KlovodJoin Date: 2012-07-10
Post Count: 4157 |
ROBLOX is a place on the internet where you build and share your creations with your friends. Secondly, the catalog (Shirts, T-Shirts, and Pants) is 70% female clothing. You guys have uploaded br4s and th0ngs. But now you want "shading?" Are you serious? Drawing female assets aren't prohibited on ROBLOX. ROBLOX is ages 8 - 16 and I am absolutely sure that we do not need underage sexuaIized kids.
So lets say ROBLOX allows "female shading." Do you realize how many trolls would come into the game? Are you seriously so obsessed with shading even though you have lots of normal clothing you can wear on your blocky char actor.
The 1.0 package is blocky and ROBLOX intended it to be a blocky person in the first place. ROBLOX isn't trying to create an exact resemblance of a human being. So just stop.
You can dress however you want in reality but this website is owned by ROBLOX and when you make an account on ROBLOX.com you automatically agree to ROBLOX's terms, conditions, and rules. If ROBLOX isn't comfortable with female shading then that is how it is.
Rioting on the forums won't change their minds. Believe it or not, ROBLOX can terminate your account for whatever reason they want, even if you're innocent. At the end of the day you can't go to court with ROBLOX so please, shut up.
Son of the OT god. ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°) |
|
|
The 1.0 package explains why i hate 3.0
3.0 is just too real
2.0 was fine i guess
was like a barbie but
3.0 is just
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVbQo3IOC_A [The happy hotdog man of RPF and VGF.] |
|
KlovodJoin Date: 2012-07-10
Post Count: 4157 |
That's completely different.
If you're talking about how ROBLOX isn't trying to create an exact resemblance of a human being then don't try to be a smartass by posting links to the 3.0 packages.
If ROBLOX was trying to create a human realistic package then why doesn't the female package have shading? Exactly. Shading is inappropriate for ROBLOX and it will stay that way.
Son of the OT god. ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°) |
|
|
well i just said that since you said something about 1.0 being blocky and dats guud n stuffs
and doesnt the 3.0 body have breasteses
dunno
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVbQo3IOC_A [The happy hotdog man of RPF and VGF.] |
|
|
1) "Roblox is for ages 8-16" that's literally when all women start getting their feminine features. honestly. there is nothing wrong with wanting to have that in a game. its only s3xualized because you make it that way.
2) trolls abuse everything. who the hell cares. they can go around wearing speedos and nobody complains. this is a pathetic argument.
3) just because an underage kid walks around with breasts doesn't mean you s3xualize it, pervert.
4) they already banned both types of shading, so it doesn't really matter.
5) respond to the actual post, don't go in the forums and make a new post just about your pathetic opinions.
|
|
KlovodJoin Date: 2012-07-10
Post Count: 4157 |
That's literally when all women start getting their feminine features. honestly. there is nothing wrong with wanting to have that in a game. its only s3xualized because you make it that way.
That's actually completely wrong. ROBLOX does not want female br3asts on their game because it is inappropriate and it doesn't matter weather it is natural inside humans or not. ROBLOX is a youth game meaning it just wants semi-human looking avatars that do not have br3asts. ROBLOX isn't a democracy where you can riot and vote to get what you want. ROBLOX is owned by David Baszucki and he doesn't want this on the site. You can't force him to do what you guys want just because of "Female rights" if you want female rights then go play IMVU or other teen games like that because this won't happen on ROBLOX.
"trolls abuse everything. who the hell cares. they can go around wearing speedos and nobody complains. this is a pathetic argument."
A lot of people care if trolls are willing to get a laugh by going into games and s3xuaIzing females. I don't appriciate how you don't think about younger audiences in ROBLOX. Parents that have kids that are 6 - 10 years old obiviously don't want human s3.x organs on the game, it's as simple as that. If ROBLOX was a teen game then shading would be allowed but ROBLOX is a game for youth and it's going to stay that way. You can't enforce ROBLOX to do what you want just because you feel that it's right or you feel that this is real life.
"just because an underage kid walks around with breasts doesn't mean you s3xualize it, pervert."
You must have NO common sense whatsoever if you can't think about what the negative outcome will be if ROBLOX allowed female shading in their game. Kids play ROBLOX and kids are completely fine with semi-human looking avatars without these parts. If ROBLOX allowed female shading then should ROBLOX allow camle toes or men's b0n3r buldge to go with it? No, don't try to think that this isn't a normal thing because ANYONE and I mean ANYONE can go into game, make their avatar naked, wear the female shading, then go into games walking around with children having to see this.
