You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
1
13788
Guest
9cyclops9: [quote author=mindseye link=board=99;num=1068001982;start=80#97 date=11/06/03 at 22:44:46]For those of you who don't read the Administrative Issues board, I've made some changes to the code tonight.
In your profile, you have an 'ignore list'. Adding a name to that list blocks you from receiving private messages and posts from that user. You can also enter '*' in the ignore list to block all private messages but still be able to read posts. If there's a user on the board who's crossed your personal threshhold of acceptability, you can now block that user yourself.
I hope that empowering everyone here in this way will be viewed as a sensible way of balancing Mark's commitment to freedom of speech with members' individual and varied senses of propriety and taste.
[/quote]
Very good idea, mindseye. That may have been what I needed to hear in order to stay. Very glad you took that step. I think it will solve some problems.
John
In your profile, you have an 'ignore list'. Adding a name to that list blocks you from receiving private messages and posts from that user. You can also enter '*' in the ignore list to block all private messages but still be able to read posts. If there's a user on the board who's crossed your personal threshhold of acceptability, you can now block that user yourself.
I hope that empowering everyone here in this way will be viewed as a sensible way of balancing Mark's commitment to freedom of speech with members' individual and varied senses of propriety and taste.
[/quote]
Very good idea, mindseye. That may have been what I needed to hear in order to stay. Very glad you took that step. I think it will solve some problems.
John
1
13788
Guest
huge_cock_have_pic: After some thought, the fact is that this is NOT about censorship. What the site is doing by allowing any story or topic is condoning illegal behavior such as the victimization of children, women, animals, etc.
To ban those types of stories and/or posts is not a limitation of the freedom of speech, it is necessary in an ordered society that outlaws these types of behaviors. Whether LPSG allows these issues will in all likelihood not affect the overall climate of anyone's society but it is BOTH immoral and illegal.
In the US at the local, state, and federal levels, these posts will at the very least cause investigations from law enforcement officials, AND THEY SHOULD! Morally these types of posts condone behavior that forces one of the ultimate physical violations on individuals incapable of making their own choices. THERE SHOULD NOT BE A PLACE FOR THEM! And any place that allows them is NOT a place for me.
To ban those types of stories and/or posts is not a limitation of the freedom of speech, it is necessary in an ordered society that outlaws these types of behaviors. Whether LPSG allows these issues will in all likelihood not affect the overall climate of anyone's society but it is BOTH immoral and illegal.
In the US at the local, state, and federal levels, these posts will at the very least cause investigations from law enforcement officials, AND THEY SHOULD! Morally these types of posts condone behavior that forces one of the ultimate physical violations on individuals incapable of making their own choices. THERE SHOULD NOT BE A PLACE FOR THEM! And any place that allows them is NOT a place for me.
1
13788
Guest
aj2181: Well I decided to wait to put my own opinion in to this topic. I've come to some conclusions on it.
I understand the reasons why some have left the board. I can't say I knew Sammy and the others well at all. I'm still sad to see them go. They were major contributers to the discussions and moderators.
I think that the reasons they gave for leaving come a little late in the game. There were things on this board that would be considered 'questionable' a long time before now. I dont agree with some of the stuff that is on here but I knew what i was getting into when i signed up.
I understand the reasons why some have left the board. I can't say I knew Sammy and the others well at all. I'm still sad to see them go. They were major contributers to the discussions and moderators.
I think that the reasons they gave for leaving come a little late in the game. There were things on this board that would be considered 'questionable' a long time before now. I dont agree with some of the stuff that is on here but I knew what i was getting into when i signed up.
B_DoubleMeatWhopper
Expert Member
[quote author=huge_cock_have_pic link=board=99;num=1068001982;start=100#102 date=11/07/03 at 08:13:11]After some thought, the fact is that this is NOT about censorship. What the site is doing by allowing any story or topic is condoning illegal behavior such as the victimization of children, women, animals, etc. [/quote]
Here is another clear example of not disinguishing between 'fantasy' and 'reality'. I have had very satisfying fantasies involving infliction of pain on people I dislike. I would never act on these fantasies, and I would be outraged if someone else took it upon himself to hurt those people out of loyalty to me. In fantasizing I have done nothing illegal. In some ways, fantasy can be cathartic if it does not culminate in enacting the illegal deeds.
