Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:21:00
Pussies
Recieved in email, regarding the quite benign (although nude) pictures of my beautiful wife:
Please be advised that we have recently received reports that inappropriate content has been posted to your Picasa Web Albums account. One or more photos displayed in your gallery violates our Program Policies and has been removed.
Our Policies state that images displayed on picasaweb.google.com cannot contain obscenity, pornography, promotions of hate, incitement of violence, or spam, malicious code, or viruses. Please note that if you continue to violate these Program Policies, we may suspend your Picasa Web Albums account.
To read more about our Program Policies and Terms of Service, please visit http://picasa.google.com/web/policy.html
Thank you for your cooperation.
Almost two years those pics just sat there and not a word was said by anyone. I post the link here recently and like magic...Google yanks ‘em. So who’s the little pussy piece of shit that complained? Gotta love the anonymous internet coward.
Posted by JimK at 01:21 PM on September 10, 2007
Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email to a friend |
Categories: Personal
Tags:
Comments:
#2 Posted by working_man 
on 09/10 at 03:20 PM -
definitions aside, this is just plain wrong. Neither of those two words applied in this case. Prolly one of the liberal douchebags that has been punted from one of your websites, thinking they were being oh so clever.
So, where you gonna rehost those.....?
:-)
#3 Posted by Drumwaster on 09/10 at 03:54 PM -
I’ve got some space on my server… If you throw in a few vidclips…
{wiping away drool}
#5 Posted by jo-jo on 09/10 at 05:04 PM -
Prolly one of the liberal douchebags that has been punted from one of your websites, thinking they were being oh so clever.
i know what you were getting at with that comment, but when i first read it, i was wondering how the liberals got the rep of being anti-nudity ;) then i realized you meant it was retaliation.
was confused ;)
#7 Posted by Drumwaster on 09/10 at 06:19 PM -
it was retaliation.
Probably by one of the same people who thought Mapplethorpe was being “brave” by posting a picture of himself with a bullwhip stuck up his ass…
#8 Posted by JimK on 09/10 at 06:59 PM -
If you throw in a few vidclips…
You know what’s scary? We made a video once, years and years ago, and I don’t know where it is.
#9 Posted by Rann Aridorn on 09/10 at 07:34 PM -
You know what’s scary? We made a video once, years and years ago, and I don’t know where it is.
I didn’t do it, nobody saw me do it, you can’t prove anything.
#10 Posted by dakrat on 09/10 at 08:20 PM -
Prolly one of the liberal douchebags that has been punted from one of your websites, thinking they were being oh so clever.
My thoughts exactly.
#11 Posted by Capmeister on 09/10 at 11:02 PM -
If you need me to keep nude pics of your wife...I mean, I can.
On my server.
Heh. :-D
#12 Posted by Harley W Daugherty on 09/10 at 11:41 PM -
high resolution pics next time dude.......
#14 Posted by JimK on 09/12 at 03:40 AM -
I cannot imagine what makes you people think I would post nakes of my old lady
RSS (Subscribe)
Tip jars (Donate today!)
#1 Posted by ErikTheRed
on 09/10 at 02:58 PM -
Obscenity or pornography? Interesting that they don’t bother to define those words. Even the U.S. Supreme Court doesn’t want to touch that one with a ... err… pole. If they want to set boundaries, they should lay out (heh heh) some definitions of what can and can’t be shown. Anyone who has worked with models (well, models that aren’t so stupid / drugged out that they don’t care what they sign) knows that there are plenty of extremely specific methods of describing what exactly can wind up in a picture. It’s not exactly rocket science.