"they already banned both types of shading, so it doesn't really matter. "
The only men's shading that I am aware of is the muscles. ROBLOX isn't sexist so don't try to bring this into the argument to make your point valid and try to think that ROBLOX is against females. This is absolutely childish and it isn't needed. Females upload the clothing they want and men upload the clothing they want, it's completely fair. As I have stated before, Shirts, T-Shirts, and Pants are 30% male and 70% female, if you think that I'm making this up then go make your research and see for yourself.
"respond to the actual post, don't go in the forums and make a new post just about your pathetic opinions."
I actually did respond to the post and I got no reply to my post. Making a thread with a long wall of text that actually is relevant to the questions and that actually has common sense (unlike you) will ACTUALLY change some people's minds and calm them down.
One more thing, if you are going to assume more stuff like you did then good luck trying to make a valid point against me.
Son of the OT god. ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°) |
|
SkebbyJoin Date: 2013-12-30
Post Count: 3165 |
I will not read that giant wall of posts.
One thing you need to know: Feminism. |
|
KlovodJoin Date: 2012-07-10
Post Count: 4157 |
Here's a td;lr edit for you.
ROBLOX doesn't want this on their site.
Son of the OT god. ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°) |
|
|
FEMALE BREASTS ARE NOT S3XUAL ORGANS AND ARE PARTS THAT SHOULD NOT BE S3XUALIZED AND THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH HAVING CHILDREN SEE BREASTS ON A VIDEO GAME BECAUSE GOD FORBID THEIR TINY LITTLE 8 YR OLD PPS WILL GET HARD JESUS CHRIST |
|
marzipaanJoin Date: 2008-08-12
Post Count: 865 |
why are you even here? posting your whining in this subsection is just spam. You're so heated over nothing that it's ridiculous. It's banned, you got what you wanted. Don't post these just to start pointless debates damn |
|
SkebbyJoin Date: 2013-12-30
Post Count: 3165 |
k
Sounds good.
|
|
g00tJoin Date: 2012-10-22
Post Count: 845 |
I wonder why starpower wants the little 8 yr olds to see it so much
|
|
KlovodJoin Date: 2012-07-10
Post Count: 4157 |
"FEMALE BREASTS ARE NOT S3XUAL ORGANS AND ARE PARTS THAT SHOULD NOT BE S3XUALIZED AND THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH HAVING CHILDREN SEE BREASTS ON A VIDEO GAME BECAUSE GOD FORBID THEIR TINY LITTLE 8 YR OLD PPS WILL GET HARD JESUS CHRIST"
Actually, if you had just thought about this idea maybe you would understand what I am saying. Just because humans have those things that doesn't mean they have to be shown. When children see women in br4s or whatever, they don't care because they are children and they barley notice. When children see this stuff on an online game, this makes them question a lot of stuff and this could lead to mental problems that they would have to deal with. Children aren't ready to "experience" this kind of "stuff" so please stop using capslock-rage because it won't make your point more valid.
"why are you even here? posting your whining in this subsection is just spam. You're so heated over nothing that it's ridiculous. It's banned, you got what you wanted. Don't post these just to start pointless debates damn"
Ok first off, if you are questioning why I am here then you are beyond stupid. I am here for an obvious reason and I don't think that I need to explain that. Secondly, it's not ridiculous because some people actually think their point is valid so I will debate my own points and the factors of the topic to them so they and I can evaluate why this isn't a good thing (for ROBLOX).
Son of the OT god. ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°) |
|
marzipaanJoin Date: 2008-08-12
Post Count: 865 |
lol did u just say kids seeing shading online would give them mental issues
Yes, I'm questioning why you're here. That was clearly stated because S&I is for suggestions and ideas for ROBLOX. You know, ideas that can improve the site. I don't know just how dense one person can be to confuse that with sharing their rants and undesired opinions. |
|
KlovodJoin Date: 2012-07-10
Post Count: 4157 |
Someone made a post about female shading and how ROBLOX should allow it.
I made a post about how you guys don't understand and how a lot of negative outcomes can come from this.
I have seen a various amount of people buying the female shading and going into the forum and making inappropriate threads saying "sp4nk me daddy!" if that's not inappropriate then I don't know what is.
Son of the OT god. ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°) |
|
KlovodJoin Date: 2012-07-10
Post Count: 4157 |
This thread is a replying thread and before you ask why I didn't just make a reply then try reading my previous posts.
Also this thread is not just a suggestion, but a fact because ROBLOX doesn't want this.