Here is another clear example of not disinguishing between 'fantasy' and 'reality'. I have had very satisfying fantasies involving infliction of pain on people I dislike. I would never act on these fantasies, and I would be outraged if someone else took it upon himself to hurt those people out of loyalty to me. In fantasizing I have done nothing illegal. In some ways, fantasy can be cathartic if it does not culminate in enacting the illegal deeds.
1
13788
Guest
mindseye: Amen, brother. Anyone who's seen a news story about a murder should understand the difference between condoning the description of an act and condoning the act itself.
1
13788
Guest
Javierdude22: Preaching for own parochy doesn't mean you have the argument Mindseye. The posters that have posted their counterargument cannot continue to do so as they have taken themselves up on their moral stands.
Look, nobody seems to understand what this 'all' is bout. This is not a fight, nor something to choose sides over. This is people simply choosing that they do not wish to be associated with certain things the boards owner Mark, officially stands for. And it is their God given right. I am binding threads in this reply as we seem to have two here and three in the Meet & greet section.
This board has expressed allowing child porn stories (yes there was one of a 14yearold kid who posted in FS), and other things people might take offense to. That simple official statement is enough, and it means that every participant to this board agrees with that, otherwise you wouldnt participate. And some, have moral problems with that, and might get into trouble careerwise. This was never about Humongous, humongous merely triggered a discussion.
Mindseye, do you nów understand the issue. And do you nów understand that having a friggin ignore button doesnt dissasiciat you from an agreement on allowing child porn? It means you ain't got the balls to stand up and say, hm...I dont agree with that, but simply stick your head in the ground. It doesnt solve the association issue, it merely solves the 'i dont wanna see this' issue. people still feel that even with the ignore button, it mans they agree with the boards policy on child porn stories.
Than another thing: weren't we all very happy the board lost it's age check a while ago? Do we wanna step into the grey area again and have some concerned parent or D.A. with too much time on his hands shut this down or put the age check back?
And Pecker, although that was very nice of you to speak for mark, we read that reply from Nony already. I still think he should reply on this, moderators are moderators, not spokespersons. we saw that go wrong at the start of this discussion, don't think too much, let Mark decide was the advice.
And the TOS. Great, no TOS to dis-allow child porn stories etc. But if you are so for free speech, why not still put up a TOS and clearly state you allow child porn stories and bestiality? That would show some balls peeps!!! But i'm guessing that might make it all a bit too official in case any law enforcer comes by. Well, at least it would finally rid the board of the mindnumbing threads we had on what is or is not allowed, what conduct is or is not allowed, what content is or is not allowed.
Please hold the people that have stood up for their beliefs in higher account than some of you have portrayed upto now, theyre worth it.
Look, nobody seems to understand what this 'all' is bout. This is not a fight, nor something to choose sides over. This is people simply choosing that they do not wish to be associated with certain things the boards owner Mark, officially stands for. And it is their God given right. I am binding threads in this reply as we seem to have two here and three in the Meet & greet section.
This board has expressed allowing child porn stories (yes there was one of a 14yearold kid who posted in FS), and other things people might take offense to. That simple official statement is enough, and it means that every participant to this board agrees with that, otherwise you wouldnt participate. And some, have moral problems with that, and might get into trouble careerwise. This was never about Humongous, humongous merely triggered a discussion.
Mindseye, do you nów understand the issue. And do you nów understand that having a friggin ignore button doesnt dissasiciat you from an agreement on allowing child porn? It means you ain't got the balls to stand up and say, hm...I dont agree with that, but simply stick your head in the ground. It doesnt solve the association issue, it merely solves the 'i dont wanna see this' issue. people still feel that even with the ignore button, it mans they agree with the boards policy on child porn stories.
Than another thing: weren't we all very happy the board lost it's age check a while ago? Do we wanna step into the grey area again and have some concerned parent or D.A. with too much time on his hands shut this down or put the age check back?
And Pecker, although that was very nice of you to speak for mark, we read that reply from Nony already. I still think he should reply on this, moderators are moderators, not spokespersons. we saw that go wrong at the start of this discussion, don't think too much, let Mark decide was the advice.
And the TOS. Great, no TOS to dis-allow child porn stories etc. But if you are so for free speech, why not still put up a TOS and clearly state you allow child porn stories and bestiality? That would show some balls peeps!!! But i'm guessing that might make it all a bit too official in case any law enforcer comes by. Well, at least it would finally rid the board of the mindnumbing threads we had on what is or is not allowed, what conduct is or is not allowed, what content is or is not allowed.
