4 ms·

Ugh. "Sucks balls." Ignore gay bash and hesitantly click. So new layout features of a beta browser release are breaking some layouts. I wonder if the author ev

• neilc 19y ago
  How is saying that something "sucks balls" a gay bash?
  • domnit 19y ago
    You're right, I take back that it's a "bash", but it is informed by anti-gay culture. I don't want to get into a discussion about that, because it's very much besides the point. I only included it because I thought it betrayed the childish nature of picking on a piece of software for no reason besides that a beta release still has bugs. If you ignore my criticism of the headline, the point still stands that it's the article is empty. All pre-release software has bugs that will be fixed in the final release, and browsers, including Mozilla's, usually have some layout bugs. These get fixed, so if people are looking for problems with a browser, they should look elsewhere.
    • curi 19y ago
      you complain "sucks balls" is anti-gay, but you call a bad article "childish". is that term not informed by anti-child culture?
    • neilc 19y ago
      Yeah, I totally agree about the article. Not only is it almost content-free, the content it does have is misguided. It's particularly ironic that the interweb flamed Microsoft for originally planning to make IE8's rendering conservative by default. Now that it is (more) standards-compliant and will hence break some pages that depend on the quirks of old IE versions, they get more abuse...
  • webwright 19y ago
    Agree. It has nothing to do with gay people. If he said "sucks ass", would you say "OMG, leave to gay people who love analingus alone!". Or, if he said, "sucks dick", is THAT gay-themed? Isn't ball sucking a laudable trait in a heterosexual female as well as a homosexual male? (Did I really just type that?)
    • joeguilmette 19y ago
      Isn't ball sucking a laudable trait in a heterosexual female as well as a homosexual male? fucking gold