• Random (unregistered) in reply to Bushea

    Are you for real?

    Wasn't the SEALED bag as much his property as his coat? Would his coat become property of his company if he put it in his desk drawer? If someone store his wallet in his desk drawer, is it ok for his boss to take it and claim property of its content for the company?

  • captain lets all have fun (unregistered) in reply to amischiefr

    people like you are runing the world

  • fake frits 37 (unregistered)

    seriously, who hasn't done something like Derek?

  • Jose (unregistered) in reply to Dave
    Dave:
    OMG Ponies!
    Yeah! I saw them too!
  • My name (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    synp:
    No, you have an expectation of privacy in the bathroom, and in the drawer. The drawer is there to store private stuff while you're in the office.

    This is not to say that the company can't open your desk, especially your old desk, and they don't need a warrant, but doing that is weird and requires justification.

    You may have an expectation of privacy but your expectations have no basis in reality. The simple fact of the matter is that your company own the drawer in your desk (sorry, their desk) and they are perfectly within their rights to open in whenever they want. I would expect a decent employer to respect their staff's privacy but it's not "weird" and it sure as hell doesn't require justification. Do you need to give me justification to open your fridge? Of course you don't, because it's your fridge.

    Bathrooms are a whole different subject that are covered by their own set of laws, for obvious reasons. You can't compare the shitter to your desk drawer and I have to wonder what the hell you've been doing in your drawer to come up with that comparison in the first place. On seconds thoughts, I really don't want to know...

    If I rent an apartment with furniture, can the landlord snoop in the closet or fridge in my apartment ? After all, he owns the stuff, so it is his fridge.

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to My name
    My name:
    Anonymous:
    synp:
    No, you have an expectation of privacy in the bathroom, and in the drawer. The drawer is there to store private stuff while you're in the office.

    This is not to say that the company can't open your desk, especially your old desk, and they don't need a warrant, but doing that is weird and requires justification.

    You may have an expectation of privacy but your expectations have no basis in reality. The simple fact of the matter is that your company own the drawer in your desk (sorry, their desk) and they are perfectly within their rights to open in whenever they want. I would expect a decent employer to respect their staff's privacy but it's not "weird" and it sure as hell doesn't require justification. Do you need to give me justification to open your fridge? Of course you don't, because it's your fridge.

    Bathrooms are a whole different subject that are covered by their own set of laws, for obvious reasons. You can't compare the shitter to your desk drawer and I have to wonder what the hell you've been doing in your drawer to come up with that comparison in the first place. On seconds thoughts, I really don't want to know...

    If I rent an apartment with furniture, can the landlord snoop in the closet or fridge in my apartment ? After all, he owns the stuff, so it is his fridge.

    No disrespect but only the highest order of moron would think that an employment contract and a home rental contract are going to be the same. Home rental contracts will include specific stipulations about the terms under which the landlord is allowed to enter. Your employment contract will have none of these stipulations and it's pretty dumb to assume it would.
  • GFK (unregistered) in reply to My name
    My name:
    Anonymous:
    synp:
    No, you have an expectation of privacy in the bathroom, and in the drawer. The drawer is there to store private stuff while you're in the office.

    This is not to say that the company can't open your desk, especially your old desk, and they don't need a warrant, but doing that is weird and requires justification.

    You may have an expectation of privacy but your expectations have no basis in reality. The simple fact of the matter is that your company own the drawer in your desk (sorry, their desk) and they are perfectly within their rights to open in whenever they want. I would expect a decent employer to respect their staff's privacy but it's not "weird" and it sure as hell doesn't require justification. Do you need to give me justification to open your fridge? Of course you don't, because it's your fridge.

    Bathrooms are a whole different subject that are covered by their own set of laws, for obvious reasons. You can't compare the shitter to your desk drawer and I have to wonder what the hell you've been doing in your drawer to come up with that comparison in the first place. On seconds thoughts, I really don't want to know...

    If I rent an apartment with furniture, can the landlord snoop in the closet or fridge in my apartment ? After all, he owns the stuff, so it is his fridge.

    I know that in France, putting [personal] in the subject of an email (or anything that obviously means personal) makes it illegal for the employer (or anyone else in the company) to read it. I'm just guessing, but the logical deduction would be that the notion of "obviously personal" also applies to a locked drawer in a desk you're the only one to use.