Please hold the people that have stood up for their beliefs in higher account than some of you have portrayed upto now, theyre worth it.
1
13788
Guest
mindseye: It's against my better judgement to reply to you on this, but I'll make a few points.
[quote author=Javierdude23 link=board=99;num=1068001982;start=100#106 date=11/07/03 at 15:34:24]
This board has expressed allowing child porn stories (yes there was one of a 14yearold kid who posted in FS), and other things people might take offense to. [...] [/quote]
What 'other things people might take offense to.' Adultery? Three-ways? References to drugs? What sorts of things do you have in mind?
As individuals, our tastes and sensitivities are all pretty unique. Sure, we have some elements in common -- I think everyone who's contributed to this post finds child sexual abuse repugnant, for example -- and none of us are offended by chocolate chip cookies. But there are a lot of topics that we'd disagree on.
Do you remember the poster who stormed out about a year ago because of "all the gay stuff" on this board? Personally, I get touchy regarding economic exploitation -- Paypal scams, spyware, Verisign's SiteFinder. Maybe that sort of thing doesn't offend you, though?
A policy that says, "posts about sex with children, animals, or family members are bad. posts about sex with multiple partners, sex with partners of the same sex, and sex under the influence of drugs, are permitted" is a policy that takes one person's view of where the line should be drawn and forces that view onto everyone.
That's what people have asked for -- that Mark make a decision about a board he owns that first of all is repugnant to him personally, and second of all would be binding to every person on the board.
Under that system, what would happen if someone did post a story involving sex with a minor? People would log on, see the post, be grossed out, and have to wait until Mark or a moderator could log on to do something about it.
What Mark is allowing instead is a transfer of power from him to the users. Now, if you see a story that offends your personal taste -- no matter how liberal or conservative your tastes are, you don't have to wait for Mark to take care of the situation for you. You can block that post yourself now.
There are some people for whom that is still not enough, and who think their value system is the one that others should live by. "Ban kiddie porn or you're going to get shut down" is the same type of threat as "accept Jesus or you'll go to hell." So far, no one's provided an adequate justification for why their judgement should supercede Mark's on his own site.
Also, for the record, the following sentence:
is a self-contradiction. In fact, Mark has already said that child pornography -- as defined by US federal statute -- is subject to deletion. What is not subject to prima facie deletion are text descriptions of sexual acts with minors, which although repugnant to 99.99% of us or more, does not constitute child pornography under federal law.
[quote author=Javierdude23 link=board=99;num=1068001982;start=100#106 date=11/07/03 at 15:34:24]
This board has expressed allowing child porn stories (yes there was one of a 14yearold kid who posted in FS), and other things people might take offense to. [...] [/quote]
What 'other things people might take offense to.' Adultery? Three-ways? References to drugs? What sorts of things do you have in mind?
As individuals, our tastes and sensitivities are all pretty unique. Sure, we have some elements in common -- I think everyone who's contributed to this post finds child sexual abuse repugnant, for example -- and none of us are offended by chocolate chip cookies. But there are a lot of topics that we'd disagree on.
Do you remember the poster who stormed out about a year ago because of "all the gay stuff" on this board? Personally, I get touchy regarding economic exploitation -- Paypal scams, spyware, Verisign's SiteFinder. Maybe that sort of thing doesn't offend you, though?
A policy that says, "posts about sex with children, animals, or family members are bad. posts about sex with multiple partners, sex with partners of the same sex, and sex under the influence of drugs, are permitted" is a policy that takes one person's view of where the line should be drawn and forces that view onto everyone.
That's what people have asked for -- that Mark make a decision about a board he owns that first of all is repugnant to him personally, and second of all would be binding to every person on the board.
Under that system, what would happen if someone did post a story involving sex with a minor? People would log on, see the post, be grossed out, and have to wait until Mark or a moderator could log on to do something about it.
What Mark is allowing instead is a transfer of power from him to the users. Now, if you see a story that offends your personal taste -- no matter how liberal or conservative your tastes are, you don't have to wait for Mark to take care of the situation for you. You can block that post yourself now.
There are some people for whom that is still not enough, and who think their value system is the one that others should live by. "Ban kiddie porn or you're going to get shut down" is the same type of threat as "accept Jesus or you'll go to hell." So far, no one's provided an adequate justification for why their judgement should supercede Mark's on his own site.
