wouldn't put my finger there." feel to it?). To put additional commentary in the "correct" place would have involved necro-ing the whole "Are Tongues Fat" thread and leap-frogging two subsequent pages of text, which would have been just as non-sequituringly

as it is here. So here we is.

Thrice Xandvii wrote:To be fair to Prinsessa, there definitely was a touch of condescension in my reply...

That's right conciliatory of you.

(not a scintilla of sarcasm intended)

But only because her point seemed to be that one mustn't post anything that offends anyone's sensitive sensibilities. Which, seemed to me to be a bit much. <snip> In fact, it wasn't even the suggestion that got me riled

Here, either.

but the attitude that we are beholden to comply, for no other reason than her opinon demands we do.

Just so.

Posted: **30 Nov 2015 09:59**

Well, if that's the general consensus I guess I'll find a different forum.

Posted: **30 Nov 2015 21:40**

I agree with Prinsessa and I actually would not want to miss them.

Posted: **01 Dec 2015 00:35**

Prinsessa wrote:Well, if that's the general consensus I guess I'll find a different forum.

That seems a bit extreme...

Posted: **01 Dec 2015 09:46**

Prinsessa wrote:Well, if that's the general consensus I guess I'll find a different forum.

I hear the ZBB is a real considerate safe place. You could try your luck there. ;)

Posted: **01 Dec 2015 14:16**

thaen wrote:
Prinsessa wrote:Well, if that's the general consensus I guess I'll find a different forum.
That seems a bit extreme...

"My way or the highway"

Posted: **04 May 2016 22:04**

Xonen on a flame war wrote:This thread has been reported as a "flame war" and a "train wreck". I don't have time to go spelunking in its depths right now, so I'm just gonna lock it for now so everyone gets a chance to take a deep breath and cool down. If I (or other mods) later decide there's a discussion that can be salvaged in there, we may unlock it.
Edit: Yeah, um.

Posted: **12 Jul 2016 02:32**

clawgrip wrote:At one time in the past, Janko had the numbers to only 20 conlangs. The key is persistence!

Posted: **13 Jul 2016 18:16**

Xonen wrote:
qwed117 wrote:
Ahzoh wrote:
thaen wrote: Is this real life?
Is this just fantasy?
Caught in a vowel merger
nə əskəp frəm rəələtə

Open your /i/s

Look up to the skaes and sa:

Posted: **13 Jul 2016 21:07**

OTheB wrote:
Xonen wrote:
qwed117 wrote:
Ahzoh wrote:
thaen wrote: Is this real life?
Is this just fantasy?
Caught in a vowel merger
nə əskəp frəm rəələtə
Open your /i/s

Look up to the skaes and sa:

I'm just a poor vowel, I need no allophony

The CBB

Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread

Re: Famous CBB Quotes Thread