This mean that the rules as stated are incorrect, as #3 refers only to posted pictures, not links: https://camaroforums.com/forum/useless-posts-36/rules-cf-509/
I'm not in the habit of posting pornographic links, so I'm not too concerned about it myself. The way the current rule is written doesn't create a "loophole", it leaves a gray area. If links are included in the prohibited list, it should say so.

 

I don't find it necessary to be posting ANYthing that's NSFW. I thought this was a Camaro forum, not a **** forum. Look at that stuff on your own and at your own leisure. Don't go around posting it. That's just my opinion...

 

I think you're splitting hairs a little bit 69, even though you are technically correct.

While I, personally, was NOT offended by the booby skydiving commercial, it doesn't take much common sense to figure out that it's not really family friendly material.

But I've tried to exploit "gray areas" on here before. I remember I got in a debate one time with specky poo about how you're allowed to see partially see-through clothing on females on public broadcast TV. Like if watch the Oscars or MTV movie awards or whatever, there's usually some chick with a dress with her nipples showing through - and it gets past censors. You can SEE her *****, but for some reason it's okay (and awesome). So I posted up a red carpet pic of one of those chicks and specky gave me a whippin' for it. But I understand. No boobies allowed - a little kid might get traumatized if he sees any.

 

I think we are going to be changing the language of that rule to clearly define links as well because even I felt it was questionable so I left the thread in tact, clearly noting if any complaints were made it would be removed.