Also, for the record, the following sentence:
This board has expressed allowing child porn stories
is a self-contradiction. In fact, Mark has already said that child pornography -- as defined by US federal statute -- is subject to deletion. What is not subject to prima facie deletion are text descriptions of sexual acts with minors, which although repugnant to 99.99% of us or more, does not constitute child pornography under federal law.
1
13788
Guest
Tender: [quote author=mindseye link=board=99;num=1068001982;start=100#107 date=11/07/03 at 16:28:49]
A policy that says, "posts about sex with children, animals, or family members are bad. posts about sex with multiple partners, sex with partners of the same sex, and sex under the influence of drugs, are permitted" is a policy that takes one person's view of where the line should be drawn and forces that view onto everyone.
[/quote]
i agree wholeheartedly here with mindseye.
i think all of this particularly goes back to the old absolute truth theory. is there truth or not?
everyone is always chiming about how what is right for one may not be right for another.
still there are absolute morals. such as we all agree that murder is wrong, for everyone.
why?
suppose i have a good reason?
well then why is it wrong to have a sexual expereince A, B, or C, but D, E, and F are ok?
i interpret the Bible to mean clearly that homosexuality is wrong.
now, clearly i understand that *I* believe it is wrong for everyone.
so, does that mean that just because i continue to post here, i am condoning those relationships? certainly not. or that i am gay? certainly not. or that accept that it is right for others? certainly not.
so back to the idea of "other acts" which are not acceptable to many. adultery, multiple partners ect, i feel are all wrong, yet no one here pitched a fit over that to leave? so *how* then do some decide what is wrong, and yet OKs other things?
ok im not talking about consentual, victim type stuff like children or rape, more like MORAL values.
how does one go about deciding what is acceptable to them?
if its legal, its ok?
is it a religious thing?
or the way one is raised?
i clearly disagree with such as mentioned, yet i understand that i have the right TO disagree. and i favor others having the right to decide themselves.
In prohibiting certain kinds of posts, i think it would take away some rights in a theory sense. then do i still have the right to say "homosexuality is wrong" ???
i more favor to let everyone say their say, even if i then feel the need to say "that is bunk".
Tender
A policy that says, "posts about sex with children, animals, or family members are bad. posts about sex with multiple partners, sex with partners of the same sex, and sex under the influence of drugs, are permitted" is a policy that takes one person's view of where the line should be drawn and forces that view onto everyone.
[/quote]
i agree wholeheartedly here with mindseye.
i think all of this particularly goes back to the old absolute truth theory. is there truth or not?
everyone is always chiming about how what is right for one may not be right for another.
still there are absolute morals. such as we all agree that murder is wrong, for everyone.
why?
suppose i have a good reason?
well then why is it wrong to have a sexual expereince A, B, or C, but D, E, and F are ok?
i interpret the Bible to mean clearly that homosexuality is wrong.
now, clearly i understand that *I* believe it is wrong for everyone.
so, does that mean that just because i continue to post here, i am condoning those relationships? certainly not. or that i am gay? certainly not. or that accept that it is right for others? certainly not.
so back to the idea of "other acts" which are not acceptable to many. adultery, multiple partners ect, i feel are all wrong, yet no one here pitched a fit over that to leave? so *how* then do some decide what is wrong, and yet OKs other things?
ok im not talking about consentual, victim type stuff like children or rape, more like MORAL values.
how does one go about deciding what is acceptable to them?
if its legal, its ok?
is it a religious thing?
or the way one is raised?
i clearly disagree with such as mentioned, yet i understand that i have the right TO disagree. and i favor others having the right to decide themselves.
In prohibiting certain kinds of posts, i think it would take away some rights in a theory sense. then do i still have the right to say "homosexuality is wrong" ???
i more favor to let everyone say their say, even if i then feel the need to say "that is bunk".
Tender
1
13788
Guest
Tender: [quote author=Javierdude23 link=board=99;num=1068001982;start=100#106 date=11/07/03 at 15:34:24]
Mindseye, do you nów understand the issue. And do you nów understand that having a friggin ignore button doesnt dissasiciat you from an agreement on allowing child porn? It means you ain't got the balls to stand up and say, hm...I dont agree with that, but simply stick your head in the ground. It doesnt solve the association issue, it merely solves the 'i dont wanna see this' issue.
Than another thing: weren't we all very happy the board lost it's age check a while ago?
[/quote]
does anyone understand how moving to another friggin site solves anything more than using 'ignore'?
it means that you aint got the balls to say i dont agree with that and im staying around to put in my 2 cents worth on it.
how is having your head in the ground, any different than moving your head to different place?
how is clicking ignore any different than going to the 'safe' site, and pretending like the problems here no longer exist? heavin forbid, if i am caught in the midst of 'sinners'! and worse yet what if i say in regard to the post that it is nasty and i disagree, or that i feel it is wrong?
besides that there are some great people here, and the majority of the board is against the principle of child porn and such... i hardly see it um as Pecker so gracefully described, being taken over...
Tender,
who by the way sees far more than sand....
Mindseye, do you nów understand the issue. And do you nów understand that having a friggin ignore button doesnt dissasiciat you from an agreement on allowing child porn? It means you ain't got the balls to stand up and say, hm...I dont agree with that, but simply stick your head in the ground. It doesnt solve the association issue, it merely solves the 'i dont wanna see this' issue.
Than another thing: weren't we all very happy the board lost it's age check a while ago?
[/quote]
does anyone understand how moving to another friggin site solves anything more than using 'ignore'?
it means that you aint got the balls to say i dont agree with that and im staying around to put in my 2 cents worth on it.
how is having your head in the ground, any different than moving your head to different place?
how is clicking ignore any different than going to the 'safe' site, and pretending like the problems here no longer exist? heavin forbid, if i am caught in the midst of 'sinners'! and worse yet what if i say in regard to the post that it is nasty and i disagree, or that i feel it is wrong?
besides that there are some great people here, and the majority of the board is against the principle of child porn and such... i hardly see it um as Pecker so gracefully described, being taken over...
Tender,
who by the way sees far more than sand....
1
13788
Guest
jackinman: I really don't have anything to add....all I'm hoping for is for all this to blow over very soon, come to some kind of resolution and stop all this bickering. I'm very sorry that we lost the members we did. Let's try and get back on track here folks.
1
13788
Guest
9cyclops9: Tender,
By leaving they are not trying to ignore what is going on here. They have tried speaking their minds on it, to no avail, so they left. Not because they were running away, but because they did not want to be associated with such material whatsoever. Surely you can support their decision to leave just like they support your decision to stay. Nobody is doing anything wrong by leaving or staying. They are doing what they feel is right, and no matter what anyone else feels is right, they have to stick to their own values, which is exactly what they are doing.
Can this all be over now? Some are there, some are here, some are at both places. And its all ok. No animosity, no hard feelings, no talking bad about people. Just what they did and what you did and what I did.
Peace
John
By leaving they are not trying to ignore what is going on here. They have tried speaking their minds on it, to no avail, so they left. Not because they were running away, but because they did not want to be associated with such material whatsoever. Surely you can support their decision to leave just like they support your decision to stay. Nobody is doing anything wrong by leaving or staying. They are doing what they feel is right, and no matter what anyone else feels is right, they have to stick to their own values, which is exactly what they are doing.
Can this all be over now? Some are there, some are here, some are at both places. And its all ok. No animosity, no hard feelings, no talking bad about people. Just what they did and what you did and what I did.
Peace
John
1
13788
Guest
Javierdude22: [quote author=mindseye link=board=99;num=1068001982;start=100#107 date=11/07/03 at 16:28:49]It's against my better judgement to reply to you on this, but I'll make a few points.[/quote]
Why is that ? Try not to be so testy and give people the benefit of the doubt. I am trying to figure this out, and think i've been pretty political so far.
Of course I know all this, and did you try and wonder why I merely said 'other things people might...' instead of naming them by name? Maybe because I understand very well that there are differences in taste, and simply cause Í don't agree with Bestiality or incest doesn't mean i'm forcing that on others as well. Don't put words in my mouth I never even intended to say (nor have I ever been intolerant about unique interests, try to give me a little credit)
Again, this is not about personal taste, this is about something that is so morally deplorable that stating that it is not allowed would man taking a stand as well.
Besides my moral values, written child sex stories are illegal in my country and in many other countries as well. Yes written. This has been in the news about a year ago. Illegal. This almost automatically means that if a child sex story is being posted here, the nationals of several countries from different continents, of which my own country for sure, are in offense of the law and can get a few months/years in prison. Do you see how that, besides issues surrounding morailty, is a problem? In effect this means some people can get excluded from the board.
