J Mathews (21):-
I can't resist. It's just so addictive!

FunkyDooWops (22):-
First off, last time I saw you, I implied that I preferred RobN to you as my misanthrope of choice. I just want to make it clear that I actually find you less loathsome than RobN, and you seem to have somewhat less unpleasant views to him. I meant to imply that I find RobN more entertaining than you, that's all. He does have his moments, you see.

Next up, making fun of speech impediments is nowhere near the level that his gag was on. Wossy's not the only one with an uncontrollable quirk that gets them singled out and teased. It's not really all that serious an issue – race, sex and sexuality are, however.

you should be pleased he feels you are equal enough and mundane enough to be made fun of, along with women, gingers, footballers and whoevr else he mocks

I love it when people make jokes about stuff that's intrinsic to me. My ethnic background, my sexuality – it makes me feel accepted and part of something. It makes me feel like people are comfortable around me and understand my situation. I always try to be humourous about "controversial" topic matters. Every time I see somebody cover their mouths in mock shock and say "oops, shouldn't say you-know-what in front of the you-know-whos", I think "oh, grow up". I'm a very accepting person, so I never have to watch what I say about others and I always speak clearly. I don't treat people who are different to me as curiousities that you tip-toe around, I welcome them with open arms and open acknowledgement of what makes them who they are. Take an old Muslim pal of mine as an example – I'd frequently get him to describe aspects of Islam to me, which I would then "comically misinterpret" in an attempt to tease him (I treated him as a sort of surrogate little brother). He didn't think I was particularly amusing, but he liked the way I was so open and forward with him and it helped us bond.

Ross, on the other hand, said that gay children should be sent into care homes.

Are you seeing the disparity here? I'm not sure how to make it much clearer than that. Saying "Kazakhstanis drive like this, but Turkmenistanis drive like this" is OK. Saying "let's lock up all Kazakhstanis" is not.

I'm sure you'd all be proven hypocrites if you were to be monitored over what jokes you laughed at. Bet there'd be some offensive ones that made you chuckle. But of course, when it comes to the gays, we're all just victims aren't we? It can't possibly be funny, ever (yawn).

Why are you so sure about that? You think I only have principles when something affects me personally? Of course you do, because you're a homophobic misanthrope. You wouldn't trust us as far as you can spit – we're all the same.

Toughen up guys, straight people have more respect for those who can laugh at themselves. If you can't, they think you're a wimp and hence below them.

I'm pretty sure that applies to people of all sexualites, y'know. I like the way you place such importance on impressing the straights. If you embarrass your buddies, they might replace you with another tame pet queer, right? You're always so eager to be accepted as one of them. The thought of being abandoned to rot in this cesspit with the rest of us must terrify you.

(Report comment to the moderator)

Yup, one obvious example which goes to show the contortions of logic to which Ofcom has resorted in arriving at this decision.

"Four Poofs and A Piano are there of their own volition, they clearly aren't offended and Ross is so very obviously not homophobic. I think people overuse that word – homophobia to me is a deep-seated, irrational and uncompromising attitude of ignorance and resentment. A dodgy joke simply doesn't fall into that category."

Jonathan Ross's house band is there because that is how they earn their daily bread. Without Ross they would be a lot less well-off, and therefore they are in a subservient relationship as they know. If the band were to complain, they would obviously stand in fear of losing their free publicity. Ross tweeted the explanation that the band were already performing with the name they chose before he had anything to do with them (in reply to this)

Jonathan Ross can dish out 'jokes' alright, but can he take them? Here's what happened after a couple of obviously spoof Twitterers started up. One of them joked about how Ross spends his millions. So, what does Mr Ross do? He asked for the tweets to be silenced, and twitter admin obliged. David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, on the other hand can take a joke, and didn't ask for the spoof to be removed by twitter admins.

As to use of the term 'homophobia' – it covers a multitude of sins. Gays in Iran are forced to have their testicles removed if they want to have legal relationhips with men; that's homophobia for sure, as is the judicial murder of gay people in Iran and elsewhere. But what about 'jokey banter,' or that 'joke' on 9th May. Many here have quite rightly suggested that if the 'joke' was racist in nature it would have been given short shrift by the bigwigs at Ofcom (and at the BBC).

We don't tolerate racism, and nor should homophobic prejudice be tolerated – not for one instant.

(Report comment to the moderator)

(Report comment to the moderator)

Henry II probably didn't want Thomas Becket murdered, but he would open his big mouth….

(Report comment to the moderator)

As for Jonathan r'UST'(I call him this deliberately too as someone has laughed at it and so, its cool), well; how dare we blame him since he can always get out of it cheaply and easily? If he has any conscience, he wouldnt be wanting to evaluate his millions with such delicate issues about others. And here some idiots are condoning it with excuses of wether is it personal or not. So inhuman, I say. His other cohorts also laughed when they both made a foolish joke of Andrew Sachs. Funny that wasnt passed over based on that.

