Well, FWIW, I didn't particularly appreciate the image from PhotoSig. I now know that you were trying to make a point, but I think it could have been made in a slightly more sensitive way than, without warning, showing an image of a penis being fondled.
I've got a pretty thick skin about these things, but that was just offensive. I was going to leave it alone (no joke intended), but since it was brought up, I don't blame Mike for being upset by it. Maybe the thread should have been changed to "Warning, offensive photo" or "Don't let your children see this!" or something like that. Or maybe the link to the image just shouldn't have been there. But, I know the way things are, and I'm prepared to let bygones be bygones... cheers, frank Caveman wrote: > I acknowledge that too. > > The incident was an unfortunate misunderstanding. I really had no > intention to mislead people or to insult Mike. > > Looking back at it, I should have changed the thread's Subject into > "PhotoSIG" or something, so it doesn't get confused by mistake with the > site that Mike was actually recommending. > > I'm sorry for that. > > caveman -- "Honour - that virtue of the unjust!" -Albert Camus
