Difference between revisions of "Talk:Miscellany of Bender's Game"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (→Necessary?) |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Is the "lesbian fetish" point necessary? Isn't that more of a personal thing than general trivia?<small>-- the preceding unsigned comment was written by [[User:Mine-Me|Mine-Me]]{{#if:| before {{{2}}}|}}.</small> | Is the "lesbian fetish" point necessary? Isn't that more of a personal thing than general trivia?<small>-- the preceding unsigned comment was written by [[User:Mine-Me|Mine-Me]]{{#if:| before {{{2}}}|}}.</small> | ||
:I agree, I felt too it was a little over the top. Not because I am going to censor "bad words" (as I don't believe in censorship), but because it seems like a rather speculative and subjective thing. My thought was that the writers just wanted her seducing to take a step further, for the comedy value of it, rather than satisfying anything one sexually. In addition, to those of the fans who wanted it are probably a minority. But I doubt it was the writers' intend to satisfy them, and it is more a comedy feature. You know, ''humour''! --'''[[User:Svip|Svip]]'''<sup>[[User talk:Svip|Talk]]</sup> 20:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC) | :I agree, I felt too it was a little over the top. Not because I am going to censor "bad words" (as I don't believe in censorship), but because it seems like a rather speculative and subjective thing. My thought was that the writers just wanted her seducing to take a step further, for the comedy value of it, rather than satisfying anything one sexually. In addition, to those of the fans who wanted it are probably a minority. But I doubt it was the writers' intend to satisfy them, and it is more a comedy feature. You know, ''humour''! --'''[[User:Svip|Svip]]'''<sup>[[User talk:Svip|Talk]]</sup> 20:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC) | ||
::I believe it was Anarchy Balsac who put it up. We'll wait for his thoughts first I guess. Another wonder I had was the rumour point. I see how it's relevant, but I also don't think it is relevant (if that makes sense). -[[User:Mini-Me|Mini-Me]] 22:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:22, 6 November 2008
Necessary?
Is the "lesbian fetish" point necessary? Isn't that more of a personal thing than general trivia?-- the preceding unsigned comment was written by Mine-Me.
- I agree, I felt too it was a little over the top. Not because I am going to censor "bad words" (as I don't believe in censorship), but because it seems like a rather speculative and subjective thing. My thought was that the writers just wanted her seducing to take a step further, for the comedy value of it, rather than satisfying anything one sexually. In addition, to those of the fans who wanted it are probably a minority. But I doubt it was the writers' intend to satisfy them, and it is more a comedy feature. You know, humour! --SvipTalk 20:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- I believe it was Anarchy Balsac who put it up. We'll wait for his thoughts first I guess. Another wonder I had was the rumour point. I see how it's relevant, but I also don't think it is relevant (if that makes sense). -Mini-Me 22:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC)