Monday, July 12, 2004, 2:32:21 PM, Dennis wrote: DH> Quoting Plan9 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> But it's not a fair rule since many of use have not been featured >> on the front of a magazine. It creates an elite group that excludes >> the rest of us (discrimination).
DH> Well, let's think about this... There is always the police mug DH> shots and wanted posters, driver's license and other DH> identification images, image captures from incriminating videos DH> (minus the incriminating bit, of course), and other sources. DH> Of course, we'll need a rule regarding a limit to how much an DH> image can be retouched--wrinkles removed, facial hair added, and DH> so forth. You missed the point completely by not quoting enough of the message. My reply was to an e-mail from Thomas F. where he said in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TF> "If anybody has been featured on a magazine cover, then this magazine TF> cover or the picture of the Rogue taken for that cover, is admissable TF> regardless of whether the face can be seen, as long as it is not an TF> "adult" magazine." So, the famous (by now) Melissa is not an TF> exception but conforms to the rule. "Whether or not the face is shown!!!" that was the point that I was trying to show was unfair. Not where a photo of a face originated. -- Regards, Plan9 Two strings walk into a bar. The first string says to the bartender: "Bartender, I'll have a beer. u.5n$x5t?*&4ru!2[sACC~ErJ". The second string says: "Pardon my friend, he isn't NULL terminated". ________________________________________________________ Current beta is v2.12 RC/4 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