I hope with 'some people' I was not included...otherwise I suggest reading up on the content of my posts.
I am not under federal law. I am under Dutch law, and every non-US citizen is under non-US citizen law. In my country written child sex or porn stories are an offense.
And I know Mark cannot take into account the laws of every nation. We have gay content here which automatically excludes the nationals of several Middle eastern and Asian countries,and of course there's nothing to do bout it. However, within Western society, laws are different only in detail, but on this topic child sex stories are important ones. This is just difficult...
Why is that ? Try not to be so testy and give people the benefit of the doubt. I am trying to figure this out, and think i've been pretty political so far.
What 'other things people might take offense to.' Adultery? Three-ways? References to drugs? What sorts of things do you have in mind?
As individuals, our tastes and sensitivities are all pretty unique. Sure, we have some elements in common -- I think everyone who's contributed to this post finds child sexual abuse repugnant, for example -- and none of us are offended by chocolate chip cookies. But there are a lot of topics that we'd disagree on.
Of course I know all this, and did you try and wonder why I merely said 'other things people might...' instead of naming them by name? Maybe because I understand very well that there are differences in taste, and simply cause Í don't agree with Bestiality or incest doesn't mean i'm forcing that on others as well. Don't put words in my mouth I never even intended to say (nor have I ever been intolerant about unique interests, try to give me a little credit)
regarding not being ok with child sex stories, this is comparing apples and pears.Do you remember the poster who stormed out about a year ago because of "all the gay stuff" on this board?
What Mark is allowing instead is a transfer of power from him to the users. Now, if you see a story that offends your personal taste -- no matter how liberal or conservative your tastes are, you don't have to wait for Mark to take care of the situation for you. You can block that post yourself now.
Again, this is not about personal taste, this is about something that is so morally deplorable that stating that it is not allowed would man taking a stand as well.
Besides my moral values, written child sex stories are illegal in my country and in many other countries as well. Yes written. This has been in the news about a year ago. Illegal. This almost automatically means that if a child sex story is being posted here, the nationals of several countries from different continents, of which my own country for sure, are in offense of the law and can get a few months/years in prison. Do you see how that, besides issues surrounding morailty, is a problem? In effect this means some people can get excluded from the board.
There are some people for whom that is still not enough, and who think their value system is the one that others should live by. "Ban kiddie porn or you're going to get shut down" is the same type of threat as "accept Jesus or you'll go to hell."
I hope with 'some people' I was not included...otherwise I suggest reading up on the content of my posts.
Also, for the record, the following sentence:
is a self-contradiction. In fact, Mark has already said that child pornography -- as defined by US federal statute -- is subject to deletion. What is not subject to prima facie deletion are text descriptions of sexual acts with minors, which although repugnant to 99.99% of us or more, does not constitute child pornography under federal law.
I am not under federal law. I am under Dutch law, and every non-US citizen is under non-US citizen law. In my country written child sex or porn stories are an offense.
And I know Mark cannot take into account the laws of every nation. We have gay content here which automatically excludes the nationals of several Middle eastern and Asian countries,and of course there's nothing to do bout it. However, within Western society, laws are different only in detail, but on this topic child sex stories are important ones. This is just difficult...
1
13788
Guest
mindseye: Javierdude: I still disagree with your analysis of the situation, but I'm trying not to fan the flames on here anymore. (And I thought of a really outstanding example today, even.)
If you'd like to discuss this further in private messages, I'll be happy to continue this thread there.
If you'd like to discuss this further in private messages, I'll be happy to continue this thread there.
1
13788
Guest
longtimelurker: I think the problems with the posts in question are a matter of consensuality. Animals cannot give consent, rape - by definition, does not involve consent and even if an underaged person appears consential they have the arguement of diminished responsibility due to age.
As for the 'ignore' - it may patch it for a few people, but it doesn't really solve the underlying problem. IF (and Javier has mentioned the illegality of the material in certain other countries) there is an investigation then association with the board would be the factor taken into account - not who is on your ignore list (I mean, what if you'd missed one poster out or were unaware of them by not going into those sections of the site?).
As for the 'ignore' - it may patch it for a few people, but it doesn't really solve the underlying problem. IF (and Javier has mentioned the illegality of the material in certain other countries) there is an investigation then association with the board would be the factor taken into account - not who is on your ignore list (I mean, what if you'd missed one poster out or were unaware of them by not going into those sections of the site?).
