you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Ehhhhhh 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

That's what I noticed about the article. Like, what's the point of taking pics like that? Women can have zero pantylines without going pantiless, so it's not 100% proof that they are even naked underneath.

Like, do whatever you want. Wear drawers or not.

Weird article.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

OH, I think u/HongKongPhooey gets paid for your click thorughs to their website. So you could just go hang out in the comment section of the shitties websites on the planet. But then u/HongKongPhooey wouldn't get paid for wiping feces all over the front page of saddit, and making the world a dumber, worse place, filled with low brow cretins. Oh, and fuck you for caring. You can't down vote this off the front page. Fuck you twice again. And fuck your mom. Saddit admin's hate you. Wish for you to consume trash, and they hate their own site.

Come again soon to have shit wiped in your eyes sockets.

(A) lol. You're account is an admin account. Whatever!

[–]Ehhhhhh 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

As a content admin, I just look for spammy spam or other blatant violations.

This is like clickbait spam. It's technically an article and isn't like hawking panties or anything. One could argue that dailymail is altogether spam but I'd prob let a more active admin make that call.

[–]Godknight 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I prefer the term "freedom of speech".