    For rented stuff like a flat, it's even more obvious, since there is a contract that stipulates you have exclusive use for it.

    I think the general rule is privacy overseeds property. But also I think those are the cases where the judge decides supposedly using his common sense.

  • (cs) in reply to GFK
    GFK:
    My name:
    Anonymous:
    synp:
    No, you have an expectation of privacy in the bathroom, and in the drawer. The drawer is there to store private stuff while you're in the office.

    This is not to say that the company can't open your desk, especially your old desk, and they don't need a warrant, but doing that is weird and requires justification.

    You may have an expectation of privacy but your expectations have no basis in reality. The simple fact of the matter is that your company own the drawer in your desk (sorry, their desk) and they are perfectly within their rights to open in whenever they want. I would expect a decent employer to respect their staff's privacy but it's not "weird" and it sure as hell doesn't require justification. Do you need to give me justification to open your fridge? Of course you don't, because it's your fridge.

    Bathrooms are a whole different subject that are covered by their own set of laws, for obvious reasons. You can't compare the shitter to your desk drawer and I have to wonder what the hell you've been doing in your drawer to come up with that comparison in the first place. On seconds thoughts, I really don't want to know...

    If I rent an apartment with furniture, can the landlord snoop in the closet or fridge in my apartment ? After all, he owns the stuff, so it is his fridge.

    I know that in France, putting [personal] in the subject of an email (or anything that obviously means personal) makes it illegal for the employer (or anyone else in the company) to read it. I'm just guessing, but the logical deduction would be that the notion of "obviously personal" also applies to a locked drawer in a desk you're the only one to use.

    For rented stuff like a flat, it's even more obvious, since there is a contract that stipulates you have exclusive use for it.

    I think the general rule is privacy overseeds property. But also I think those are the cases where the judge decides supposedly using his common sense.

    This type of privacy invasion turns on whether the intrusion was reasonable, so you are correct, the judge or jury will use their common sense to decide. There is no superceding going on, though. It is illegal to trespass (which includes touching anything that isn't yours without permission), and it is illegal to unreasonably intrude into someones privacy. If neither of those things happened, then the company is off the hook.

  • Iv (unregistered) in reply to Nagesh

    The part you are missing : sex is taboo in US

  • Iv (unregistered) in reply to Nagesh
    Nagesh:
    webrunner:
    Nagesh:
    I fail to get the WTF.

    I can't vouch for the "WT" but where the "F" comes in should be fairly clear.

    Perhaps my cultural ignorance is prventing me from getting the joke.

    The part you are missing is that sex is taboo in US and that everything that involves sex is funny and shameful.

  • Code Warrior Malo (unregistered) in reply to Mikoangelo
    Mikoangelo:
    I believe you meant:
    After spending fifteen minutes in the restroom,
    washing his hands
    , Alistair called Derek's manager, Isabelle.

    Thanks a lot Mikoangelo, you just made me spit coffee all over my desk! You sir, win some internets.

  • RELE (unregistered)

    So we have a situation where one nerd was concerned that a second nerd may be getting more than the other nerds. This despite the fact that the second nerd had to give it to himself to get it. So the first nerd decided to stick his nose in and give the second something he didn't want to get.

    P.S. if you give a s*** and got to here then this is hitting way too close to home. Thus the question is who do you identify with? NERD #1: corporate brown-noser NERD #2: pervert

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to OzPeter
    OzPeter:
    Given that Derek was still a current employee during the move, the WTF is that the IT people were breaking open his desk

    Seems a little odd that they would break open a desk, presumably destroying company property, when the person with the key was available. I can't imagine vandalizing company property before making a serious effort to find a way to get the task done without doing damage.

  • (cs) in reply to Iv
    Iv:
    Nagesh:
    webrunner:
    Nagesh:
    I fail to get the WTF.

    I can't vouch for the "WT" but where the "F" comes in should be fairly clear.

    Perhaps my cultural ignorance is prventing me from getting the joke.

    The part you are missing is that sex is taboo in US and that everything that involves sex is funny and shameful.

    That's just silly. Sex is beautiful and one should have as much of it as possible. If you're married, that is.

