No, I’m not, sorry. Actually it turned into a pretty good thread - funny, and all that. I’ll try to find it for you; probably not till tomorrow.
Oh God, don’t! I beseech you with my precious thousandth post! It will rise again! The jack-assery will never end!
Please don’t.
Damn, maybe the 1st Amendment wasn’t such a good idea after all…
Hah! I blew my ripe and golden 1000th post on a snide remark about former Washington, D.C. mayor Marion Berry. I have no sympathy. (perhaps I’ll email a mod to lock it before I link to it.)
Now, Brutus, I know you have a sense of humor; I’ve seen it here and there. But, OK, if you’d prefer. I’ve given enough clues for those interested to search for it anyway.
Oh, all right. I suppose that pointing the angry trouser snake into a fish tank can be funny. As long as that thread contains no pan-frying…
Anything to do with cats, or worse still, cat owners.
Just to make it perfectly clear to you, as others have pointed out, there have cases where women DID have teeth inside their vaginas. You lost out on the fight for ignorance on this one because you already had your mind made up. You don’t have to open up something that might gross you out but the world is a stranger place than your predespoded, sheltered little mind would have you believe.
Well, my friend, you’re only going to have to endure one more from me. I went and saw the movie tonight, and I think that you’ll be surprised at my reaction. I will spend considerable time on it and present it for your approbation sometime in the next week after I figure out how to approach it. However, as a preview, I will say that first of all I think that I was arguing the fish in the ocean rather than the ocean itself, and second that the movie was not at all what I expected it to be, which should prove to be an example for everyone else.
More to come later. Much, much more.
Ok, since you say so I did take a look; although I’m still not sure if trolling/imbecility wasn’t the original motive behind the thread.
Well, I found it, I reread it. There are only a couple of references (and a link) to pan-frying (which, by the way, I didn’t read either). It also explains dnooman’s reaction; he was very down on even the concept of the thread. It does fade quickly after the first page and a half or so, which is divided between a few serious comments and quite a few very funny comments and puns.
So, warning, following is a link to an open GQ thread about fish eating human semen - read at your own risk:
Is this guy still around? He’s priceless…and pretty good at getting people to bite.
OK, that was some funny shit. Disgusting as well, mind you, but pretty damned funny.
Anything with goatse in the title. Except one I opened up to post the suggestion that “Maybe you need ‘TMI, no, really’ in the title?”
Math threads.
You did the right thing in looking. 
To the OP - good example! I wouldn’t open that one either, although it wasn’t the first thing that popped into my head when I read the caption.
The first thing to pop into my head was any post where the poster calls president Bush “Shrub.”
I confess I’m not a huge fan of the current president.
But whenever I see “Shrub” in the caption I think “how clever. We are making fun of his name. Shall we say he has cooties too?”
I skip them.
The title for that thread made me queasy every time I read it (it was an active thread for nine friggin’ months)–but it was worth reading just to learn about mangeorge’s fervent dedication to fighting ignorance, even for topics about which we’d probably rather remain ignorant.
This all makes me wonder what happened to Roland Deschain.
I almost never read the Bush/Kerry threads, because, as someone already pointed out, it’s all the same stuff, same posters, different day. I’ve no care to read it again. Also don’t read gay marriage threads, unless there’s something specific about that particular thread that makes me think I might have something useful to contribute. My mind’s made up on how I feel about it, and I’m not going to change my opinion. While I don’t post much in GD, I do try to read threads that are about things I’m undecided on. It helps me look at all sides of an issue, and then I spend some quiet time alone, contemplating my own stance on the issue. I also use GD threads as a jumping-off point for conversations with my teenage daughters, in whom I’m trying to instill the ability to think for themselves instead of just parroting what someone else thinks.
While I won’t name names, there are a couple of Dopers who, if I see them to be the originator of the thread, I don’t bother (the flipside of this is that there are several Dopers who, if I see them as the originator, I’ll read it even if the title doesn’t strike me as being that interesting).