Ofcom on its part is also full of over-rated fools whose judgement shows just that. Yes. That someone laughed at such a wicked joke, makes it a great national opinion to be adopted and enshrined into legislation I suppose: 'send kids away'; how so heartless.

For even thinking this, Ross should be assessed by a mental health specialist because he might end up abusing kids too. Well, why wouldnt he if he would put his child up for adoption just because he (Ross) thinks that child is gay, etc. He might have beaten up he child first to make sure the child changes.

Like Pumpkin pie said, I am gay too, but this is not about me. And at my age, well, no one would send me to anywhere… but surely, someone has to tell these heartless people that it is someone else' static aspects life they are toying with.

(Report comment to the moderator)

Now, have you heard Mr Ross getting upset about the jibes made towards him and his "disability"? No, probably because he doesn't care. The man rips the piss our of everyone and everything – you should be pleased he feels you are equal enough and mundane enough to be made fun of, along with women, gingers, footballers and whoevr else he mocks. I'm sure you'd all be proven hypocrites if you were to be monitored over what jokes you laughed at. Bet there'd be some offensive ones that made you chuckle. But of course, when it comes to the gays, we're all just victims aren't we? It can't possibly be funny, ever (yawn).

Toughen up guys, straight people have more respect for those who can laugh at themselves. If you can't, they think you're a wimp and hence below them.

Four Poofs and A Piano are there of their own volition, they clearly aren't offended and Ross is so very obviously not homophobic. I think people overuse that word – homophobia to me is a deep-seated, irrational and uncompromising attitude of ignorance and resentment. A dodgy joke simply doesn't fall into that category.

(Report comment to the moderator)

You are wasting your time discussing with RobN. He is a troll of the very worst kind. Best not to feed the troll.

(Report comment to the moderator)

As regards what Jonaffin woss (just a joke) said being humorous, all I can say is, people used to think the TV show 'love thy neighbour' was very funny, and harmless fun. Nowadays, jokes about white honkeys etc.. are considered pretty offensive by most.

I see the usual homophobes pretending they are gay are posting as usual on this site. Don't you agree RobN?

(Report comment to the moderator)

(Report comment to the moderator)

I'm British. Offence and defence are pretty much the only things I spell the American way, and it's still 50-50 there.

Precisely: So it's not "personally offensive" – leave them to complain should they wish to, and stop trying to fight other people's battles.

What, children? Either way, I do find these things personally offensive. Given how self-centred you are, it might be a little hard to wrap your brain around the concept of feeling angry at something that doesn't directly affect you. In a nutshell, it's pretty much "I like these people, someone's insulting them, what the hell".

Take the British Empire, for example. If some American said "the British Empire was lame, they barely killed any foreigners", you'd be inclined to say "shut up, not only did you never even have an empire, you only had one ethnic group to wipe out and you couldn't even manage that". See, even though they're referring to people who lived and died long before your time, you're still offended. Not just for them, but because you identify with and care for them so closely that it becomes personal. That's what I'm getting at here, just replace archaic nationalist emblems with living breathing people and you have what I'm feeling.

(Report comment to the moderator)

"If you mean only things that directly affect us, like I said, it's not me I worry about, but people far more vulnerable than myself."
Precisely: So it's not "personally offensive" – leave them to complain should they wish to, and stop trying to fight other people's battles.

(Report comment to the moderator)

As for the foamy-mouthed RobN, this "joke" victimises gay children. It does not affect me, as I am too old to be sent to an orphanage. I don't understand what you mean by "personally offensive" – surely offense can only ever be personal? If you mean only things that directly affect us, like I said, it's not me I worry about, but people far more vulnerable than myself.

(Report comment to the moderator)

Complaints are very biased and have to be weighed up against the common consensus. Considering Wossy racks up millions of listeners and only a small percentage complained, I'd say it was a result.

(Report comment to the moderator)

(Report comment to the moderator)

(Report comment to the moderator)

(Report comment to the moderator)

(Report comment to the moderator)

Talking of Ofcom, a new complaint to them would be the Wall to Wall coverage of London Pride that “did not” happen! If Ofcom finds the BBC not guilty of “Extreme” homophobia with regards to the BBC not covering this Massive Event, over 1 Million people attended London Pride and if it had been “ANY” other event the BBC would have had Wall to Wall coverage.

Ofcom are starting to look like they are in Collaboration with the BBC! There for a “Judicial Review” of Ofcom must now be a Priority!!!!

(Report comment to the moderator)

… we work across the broadcast industry to ensure that broadcasters are mindful of the privileged position they hold and the importance of using the platform they have in a considerate way that takes account of the diversity of their audiences. We are confident that in the vast majority of cases broadcasters are handling issues of equality and diversity appropriately and sensitively. However, I would agree with you that the BBC should recognise the hurt that the kind of statement made by Mr. Ross could cause to gay and lesbian people. …..

(Report comment to the moderator)

(Report comment to the moderator)