  • trwtf (unregistered) in reply to Jay
    Jay:
    OzPeter:
    Given that Derek was still a current employee during the move, the WTF is that the IT people were breaking open his desk

    Seems a little odd that they would break open a desk, presumably destroying company property, when the person with the key was available. I can't imagine vandalizing company property before making a serious effort to find a way to get the task done without doing damage.

    And how long should the moving crew stand around with their [tt]thumbs[/tt] up their [tt]noses[/tt] waiting for someone who couldn't be bothered to clean out his desk before a move, or even unlock it? Cheaper to trash the desk than to hold up the job.

    Time is money on this sort of job. I've seen walnut conference tables chainsawed to get them down a dump chute, because the cost of salvage was higher than the salvage value.

  • The English Gentleman (unregistered) in reply to Nagesh
    Nagesh:
    Iv:
    Nagesh:
    webrunner:
    Nagesh:
    I fail to get the WTF.

    I can't vouch for the "WT" but where the "F" comes in should be fairly clear.

    Perhaps my cultural ignorance is prventing me from getting the joke.

    The part you are missing is that sex is taboo in US and that everything that involves sex is funny and shameful.

    That's just silly. Sex is beautiful and one should have as much of it as possible. If you're married, that is.

    The funniest thing about this statement is that you probably mean it! Thank fuck we're not so backwards that we insist on marriage before sex, what a crock of shit.

  • (cs) in reply to My name
    My name:
    Anonymous:
    synp:
    No, you have an expectation of privacy in the bathroom, and in the drawer. The drawer is there to store private stuff while you're in the office.

    This is not to say that the company can't open your desk, especially your old desk, and they don't need a warrant, but doing that is weird and requires justification.

    You may have an expectation of privacy but your expectations have no basis in reality. The simple fact of the matter is that your company own the drawer in your desk (sorry, their desk) and they are perfectly within their rights to open in whenever they want. I would expect a decent employer to respect their staff's privacy but it's not "weird" and it sure as hell doesn't require justification. Do you need to give me justification to open your fridge? Of course you don't, because it's your fridge.

    Bathrooms are a whole different subject that are covered by their own set of laws, for obvious reasons. You can't compare the shitter to your desk drawer and I have to wonder what the hell you've been doing in your drawer to come up with that comparison in the first place. On seconds thoughts, I really don't want to know...

    If I rent an apartment with furniture, can the landlord snoop in the closet or fridge in my apartment ? After all, he owns the stuff, so it is his fridge.

    If he leased you the apartment, then he gave away his property rights to you for the term of the lease. Duh.

  • (cs) in reply to Random
    Random:
    Are you for real?

    Wasn't the SEALED bag as much his property as his coat? Would his coat become property of his company if he put it in his desk drawer? If someone store his wallet in his desk drawer, is it ok for his boss to take it and claim property of its content for the company?

    No. But on moving day, when all the old desks were getting thrown out, they could certainly clean out the old desks and open any containers so that they could dispose of the property within.

  • Max Guernsey, III (unregistered)

    Do you feel better yet?

  • (cs) in reply to The English Gentleman
    The English Gentleman:
    Nagesh:
    Iv:
    Nagesh:
    webrunner:
    Nagesh:
    I fail to get the WTF.

    I can't vouch for the "WT" but where the "F" comes in should be fairly clear.

    Perhaps my cultural ignorance is prventing me from getting the joke.

    The part you are missing is that sex is taboo in US and that everything that involves sex is funny and shameful.

    That's just silly. Sex is beautiful and one should have as much of it as possible. If you're married, that is.

    The funniest thing about this statement is that you probably mean it! Thank fuck we're not so backwards that we insist on marriage before sex, what a crock of shit.

    Nothing funny about it. Everyone has their own value system. Korea people love eat dogs. Do you? You like eating beef. I don't. Get the point, smartee pants?

  • supernaut (unregistered)

    When I hover my cursor over "turkey baster" the tooltip says "Click me". Well I did, and now there are unicorns all over my screen. Really. (I'm using Chrome).

    Captcha - delenit

    I tried delenit, but the Unicorn still did not disappear. I had to refresh the page.