Son of the OT god. ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°) |
|
marzipaanJoin Date: 2008-08-12
Post Count: 865 |
Yes, the first one was an IDEA. Albeit, a bad one. And what makes you so self-proclaimed that you automatically infer that you have superior knowledge over all of this? Differing opinions doesn't mean one is either right or wrong.
this is a gray matter and i can see valid points from both sides. but it's already been removed, and your post is still spam. it's not your job to "educate" anyone about this issue. we all have thinking processes of our own |
|
SkebbyJoin Date: 2013-12-30
Post Count: 3165 |
merry12 = overreactive feminist
op = has technically fine post |
|
KlovodJoin Date: 2012-07-10
Post Count: 4157 |
"We all have thinking processes of our own"
Oh boy, how great it would be if people actually used those thinking processes.
When ROBLOX CD's the female shading T-Shirts, people obviously didn't get the message ROBLOX was trying to send out so I did ROBLOX's job by explaining this to the community in a nice and fashioned way without any harsh criticism.
Another thing is that my thread isn't an opinion, it's a fact because I am explaining the reason ROBLOX doesn't allow this and what ROBLOX should be.
Just because ROBLOX doesn't allow female shading that doesn't mean talking about it is irrelevant, there is a huge post saying that ROBLOX should allow it and it's a wildfire over there. I have decided to take that into my own hands and make a reply to the thread but it didn't go well because no one responded to me. So after that I made this thread about why ROBLOX doesn't female shading and because I did this, people are noticing me and my fact is spreading slowly.
If ROBLOX were to be a teen game then I would be completely fine with shading but ROBLOX is a kids game and we can't have this.
Son of the OT god. ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°) |
|
KotawlJoin Date: 2013-06-22
Post Count: 23595 |
roblox doesn't allow camel toe that's a good thing |
|
KlovodJoin Date: 2012-07-10
Post Count: 4157 |
Bump5
Son of the OT god. ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°) |
|
|
Omg you desverve a cookie
Prove those Feminists wrong
|
|
marzipaanJoin Date: 2008-08-12
Post Count: 865 |
@skebby
how can you conclude i'm a feminist if i haven't even shared my personal opinion lol
@klovod
"Another thing is that my thread isn't an opinion, it's a fact because I am explaining the reason ROBLOX doesn't allow this and what ROBLOX should be."
Very minimally. You ended your thread with "so please, shut up". And yet you think you're doing us all a favor. No, it's not fact. You made inferences on why ROBLOX might have gotten rid of shading. That doesn't translate into fact.
You're not inclined to do ROBLOX's job. Nor do they have to explain something that's pretty straight-forward. You still don't get the difference between this post and the other one, so looks like I have to simplify this for you.
other thread = suggestion that ROBLOX brings it back
this thread = self-righteous guy explains why it was banned
see how one of them is irrelevant to this sub-section?
i see your point, i do and i don't agree with shading either but there's already one mini-war going on and you don't need to start a separate thread just to be heard. this whole thread is just reeking of desperation to be acknowledged
|
|
|
No, this post is specifically made to attack the main post by someone who thinks theyre so self righteous and thinks they know about this issue when rlly ur just a pretentious bigot and theres nothing more to it tbh |
|
KlovodJoin Date: 2012-07-10
Post Count: 4157 |
What I like about your posts is that you you try and say that just because I am not in authority, I can't state facts. My entire post proves that it's a facts because the mods deleted the T-Shirts because it was appropriate for a kids site and it shouldn't be up there.
And no, I didn't end my thread with "so please, shut up" so don't put words in my mouth also I never said I was doing you all a favor, I said that I was explaining why ROBLOX doesn't allow female shading, I even gave my post good reason yet you still decide to argue through all this and I knock you down with your facts and you try to crawl back up thinking that you will have a valid point to fight against me.
I'm never said I was inclined to do ROBLOX's job, you did by assuming that I was trying to do that just because I was sharing my thought and my thought is on point and it is a valid fact. ROBLOX Administrators make this a kids site and they are not comfortable with those kinds of shading.
The other thread was a suggestion and it was a debate on how ROBLOX's moderation wasn't fair and how female shading is supposed to be allowed. The OP of that thread was also stating that it was somehow discriminatory to females even though it was completely inappropriate.
My thread was explaining why ROBLOX doesn't allow female shading and I was explaining this from the administrators point of view. It's their site and they can do whatever they want. They also had good reason for this. The female outline consists of br3asts outlined. If you upload a decal of drawn female br3asts then does ROBLOX allow it into their site? No they don't so don't act all innocent and think that ROBLOX is against females or whatever.
My thread isn't irrelevant to the sub-section because like I have stated before, this thread is replying to another thread. I already have replied to the OP thread but I got no response. So I made this thread in reply to it. This forum is where the debate is happening so why would I put this in another forum like RT, OT, or ATR? This thread isn't relevant to those communities and I would most likely get confused responses or trolls.
Son of the OT god. ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°) |
|