Re: User_talk:Throbbing_Monster_Cock
You requested I respond to you here. Attached is a duplicate of my response copied from my talk page.
- I'm always leery when someone implies that we suffer from too much freedom, when in fact we spend our labor in an atmosphere dreadfully short of that nourishing quality. Nonetheless, there can still be discussion regarding my chosen name.
- David is willing to credit my name as being a “clever double-entendre”, but that is likely crediting me too much. It isn’t particularly clever (as perhaps le coq géant might have been) and only an elaborate image can produce a different interpretation than springs to mind for most Anglo readers. Whether or not this is a punishable offense, I suppose, will lie in the hearts of fellow wikipedians.
- I cannot see the plea that I should be removed to “protect the children” as one that should be given serious credence. My name consists of three words, each of which would be perfectly acceptable in a children’s dictionary. Any supposed inappropriate meaning for those words comes only from the mind of the reader, and not from any inducement that I have placed on this site.
- If wikipedia is intended to be a learning resource for “small children”, as is proposed above, then I maintain there is already a critical need for the swift hand of the censor to strike fiercely. I ask you, which of the following pages would you least want to explain to your inquisitive eight-year-old:
Sigh. David 19:27 Oct 17, 2002 (UTC)