  • supernaut (unregistered) in reply to supernaut

    Just read the source html on the article, and the programmer's comments are every funnier! Thanks for the laughs :)

  • (cs) in reply to Iv
    Iv:
    The part you are missing is that sex is taboo in US and that everything that involves sex is funny and shameful.
    TRWTF is that you keep calling it sex, even though the woman is inflatable.
  • (cs) in reply to GFK
    GFK:
    My name:
    Anonymous:
    synp:
    No, you have an expectation of privacy in the bathroom, and in the drawer. The drawer is there to store private stuff while you're in the office.

    This is not to say that the company can't open your desk, especially your old desk, and they don't need a warrant, but doing that is weird and requires justification.

    You may have an expectation of privacy but your expectations have no basis in reality. The simple fact of the matter is that your company own the drawer in your desk (sorry, their desk) and they are perfectly within their rights to open in whenever they want. I would expect a decent employer to respect their staff's privacy but it's not "weird" and it sure as hell doesn't require justification. Do you need to give me justification to open your fridge? Of course you don't, because it's your fridge.

    Bathrooms are a whole different subject that are covered by their own set of laws, for obvious reasons. You can't compare the shitter to your desk drawer and I have to wonder what the hell you've been doing in your drawer to come up with that comparison in the first place. On seconds thoughts, I really don't want to know...

    If I rent an apartment with furniture, can the landlord snoop in the closet or fridge in my apartment ? After all, he owns the stuff, so it is his fridge.

    I know that in France, putting [personal] in the subject of an email (or anything that obviously means personal) makes it illegal for the employer (or anyone else in the company) to read it. I'm just guessing, but the logical deduction would be that the notion of "obviously personal" also applies to a locked drawer in a desk you're the only one to use.

    For rented stuff like a flat, it's even more obvious, since there is a contract that stipulates you have exclusive use for it.

    I think the general rule is privacy overseeds property. But also I think those are the cases where the judge decides supposedly using his common sense.

    On the flip side, there was no reason to expect that there WAS anything personal in the drawer until it was opened. And even then, the bag could have held company property. There was no way of knowing until the drawer was open and the bag examined. And he definitely (well, based on the story) had enough notice to know that he should have cleared his desk beforehand.

  • (cs) in reply to Iv
    Iv:
    The part you are missing is that sex is taboo in US and that everything that involves sex is funny and shameful.

    Only if you're doing it right.

  • JTSandvik (unregistered)

    In Norway, employers get of trouble for snooping in email that seems private, and I would assume the same for an opaque plastic bag. Even when it was open, Alistair had a choice, be discreet, or tell the closest manager. When that didn't work, she/he kept telling, like a ten year old telling on its siblings. Damn, Alistair is certainly not the funny one at the office party!

  • Spike (unregistered)

    I call SHENANIGANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • ee (unregistered)

    The increasingly lame postings on this site are beginning to make me reconsider coming by here. Was the censoring supposed to be funny? Because all I got was obnoxious.

  • (cs) in reply to Severus
    Severus:
    I had to look up "turkey baster". And I realized that the uncensored version would have been much easier to read. Thanks, internet!

    I knew what it meant and I'm a horrible cook. Have microwave dinners really dumbed down our generation that much?

    The uncensored version would have been easy to read, but it wouldn't have been very funny, just a story about finding a dildo in an old desk. Since this is a humor website, they went for the version that was funny.

    Oh, and the word "internet" as you are using it is a proper noun, so it should be capitalized.

  • iMalc (unregistered) in reply to Joey Stink Eye Smiles
    Joey Stink Eye Smiles:
    TRWTF is that these geniuses didn't call Derek to open his fucking desk.
    Heh heh... good pun there.
  • John Boy (unregistered) in reply to Jason Ellis
    Jason Ellis:
    dildo:
    Nikonoel:
    Also, it makes it even harder to understand for non native english speakers. And less funny, even once I understood what it was all about.

    Everyone wants to be a policeman. Go be one, for fuck sake, if you want to, and quit policing what others type (goes for all sorts of media: blogs, email - you name it).

    My comment goes to site owner, and not to the author of the quote.

    Nah mate, you are.

    How so?

  • abigo (unregistered) in reply to trwtf
    trwtf:
    dildo:
    Nikonoel:
    Also, it makes it even harder to understand for non native english speakers. And less funny, even once I understood what it was all about.

    Everyone wants to be a policeman. Go be one, for fuck sake, if you want to, and quit policing what others type (goes for all sorts of media: blogs, email - you name it).

    My comment goes to site owner, and not to the author of the quote.

    THE "POLICING" WAS A JOKE. A JOKE. HUMOR MOTHERFUCKER, LOOK IT UP. Jesus tap-dancing Christ, this is supposed to be an intelligent profession.

    how's alex's ass taste? salty?

  • Dave (unregistered) in reply to anon
    anon:
    They also traced it back to one particular user who had a need to download several gigabytes (!) of documentaries in that month.

    They refused to tell me, however, what HR did with the guy, nor if he is willing to share his collection with his colleagues.

    I'd like to contrast this sort of thing with a place I used to work, which was pretty laid-back. Several guys there were pr0n-collectors, including one guy whose legendary collection consisted of the main lot of pr0n in his home office, the spare pr0n in the attic, and a load of emergency backup pr0n in the garage. He was The Man. We were in awe of him.

  • enim (unregistered) in reply to jverd
    jverd:
    dildo:
    Nikonoel:
    Also, it makes it even harder to understand for non native english speakers. And less funny, even once I understood what it was all about.

    Everyone wants to be a policeman. Go be one, for fuck sake, if you want to, and quit policing what others type (goes for all sorts of media: blogs, email - you name it).

    My comment goes to site owner, and not to the author of the quote.

    That's retarded. The owner wasn't policing anything. The "censorship" was done either as a joke, or, as he stated, as a courtesy to those readers could get in trouble at work or who would be unable to read it at work if it were left as is.

    Jebus, pay attention and grow up.

    CAPTCHA: appellatio -- "She performed

    appelatio
    on his
    banana
    while he
    plucked
    her
    peaches
    ."

    The censorship shouldn't have been done. Censoring is a behavior of an opinion of only a part of society. The message loses on value when it's changed. No one should give themselves a right to change it. You grow up, you fucking suck up.

  • esse (unregistered) in reply to Curious George
    Curious George:
    trwtf:
    dildo:
    Nikonoel:
    Also, it makes it even harder to understand for non native english speakers. And less funny, even once I understood what it was all about.

    Everyone wants to be a policeman. Go be one, for fuck sake, if you want to, and quit policing what others type (goes for all sorts of media: blogs, email - you name it).

    My comment goes to site owner, and not to the author of the quote.

    THE "POLICING" WAS A JOKE. A JOKE. HUMOR MOTHERFUCKER, LOOK IT UP. Jesus tap-dancing Christ, this is supposed to be an intelligent profession.
    +1

    George, you're kissing ass.

  • transverbero (unregistered) in reply to hoodaticus
    hoodaticus:
    dildo:
    Nikonoel:
    Also, it makes it even harder to understand for non native english speakers. And less funny, even once I understood what it was all about.

    Everyone wants to be a policeman. Go be one, for fuck sake, if you want to, and quit policing what others type (goes for all sorts of media: blogs, email - you name it).

    My comment goes to site owner, and not to the author of the quote.

    Watch your fucking fucked-up attitude you fucking fuck. They're not policing anything. They did it for the same mother-fucking reason that South Park is better live: it's funnier censored! It makes it seem even naughtier, because whenever something is ambiguous, it is human nature to plug in the worst possible explanation.

    Although, in this case, the worst possible explanation for each censored phrase is the correct one.

    Fuck you, motherfucker. That was uncalled for. Dick!

  • The 2-Belo (unregistered) in reply to mike
    mike:
    penalize

    HEY!!!

  • Onaka (unregistered)

    That's not courtesy... That's bullshit. All censorship is wrong and utterly indefensible, be it a blog post or a forum thread. It's not the person who uses explicit language that's wrong, it's the person who takes offense to it. At the very least provide a link to the original version of the post.

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous
    mike:
    please don't butcher the articles in the future.

    that was simply stupid.

    folks can read this after work if necessary.

    don't penalize the rest of us.

    surely Derek is the only only that wants to be penalized

  • Felipe (unregistered) in reply to trwtf

    Probably he is just North American.

  • only me (unregistered) in reply to biff
    biff:
    Ok. Granted that possessing such sex toys on company property and time IS unprofessional - as well as embarassing.... It should be one of those things that goes with out having to spell it out in the rule books...

