Misery/Curly Image

I heard that THIS image was removed from the forums, TWICE. I have one question to ask: why? What is wrong with this image? This is not dirty in any way. Does this go against the forum rules? (Someone correct me if I'm wrong...)

I for one believe this image was unfairly removed, and I don't agree with its removal. If images such as the following are allowed to stay on the site:
http://www.cavestory.org/forums/posts/21403/
http://www.cavestory.org/forums/posts/68171/

Then why not the one above?


In conclusion, please vote for whether or not you find the image:

-Abides by the forum rules

This is somewhat of a petition....

(also, sorry to onlineworms if the two images i linked get removed from the forums...)



EDIT: Judgement was passed on the image of Curly and Misery in swimsuits. The other two images in the links were deemed to be against the rules.

 

I vote that the image was indeed unfairly removed.

 

Bah, I'm BACK!

http://www.cavestory.org/forums/posts/21403/

This one looks like it was buried.
I think it slipped through, like Boot's always posting in Red.
Now it'll probably be fixed, though...

http://www.cavestory.org/forums/posts/68171/

Yeah, it's clean, for 30 seconds.
I doubt the Admins stared at this picture long enough to see it turned into the dirty one again. {I didn't even see it until you linked it...}
Another one slipped through the cracks...

In conclusion, please vote for whether or not you find the image:

-Abides by the forum rules

Of course it doesn't.
How the hell is it suitable for a "Family Audience"....

 

http://www.cavestory.org/forums/posts/21403/
http://www.cavestory.org/forums/posts/68171/

Fixed.

(also, sorry to onlineworms if the two images i linked get removed from the forums...)

Nah! I just made them links.

 

*Shrug*

Since they're links, they can have spoiler tags on them, now. Right?
{Since pictures can't}

Still, why do we even need pictures like these in the first place? It's a forum...

 

Still, why do we even need pictures like these in the first place? It's a forum...

Why did you post a question, and then answer it right after? You just answered it, jeez Lowell....

 

There is a reason Rule 34 was formulated.

 

Eh...

Why did you post a question, and then answer it right after? You just answered it, jeez Lowell....

That was because I was asking everyone, and offering what I thought...

There is a reason Rule 34 was formulated.

One place to keep all of the dirt.

 

Still, why do we even need pictures like these in the first place? It's a forum...

Why not? This forum talks about other things than Cave Story too.
Plus strictly speaking it's fan art.

 

One place to keep all of the dirt.

If by "one place", you mean "Teh Interwebz", then yeah, that's the point. And "dirt"? Well, eye of the beholder, I guess. Although, Calvin and Hobbes...?

 

Yes, yes..

Why not? This forum talks about other things than Cave Story too.
Plus strictly speaking it's fan art.

Yeah, this has been pointed out several times already, but the rules still say:
"Family Audience"
And the question of this thread is wither that picture holds up to that or not...
I don't see how it can.

If by "one place", you mean "Teh Interwebz", then yeah, that's the point. And "dirt"? Well, eye of the beholder, I guess. Although, Calvin and Hobbes...?

They're called "Dirty" pictures, right?
Anyways, I meant that there's already a place for that picture, why bring it into the forums?

 

Although, Calvin and Hobbes...?

Please, just don't even bring up the calvin and hobbes rule 34. That's just wrong, oh so very wrong.

 

Yeah, this has been pointed out several times already, but the rules still say:
"Family Audience"
And the question of this thread is wither that picture holds up to that or not...
I don't see how it can.

The same way beaches are family friendly.

They're called "Dirty" pictures, right?
Anyways, I meant that there's already a place for that picture, why bring it into the forums?

Because they're on topic? Because fellow forumers might like them? I mean, I'm too against propagating sex at unnecessary levels, but you're IMO going too far in the opposite direction...

Please, just don't even bring up the calvin and hobbes rule 34. That's just wrong, oh so very wrong.

Exactly! Calvin and Hobbes Rule 34 is the wrongest thing ever and every its creator should go to Hell and be sat on by Satan!

 

Listen

The same way beaches are family friendly.

Why hide behind something?
There's nothing that can really be done about that, but there are rules here, ones that we can follow....

Because they're on topic? Because fellow forumers might like them? I mean, I'm too against propagating sex at unnecessary levels, but you're IMO going too far in the opposite direction...

Or, I'd like to have a clean Forum, one to be proud of, and not have dirty pictures all over the place.
Still, it's in the rules. I'm just pointing it out for you guys...

 

Why hide behind something?
There's nothing that can really be done about that, but there are rules here, ones that we can follow....

Or, I'd like to have a clean Forum, one to be proud of, and not have dirty pictures all over the place.
Still, it's in the rules. I'm just pointing it out for you guys...

*sigh* Okay, let me put it this way: Whether something is dirty or not often depends on the viewer's customs. Someone may only call "dirty" pictures with explicit genitalia, others might dislike even bare belly. Just that you don't say I'm hiding behind words: I don't think that pictures of Curly and Misery in swimsuits are dirty. More revealing than I would like, maybe, but definitely not offensive.

 

Huh.

So, we should be asking Shirofan, yeah?
He made the rule, after all O.o;

 

So, we should be asking Shirofan, yeah?
He made the rule, after all O.o;

Yeah, why not? He should've been more specific.

 

Also, keep in mind that Pixel himself put "Curly's panties" as an obtainable object, which although less graphic, is much more suggestive in the concept itself. I'd say it's way more suggestive than the picture of curly and misery, since they're just in bikinis.

 

*Shrug*

Also, keep in mind that Pixel himself put "Curly's panties" as an obtainable object, which although less graphic, is much more suggestive in the concept itself. I'd say it's way more suggestive than the picture of curly and misery, since they're just in bikinis.

Eh, I'd think an article of clothing is in completely in the other direction.
I mean, someone made a "Cute" picture-scene thingy out of that, and it's no where near "Dirty" or anything...
Besides, wouldn't that make every Wal-Mart and clothing story in the world "Dirty"?
Still, we should ask Shiro. Problem is, who's going to ask him?
I don't think he'd like it if he got 53 emails for the same thing.... {Saying we all asked him, without knowing the other did}
;

 

Eh, I'd think an article of clothing is in completely in the other direction.
I mean, someone made a "Cute" picture-scene thingy out of that, and it's no where near "Dirty" or anything...
Besides, wouldn't that make every Wal-Mart and clothing story in the world "Dirty"?
Still, we should ask Shiro. Problem is, who's going to ask him?
I don't think he'd like it if he got 53 emails for the same thing.... {Saying we all asked him, without knowing the other did}
;

You're missing the point. It's not the panties themselves that are dirty, but the fact that in the game, you can actively seek them out and "steal" them. They serve no use for gameplay, and are just more or less fanservice. Stealing panties is what's suggestive, not underwear itself.