Torontoist: Beloved U of T

Ellstar

Thu, 15 May 2008 16:39:29 -0500

Those things are such an eyesore, the less they pollute the campus the better.

spacejack

Thu, 15 May 2008 09:38:21 -0500

I thought this was a class assignment for Ad Busting & Culture Jamming 101.

andrew

Thu, 15 May 2008 00:12:11 -0500

I think that's a decent use of a semi-colon.

Jonathan Goldsbie

Thu, 15 May 2008 00:07:20 -0500

x_the_x: Of course, to respond to the majority of your comment would just reinforce your impressions of me, but I must take serious issue with your assertion that my semicolon was used incorrectly.

Tyson Che

Wed, 14 May 2008 21:42:09 -0500

@Tyrannosaurus Rek "Your mom and me," surely. And what is up with your photo, my friend? It is truly disturbing.

ambrose

Wed, 14 May 2008 21:28:01 -0500

Sounds like a sexy time. p.s. I'd rather watch a show about a bounty hunter that takes these signs down.

TokyoTuds

Wed, 14 May 2008 19:15:32 -0500

I hate these signs in all contexts, but interesting to hear they are banned at 3rd party locations. Tuds

x_the_x

Wed, 14 May 2008 18:50:11 -0500

(8), is that self-satire, an onion article in progress, or do you really think every stupid question (including this one) needs a navel-admiring, paragraph-long, cloyingly-PC response? Bonus points for the four justifications for not using "wang" (even there were really only two justifications and two redundancies), and then adding another justification after an incorrectly-used semi-colon. Other than that, you seem like a really easy-going guy.

Jonathan Goldsbie

Wed, 14 May 2008 18:39:38 -0500

It's a ban on the signs as third-party advertising devices. A mobile sign can still be used if it's "in front of the business that the sign is advertising," but there are restrictions [PDF] and you need a permit. I think they were prohibited for third-party purposes because some people feel they look cheap and detract from streetscapes that are crowded with them (e.g. Bathurst north of Glencairn). I'm personally not a fan, but they're at the bottom of my list of priorities. Howard Moscoe, though, really, really hates them.

waitwhat

Wed, 14 May 2008 18:27:36 -0500

But really, why is there a ban on these signs in the first place? I'd actually like to know. Before the ban were these kinds of signs all over town and making it it impossible to enjoy Toronto?

Jonathan Goldsbie

Wed, 14 May 2008 17:46:18 -0500

In answer to your question, rek, I chose to leave "penis" as it was because it's the most acceptable, commonly understood, scientific, and specific word for the thing which it signifies; it's simply the name of a body part, and I wouldn't censor it any more than I would "vagina." I blurred "CUNT" (just enough to make it difficult to read on first glance), because having that word in all-caps neon letters on our front page would probably make the site unsafe for work. Further, although it's just another slang term in England and maybe elsewhere, it's still legitimately perceived to be an especially hateful curse word in our own social context. I also wanted to make it clear that I am not endorsing this crude and juvenile defacement. PickleToes: Newsworthy? Not at all. Blogworthy? I'd argue as much.

tyrannosaurus_rek

Wed, 14 May 2008 16:58:20 -0500

I'm not looking for anyone, Doggiez, your mom and I are quite happy together. :)

Doggiez

Wed, 14 May 2008 14:35:48 -0500

Now how will tyrannosaurus_rek advertise for a date?

rival_oms

Wed, 14 May 2008 14:29:42 -0500

I agree with Rek. Leave no penis untouched!

PickleToes

Wed, 14 May 2008 14:20:35 -0500

Is this really newsworthy?

tyrannosaurus_rek

Wed, 14 May 2008 14:09:35 -0500

Why censor the word cunt, but leave penis untouched?

matty

Wed, 14 May 2008 13:31:24 -0500

So is graffitti. Yet you people continue to aid in its proliferation by promoting it.

David Topping

Wed, 14 May 2008 13:22:23 -0500

The sign's been around, in various stages of retooling, since at least last month; here's what it looked like then.