    The problem is that for the company to permit or knowingly condone such to exist on the company premisis legally leaves the company open to charges of allowing a sexually opressive atmosphere for female workes... it falls into the same catagory as allowing men to have the naked playboy centerfold pix in their lockers....

    Under THAT premise, he would have already been gone in many companies. Thus avoiding all the possible reprecussions of the later porn down laoding incident.

    Glad I read all the comments before commenting myself because I thought the same thing. Most of the readers here are engineers, and I am not saying I always like HR or Legal, but there is the real WTF . All these people saying live and let live , have never been on the other end of a lawsuit.

  • jverd (unregistered) in reply to enim
    enim:
    jverd:
    dildo:
    Nikonoel:
    Also, it makes it even harder to understand for non native english speakers. And less funny, even once I understood what it was all about.

    Everyone wants to be a policeman. Go be one, for fuck sake, if you want to, and quit policing what others type (goes for all sorts of media: blogs, email - you name it).

    My comment goes to site owner, and not to the author of the quote.

    That's retarded. The owner wasn't policing anything. The "censorship" was done either as a joke, or, as he stated, as a courtesy to those readers could get in trouble at work or who would be unable to read it at work if it were left as is.

    Jebus, pay attention and grow up.

    CAPTCHA: appellatio -- "She performed

    appelatio
    on his
    banana
    while he
    plucked
    her
    peaches
    ."

    The censorship shouldn't have been done. Censoring is a behavior of an opinion of only a part of society. The message loses on value when it's changed. No one should give themselves a right to change it. You grow up, you fucking suck up.

    Bullshit.

    If it's my site, I decide what goes there. Period. You don't like, start your own site and post what you want.

    Also note that any post that's submitted is subject to editing for various reasons. That fact that he chose to replace certain words and phrases for humorous effect and/or to prevent his readers' employers from blocking the page completely is not censorship.

    So YOU grow up, you fucking simple-minded fucktard fuckity-fuck fuckerballs, and get over you petty indignation over something that doesn't matter and learn the difference between censorship and editing.

    Putz.

  • jverd (unregistered) in reply to Onaka
    Onaka:
    That's not courtesy... That's bullshit. All censorship is wrong and utterly indefensible, be it a blog post or a forum thread. It's not the person who uses explicit language that's wrong, it's the person who takes offense to it. At the very least provide a link to the original version of the post.

    There's a difference between censorship and editing, moron.

    And no, not all censorship is wrong. Even if this were censorship (which it's not), as the owner of the site, Alex has the right to decide what's acceptable and what's not. You don't like it, start your own site.

  • paratus (unregistered) in reply to jverd
    jverd:
    enim:
    jverd:
    dildo:
    Nikonoel:
    Also, it makes it even harder to understand for non native english speakers. And less funny, even once I understood what it was all about.

    Everyone wants to be a policeman. Go be one, for fuck sake, if you want to, and quit policing what others type (goes for all sorts of media: blogs, email - you name it).

    My comment goes to site owner, and not to the author of the quote.

    That's retarded. The owner wasn't policing anything. The "censorship" was done either as a joke, or, as he stated, as a courtesy to those readers could get in trouble at work or who would be unable to read it at work if it were left as is.

    Jebus, pay attention and grow up.

    CAPTCHA: appellatio -- "She performed

    appelatio
    on his
    banana
    while he
    plucked
    her
    peaches
    ."

    The censorship shouldn't have been done. Censoring is a behavior of an opinion of only a part of society. The message loses on value when it's changed. No one should give themselves a right to change it. You grow up, you fucking suck up.

    Bullshit.

    If it's my site, I decide what goes there. Period. You don't like, start your own site and post what you want.

    Also note that any post that's submitted is subject to editing for various reasons. That fact that he chose to replace certain words and phrases for humorous effect and/or to prevent his readers' employers from blocking the page completely is not censorship.

    So YOU grow up, you fucking simple-minded fucktard fuckity-fuck fuckerballs, and get over you petty indignation over something that doesn't matter and learn the difference between censorship and editing.

    Putz.

    you're a retard.

  • paratus (unregistered) in reply to jverd
    jverd:
    Onaka:
    That's not courtesy... That's bullshit. All censorship is wrong and utterly indefensible, be it a blog post or a forum thread. It's not the person who uses explicit language that's wrong, it's the person who takes offense to it. At the very least provide a link to the original version of the post.

