Now PADI gets involved in agency bashing

[fisherdvm]

I find his cartoons hilarious.

"Larson's comic has been attacked by people and groups to whom it caused offense. Several Far Side jokes have involved violence and murder, often between animals or humans and animals. Though not visually gory, some readers have found such strips to be too gruesome and dark for the comics page.

One cartoon shows two chimpanzees grooming. One finds a human hair on the other and inquires, "Conducting a little more 'research' with that Jane Goodall tramp?" The Jane Goodall Institute considered this to be in bad taste, and its lawyers drafted a letter to Larson and his distribution syndicate in which it described the cartoon as an "atrocity." It was stymied, however, by Goodall herself, who revealed that she found the cartoon amusing. Since then, all profits from sales of a shirt featuring this cartoon have been donated to the Institute. (Larson was attacked by Frodo, a chimp described by Goodall as a bully, while visiting Gombe National Park in 1988. Goodall commented, "He somehow managed to get news of the cartoon.")[citation needed]

Larson has occasionally engaged in self-censorship, acknowledging that some of his cartoons were seriously over the line. The Prehistory Of The Far Side shows a number of these.

In The Complete Far Side as well as The Prehistory Of The Far Side, interspersed with the comics, there are letters from angry citizens to newspaper publishers, demanding the removal of The Far Side from their pages, and often citing a canceled subscription if this was not met. However, these protesters constituted a small enough minority that papers were able to continue to run the strip, with the matter becoming moot when compilation books were produced. Larson himself often laughs at the controversies of his comic as evidenced in The Prehistory of the Far Side, in which he writes that these people have usually misunderstood the cartoon."

 

[freediver]

I find his cartoons hilarious.

"Larson's comic has been attacked by people and groups to whom it caused offense. Several Far Side jokes have involved violence and murder, often between animals or humans and animals. Though not visually gory, some readers have found such strips to be too gruesome and dark for the comics page.

One cartoon shows two chimpanzees grooming. One finds a human hair on the other and inquires, "Conducting a little more 'research' with that Jane Goodall tramp?" The Jane Goodall Institute considered this to be in bad taste, and its lawyers drafted a letter to Larson and his distribution syndicate in which it described the cartoon as an "atrocity." It was stymied, however, by Goodall herself, who revealed that she found the cartoon amusing. Since then, all profits from sales of a shirt featuring this cartoon have been donated to the Institute. (Larson was attacked by Frodo, a chimp described by Goodall as a bully, while visiting Gombe National Park in 1988. Goodall commented, "He somehow managed to get news of the cartoon.")[citation needed]

Larson has occasionally engaged in self-censorship, acknowledging that some of his cartoons were seriously over the line. The Prehistory Of The Far Side shows a number of these.

In The Complete Far Side as well as The Prehistory Of The Far Side, interspersed with the comics, there are letters from angry citizens to newspaper publishers, demanding the removal of The Far Side from their pages, and often citing a canceled subscription if this was not met. However, these protesters constituted a small enough minority that papers were able to continue to run the strip, with the matter becoming moot when compilation books were produced. Larson himself often laughs at the controversies of his comic as evidenced in The Prehistory of the Far Side, in which he writes that these people have usually misunderstood the cartoon."

Dude, you've got waaaayyy too much time on your hands!
All hail Gary Larson!!!

 

[String]

Do you have some jokes about the terminally ill you care to share?

Yes plenty. How many do you want?

 

[Thalassamania]

Three.

 

[Gombessa]

So a NAUI instructor, an PADI instructor, and an SSI instructor walk into a bar...

 

[sweatfrog]

So a NAUI instructor, an PADI instructor, and an SSI instructor walk into a bar...

Just one Instructor, right?

 

[pir8]

I do. PADI used to be a non-profit. I believe your agency still is.
My primary problem is that PADI seems to have crossed the line from mere professionalism to pure *****dom. Mercenary considerations are ALL that matter to the current leadership, and this bothers as many members as non-members.

I'm all for capitalism, but with a conscience. Adam Smith's theories counted on a moral and informed society - they weren't meant to work with ignorant consumers and vendors with no conscience.

Just because an agency is non profit doesn't mean that people there aren't making money from it. PADI just admits that it is out to make money.

 

[The Chairman]

I am certain that if you look hard enough on this forum you will find those who disparage other forums. That's not the same as me doing the same. Sure, I get tired of the copy cats, but you won't find me engaging in a direct assault. If you do, please PM me the reference so I can quickly delete it!

In that vein, were I to publish a number of fan letters we have received there would be some of the same sort of complaints about the other sites. I would not see this as ME bashing the other sites. Since we have a mechanism for y'all to do that already, you won't have to worry about it!

I agree... there is a lot of chest thumping when it comes to certain agencies. Yes, there are even agendas by some to create a lot of negativity about PADI, and there is a certain amount of smack down exhibited when you DON'T agree with them. We get it: You don't like PADI. Hopefully, you can understand that many of us DO like PADI. You don't have to be on this forum since it's inception in order to have an opinion one way or the other.

As for the "retard" comment... I almost pulled it outright. But there were too many GREAT responses about how insensitive it was. You know, I almost didn't watch "The Ringer" with Johnny Knoxville because I figured it would be one long bash of the Special Olympics. While it had it's not so great moments, I really liked the film in that it showed those who compete as having the very same dreams and faults as the rest of us. To be certain, we view terms as "tard" and "retard" as patently offensive and worthy of moderation. We don't allow name calling here even when the egos show.

You can always disagree with someone and keep it civil. Sure, you can point out their faults as you perceive them, just don't cross the line by calling them names. Can you tell someone that their hubris prevents them from seeing how hypocritical their statement was? Sure. But you don't have to call them an egomaniacal clown who would not see his own hypocrisy if it hit him in the head. If the difference between these two isn't clear to you, then I would avoid all appearances of evil and avoid pointing out faults at all. Just stick to what you know.

 

[chip104]

Yes plenty. How many do you want?

worst joke teller EVER.

 

[Walter]

Thanks Pete. As most folks know, I'm not a fan of PADI, but PADI is not guilty of bashing BSAC in the instance quoted. I can't personally recall any time in which they bashed BSAC or any other agency.