Quote from: redsn0w on April 12, 2015, 10:17:27 AM

Quote from: Grand_Voyageur on April 12, 2015, 09:44:09 AM

Quote from: redsn0w on April 12, 2015, 09:20:27 AM

Quote from: Grand_Voyageur on April 12, 2015, 09:15:28 AM

Quote from: theymos on April 12, 2015, 08:34:54 AM

...

...

He can simple use ad block plus or similar to hide the view of a specific avatar, if there is only an "user complaint". I think theymos should receive a lot of "complaint" by the community and after he can 'act' but now it seems there is not the case.

Sorry, but i don't see only 1 user complaint at least after re-reading the last 3 pages. I see a few more. However, I think that following the re-introduction of avatars some users are simply trying to test how much extreme/illegal/objectionable/etc images are allowed to stay.
Personally, I would like a clear boundary set by admins and put among the sticky rules.

The community majority should disapprove that avatar not one or only few users, however the solution to that problem has been given *adblock*, insert the link of the user avatar in the filter, confirm and reload the page... et voila! The censorship is not a good thing and there is always a "second way" to resolve the problem.

I may agree with you that having to resort to censorship is at best a failure; however, i think we really need a better explanation of what a NSFL image is. Adblock could be a nice & wonderful ad-hoc temporary solution to de-escalate the whole issue but this would not explain what a NSFL image is. Otherwise, we'll see similar avatar & complaint thread popping up everyday with ever worse images & moods. As marcotheminer said before: Here we go again..
Just my 2 satoshi, however.