    There's a difference between censorship and editing, moron.

    And no, not all censorship is wrong. Even if this were censorship (which it's not), as the owner of the site, Alex has the right to decide what's acceptable and what's not. You don't like it, start your own site.

    you're a retard. the stuff that comes out of your mouth uncalled for is so filthy that you'd barely be worth the spit that I'd gladly project to your face. go fuck yourself.

  • only me (unregistered) in reply to Onaka
    Onaka:
    That's not courtesy... That's bullshit. All censorship is wrong and utterly indefensible, be it a blog post or a forum thread. It's not the person who uses explicit language that's wrong, it's the person who takes offense to it. At the very least provide a link to the original version of the post.
    Hopefully I am not feeding a troll, but here goes:

    One persons freedom ends where another persons freedom begins. Or as Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.said: "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." Your freedom to spout whatever you wants ends at my freedom to not have to listen to it. That is why one cannot yell "Fire!" in a movie theatre.

    Besides, it was just funnier this way.

  • letatio (unregistered) in reply to only me
    only me:
    Onaka:
    That's not courtesy... That's bullshit. All censorship is wrong and utterly indefensible, be it a blog post or a forum thread. It's not the person who uses explicit language that's wrong, it's the person who takes offense to it. At the very least provide a link to the original version of the post.
    Hopefully I am not feeding a troll, but here goes:

    One persons freedom ends where another persons freedom begins. Or as Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.said: "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." Your freedom to spout whatever you wants ends at my freedom to not have to listen to it. That is why one cannot yell "Fire!" in a movie theatre.

    Besides, it was just funnier this way.

    Much funnier - muhahahah

  • The English Gentleman (unregistered) in reply to Nagesh
    Nagesh:
    The English Gentleman:
    Nagesh:
    Iv:
    Nagesh:
    webrunner:
    Nagesh:
    I fail to get the WTF.

    I can't vouch for the "WT" but where the "F" comes in should be fairly clear.

    Perhaps my cultural ignorance is prventing me from getting the joke.

    The part you are missing is that sex is taboo in US and that everything that involves sex is funny and shameful.

    That's just silly. Sex is beautiful and one should have as much of it as possible. If you're married, that is.

    The funniest thing about this statement is that you probably mean it! Thank fuck we're not so backwards that we insist on marriage before sex, what a crock of shit.

    Nothing funny about it. Everyone has their own value system. Korea people love eat dogs. Do you? You like eating beef. I don't. Get the point, smartee pants?

    I get the point Nagesh, you enjoy dog-meat and I enjoy casual sex. I'm perfectly happy with that! Hope you enjoy your dog-meat as much as I enjoy living in a society unmarred by religious and social dogma.

  • Arvind (unregistered)

    TRWTF is the censorship. It was hard to "decode" those replacements. Boring. Why don't you just mark NSFW on the link, so if someone is accessing the site from office, they don't click it.

  • Arvind (unregistered) in reply to The English Gentleman
    The English Gentleman:
    Nagesh:
    The English Gentleman:
    Nagesh:
    Iv:
    Nagesh:
    webrunner:
    Nagesh:
    I fail to get the WTF.

    I can't vouch for the "WT" but where the "F" comes in should be fairly clear.

    Perhaps my cultural ignorance is prventing me from getting the joke.

    The part you are missing is that sex is taboo in US and that everything that involves sex is funny and shameful.

    That's just silly. Sex is beautiful and one should have as much of it as possible. If you're married, that is.

    The funniest thing about this statement is that you probably mean it! Thank fuck we're not so backwards that we insist on marriage before sex, what a crock of shit.

    Nothing funny about it. Everyone has their own value system. Korea people love eat dogs. Do you? You like eating beef. I don't. Get the point, smartee pants?

    I get the point Nagesh, you enjoy dog-meat and I enjoy casual sex. I'm perfectly happy with that! Hope you enjoy your dog-meat as much as I enjoy living in a society unmarred by religious and social dogma.

    FYI That is racism. You have no reason to call your culture as being superior to some other culture. Grow up, kid. We don't all live in America.

Leave a comment on “Toying Around”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #336596:

« Return to Article