Disgruntled former posters!

[13788]

pghcyclist:

The case law I've found on the subject, I've posted to a thread called "Censorship" on the Et Cetera Et Cetera board.

I've been IMing a lawyer friend (OK, he's trying to pick me up) online, and he does say that text can be considered pornographic. The issue is whether the story has "literary" merit -- like Lolita.

Regardless of whether or not you can win the case (and I still think you can), do you want to go through the grief of having to go to court, hire a lawyer, get arrested, etc. There is some risk in this, but there is risk in crossing a busy street.

Scott

 

[13788]

mindseye: [quote author=pghcyclist link=board=meetgreet;num=1068222403;start=40#40 date=11/10/03 at 17:54:24]do you want to go through the grief of having to go to court, hire a lawyer, get arrested, etc. There is some risk in this, but there is risk in crossing a busy street.[/quote]

I suspect the days of Lolita cases are long past; particularly in light of Judge Dalzell's 1997 opinion in the CDA case, upheld by the Supreme Court that "[a]s the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed, the Internet deserves the highest protection from governmental intrusion." However, I'll defer to your lawyer friend in this regard.

With regard to the 'grief', Mark has retained counsel to advise him with regard to this site and to his online business. His attorney has reviewed the content of this site, and -- at least in the past, dunno about this current situation -- Mark's actions have been consistent with the attorney's advice. I can't imagine things would be any different now.


(...and good luck with the lawyer. )

 

[13788]

huge_cock_have_pic: Dee

(((((((law enforcement still carries a burden of proof in establishing how a story or post on the LPSG has contributed in some way to a discernible act of child pornography or other illegal behavior.))))))

Yes, law enforcement carries a burden but the burden to begin a case is extremely easy to meet. Probable cause is enough to begin a prosecution, much less an investigation. A story about illegal sexual activities would merit probable cause in almost any court.

((((((You used the word "some" earlier. "Some" most certainly isn't "every" or "all" cases, and "some" most certainly doesn't carry enough argumentative power to merit the depth of investigation you suggest. ))))))

One thing--I hope you don't think I advocate these scenarios. I am just explaining they exist and they can affect this site and its members. That said, the reason I used the word "some" is to point out that all it takes is one agency, one investigation to call everyone's charecter into doubt. And although it may be unfair and unjust, investigations into sexual issues such as child porn will call into question anyone who is associated with it--that includes membership in a site that has said it will freely allow these types of stories.

((((((((That said, we're just an online forum, man, and that's all. ))))))))

I agree with the fact that this is JUST an online forum, but I see the flip side of that statement. Because it is only an online forum, why the risk and argument over stories and suggestions that are clearly offensive to society as a whole. What is being suggested is not a form of totalitarianism. The suggestion is merely to state that stories about fantisies regarding acts that are clearly illegal and immoral be banned from this site. That doesn't mean banning the person who posts them; it means deleting these stories when they are posted for the sake of the group.

((((((((For example, because this site was once considered "adult" in nature, then we had to impose an age limit. No member could be under the age of 18 or 21 depending on your jurisdiction. We later scrapped that rule because younger people have a right to know information about sexuality, pubesence, their bodies, etc. Provided that it's done in a tactful manner, there's nothing wrong with a high school kid comparing stats with other members, asking questions about his first excursions into sex, or wondering how he can gain access to contraceptions once he's firmly established, to himself, that he's ready for action))))))

There is nothing wrong with a high school student asking about his or her sexuality. But, if that is a goal of this site, then the types of stories that are being argued SHOULD be banned. The inclusion of these stories will transform this website into an adults only website. They have no place in a student's questions about first encounters, contraception, puberty.

(((((((But hey, at one point, you're a lawyer who seemed content enough with his exhibitionistic tendencies to display a penis picture in your profile. Anyone who clicked on the link provided in your profile could see it, minor or not. And if you kept it up in your profile, are we responsible for your decision to take and/or post the pic?)))))

You probably shouldn't be responsible but this site and those who moderate it could be held responsible for it nonetheless. If taking down a picture is required then that's fine, especially since this discussion and seeing the posts have shown me that minors do frequent this website.

Finally, as for "shutting up" about this topic. In due time, but the reason I came back into the group (for now) was to fully explain my reasons for leaving. You are willing to be in court or investigated over this, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the majority of the members of this site are. They should at the very least, be very well informed on the potential risks taken in logging on to a site that not only allows child porn, bestiality, and necrophelia postings, but has now openly said it will. It is a very dangerous road to follow.

With all due respect to Mark, a freedom of speech challenge can be made by other methods that will put fewer people at risk.

 

[B_JohnTheHorse]

A good rule of thumb for members here would be to be very careful about what 'pics' you download and from whom. Every once in a while someone I don't know will invite me to download a file on Yahoo IM. My answer? Usually no! There are tons of horny 16 yo's who would love to trade pics with people over 18..but it's NOT legal.

