On 2016-10-28 19:45:34 Anzhelina said:
they didnt get any possitive feed back from esa..
By that do you mean they didn't get their way immediately so the only possible recourse was to break the site rules and bring it out in the open? I am not sorry they did but I am just trying to be fair and see both sides. I DO think the rule is dumb as I indicated on the thread. At the same time I do feel ESA needs to be consistent.
On 2016-10-28 19:45:34 Anzhelina said:
Humour me...
Whats gonna be next?
1: no lips in ur photos if u dont do Owo
2; no face fotos if u dont do facial cumshots..
Just how far is this gonna go.
That is a completely specious argument. They HAVEN'T banned photos of lips. They HAVEN'T banned photos of faces.
Your logic, taken to it's extreme, works like this.
The law prevents me from killing people or driving to fast. When is the law's control over my life going to end? Will they stop me drinking water when I am thirsty? Will they force me to eat my sandwiches with the crust on instead of cutting them off?
This is what is known as a "false equivalency" and sorry, but your logic just doesn't pan out the way you think it does. "What if" is one of the silliest ways to defend your point.