1
13788
Guest
Javierdude22: Mindseye
My posts are not flames, nor have they ever been. I am in a serious conflict in moral values. But the fact is that I really enjoy participating in this site, and am thus figuring out ways to stay.
I personally feel this is better within this thread, LTL has made some good points as well, and I do want to hear his views on this further along as well.
Jav
My posts are not flames, nor have they ever been. I am in a serious conflict in moral values. But the fact is that I really enjoy participating in this site, and am thus figuring out ways to stay.
I personally feel this is better within this thread, LTL has made some good points as well, and I do want to hear his views on this further along as well.
Jav
1
13788
Guest
huge_cock_have_pic: Mindseye,
You actually equate the right to be homosexual with the license to engage in child sex and bestiality? Are you serious?
The fact is Mark has the obligation to draw the line at activities that are ILLEGAL. Homosexuality is not illegal, child sex, rape, bestiality are illegal and should never be condoned in any form.
You actually equate the right to be homosexual with the license to engage in child sex and bestiality? Are you serious?
The fact is Mark has the obligation to draw the line at activities that are ILLEGAL. Homosexuality is not illegal, child sex, rape, bestiality are illegal and should never be condoned in any form.
1
13788
Guest
huge_cock_have_pic: Seriously Mindseye and Mark,
You have to explain yourself. The simple fact is that practically speaking the types of stories that have been mentioned--things like beastiality, sex with minors, rape--these are things that will cause law enforcement investigations. Your high minded principles put the members of this site in danger of being the objects of a law enforcement investigation into child porn, etc.
The fact is that even hard core porn sites ban these types of stories. You may think that there is some obligation to the idea of freedom of speech, but there is also an obligation to the members of this site to protect them when possible.
THAT is what many if not all the people who left are concerned about. This Humongous charecter is a rabbit trail, a chump. Spamming and harassment can be dealt with. Risking careers and reputations because Mark and/or you want to fight a freedom of speech battle on this site--THAT is irresponsibility on your parts, to the safety and well being of the members of this site.
You have to explain yourself. The simple fact is that practically speaking the types of stories that have been mentioned--things like beastiality, sex with minors, rape--these are things that will cause law enforcement investigations. Your high minded principles put the members of this site in danger of being the objects of a law enforcement investigation into child porn, etc.
The fact is that even hard core porn sites ban these types of stories. You may think that there is some obligation to the idea of freedom of speech, but there is also an obligation to the members of this site to protect them when possible.
THAT is what many if not all the people who left are concerned about. This Humongous charecter is a rabbit trail, a chump. Spamming and harassment can be dealt with. Risking careers and reputations because Mark and/or you want to fight a freedom of speech battle on this site--THAT is irresponsibility on your parts, to the safety and well being of the members of this site.
1
13788
Guest
jessinathensga: im leaving too...people are fucked up that allow that...bye nice meeting some of you....i just joined so its not a total loss
1
13788
Guest
HUMONGOUS: Maximillian and Sammygirly will be missed---there is no doubt about that. However it is best that they were forced out as they were inhibiting freedom of expression by censorship. I applaud the memo from Mark and thank him wholeheartedly for his views oppossing censorship. The tactics employed by Max and Sammygirly were tantamount to censorship and a board as important as this should not engage in such a practice.
I do beleive the somewhat "heavyhanded" approach used by Max and the snide, condescending demeanor of Sammygirly was responsible for a lot of members leaving. I have spoken with several former members who have attested to that. However I will not condemn them for expressing their views as they condemned me for expresing mine. I wish them the best of luck in their new endeavors. I would also like to take the time to thank Dee and Mark for their intervention. It was most appreciated. May cooler heads prevail now that the conjoined twins have left.
Sincerly,
Humongous ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
I do beleive the somewhat "heavyhanded" approach used by Max and the snide, condescending demeanor of Sammygirly was responsible for a lot of members leaving. I have spoken with several former members who have attested to that. However I will not condemn them for expressing their views as they condemned me for expresing mine. I wish them the best of luck in their new endeavors. I would also like to take the time to thank Dee and Mark for their intervention. It was most appreciated. May cooler heads prevail now that the conjoined twins have left.
Sincerly,
Humongous ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Similar threads
- Replies
- 16
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 4
- Views
- 4K
- Replies
- 1
- Views
- 256