 

[13788]

huge_cock_have_pic: (((((((((But before anything gets banned, I'd hope the moderators come up with some criteria for deciding what is appropriate and what is not.))))))))))

The problem people are having right now is that the standard is nothing gets banned. The moderators apparently have nothing to say about that because the overall sense is that it is Mark's call, and his alone.

(((((((However, I doubt anyone wants to see that happen. There is risk in the world, and the real question is how to minimize your individidual risk and understand the risks you are taking.)))))))

I agree that the central issue in this whole flap is assessing the risk. That is why I am stirring this up. The assessment part of this argument has been ignored. Instead, people have wanted to make this into a personal disagreement, or a problem with an obviously immature agitater and harasser. As things apparently stand, it's an attitude of let people take their chances, everything goes. Is that type of risk over topics such as the ones previously stated really worth it for a site that claims to be informative rather than "adult" oriented?

(((((((((((Regardless of whether or not you can win the case (and I still think you can), do you want to go through the grief of having to go to court, hire a lawyer, get arrested, etc. There is some risk in this, but there is risk in crossing a busy street. The issue is whether the story has "literary" merit -- like Lolita. )))))))))

In a legal argument over written pornography, literary merit is the question asked of the finder of fact. The end result is not what's necessarily at stake. It is the possibility of being embroiled in an action involving the types of stories we've discussed.

((((((((((( As a discussion forum that seeks to educate people, there is clearly first amendment protection. The stories section is something different. The avatars (especially the nude ones) are also problematic (especially if someone reads this group at work and someone claims sexual harassment). ))))))))))))

Finally, we may see a difference between various sections in this website, but they are attainable to all, including minors. The fictional story section is as much a part of this site as the "healthy penis" part.

 

[13788]

pghcyclist:

(((((((((But before anything gets banned, I'd hope the moderators come up with some criteria for deciding what is appropriate and what is not.))))))))))

The problem people are having right now is that the standard is nothing gets banned. The moderators apparently have nothing to say about that because the overall sense is that it is Mark's call, and his alone.

And mindseye says that Mark is consulting a lawyer. That seems good enough for me.

(((((((However, I doubt anyone wants to see that happen. There is risk in the world, and the real question is how to minimize your individidual risk and understand the risks you are taking.)))))))

I agree that the central issue in this whole flap is assessing the risk. That is why I am stirring this up. The assessment part of this argument has been ignored. Instead, people have wanted to make this into a personal disagreement, or a problem with an obviously immature agitater and harasser. As things apparently stand, it's an attitude of let people take their chances, everything goes. Is that type of risk over topics such as the ones previously stated really worth it for a site that claims to be informative rather than "adult" oriented?

There is stirring things up and then there is stirring things up. It seems to me that your rhetoric is inflamatory and will only seek to cause problems. I'm sure there is more history here than I know, but I understand why people see red when someone starts talking about banning this and censoring that. Certainly there are other less extreme options available, such as password protecting the stories, placing a front door on the stories that requires someone to verify that they are over 18, etc.

((((((((((( As a discussion forum that seeks to educate people, there is clearly first amendment protection. The stories section is something different. The avatars (especially the nude ones) are also problematic (especially if someone reads this group at work and someone claims sexual harassment). ))))))))))))

Finally, we may see a difference between various sections in this website, but they are attainable to all, including minors. The fictional story section is as much a part of this site as the "healthy penis" part.

Yes, this place is library that includes both fiction and non-fiction, opinion and fact. I suspect that it is banned by lots of internet filtering software because of its content, thus restricting access to many minors in schools, libraries, and homes.

Personally, I don't read the stories on this board (or at least I haven't yet). However, I do oppose limiting access for adults to only those things appropriate for children. I also don't think it is necessarily a community's responsibility to be surrogate parents. If a minor has access to this site, their parent is ignorant of their child's online behavior and takes no precautions to stop their child from viewing sites that parent might either object to or think the child is not ready for, I don't think that community should be punished for their negligence.

Scott

 

[13788]

huge_cock_have_pic: (((((((Certainly there are other less extreme options available, such as password protecting the stories, placing a front door on the stories that requires someone to verify that they are over 18, etc. )))))))))

First, I don't mean to come off as extreme or offensive. That is NOT my goal. My goal is to bring up things that I do not believe were brought up prior to my input. As for history, I can't speak for anyone else but myself. Except for the past month or so, I have no history with this site.

All that said. your suggestions that I pasted above this post would be a great compromise. It would address concerns about child access to these stories, while protecting freedom of speech concerns. It may not be enough for all people concerned, but it would at least show some concilliation and concern for the goals and thoughts of others.