Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • You were officially warned for what actually? Showing an image of bare breasts? Mentioning Playboy? Not having an image of a man for the women in the audience?

    I wonder what's next. Not inviting Larry to give a keynote because he might mention something that some Muslims or atheists take offence of?

    I bet if you had shown pictures of guns, and talked about screen scraping the NRA website, noone would have complained, and you wouldn't have had a reason to post your note.

    • by Alias (5735) on 2006.12.22 18:48 (#52470) Homepage Journal
      The official warning was for "inappropriate content". By which they mostly meant the image.

      I don't think it is necesary to apologise merely for causing offense to somebody or some subset of the audience. You will always offend someone no matter what you say.

      And an apology to those people are not necesary.

      However, as I said, for some people it caused more of a problem that just mere offense. And I feel an apology to those people IS required.