Originally Posted by JackieLackey
Those would definitely qualify as too graphic. That and morgue photos. God forbid.
But I guarantee a signature of Abdullah The Butcher and his fork with a bloody opponent in the ring, New Jack stabbing someone or some CZW bullshit would be allowed. Just like if you have a man with a naked ass in your sig can you get banned unless it's Flair and Hogan with their pants down in a match
There is blood in the sport. If it is wrestling related that is one thing, but if it has nothing to do with wrestling stars in actual matches then that is another.
So if you have any violent images in your avatar or signature that isn't wrestling related then please remove them.
is once again a great rule on this forum when you ask "why is it different?" nobody of the staff would be able to give you a reasonable answer.
So for example I can have this picture as signature?
Because he is Stone Cold Steve Austin and that happened in a match but if that was Al Pacino in a movie I would be forced to remove it?
What makes it even more awkward is
Pro Wrestling = real blood
Hollywood movies = fake blood
Violence is violence no matter if Terry Funk, Nicholas Cage or Sylvester Stallone on the picture. A picture of Funk is even worse because it's his real blood
Don't get me wrong, I don't want the users with violent wrestling images to remove their signatures, the point is that other users should be allowed to have non-wrestling signatures with similar content and the same level of violence like wrestling related signatures because the rule is stupid
(and don't start with examples of movies where people lose their body parts or something like that because you know what I mean)