Genghis Pwn

Another of my threads has been arbitrarily and unfairly locked on this message board, for no legitimate reason whatsoever.

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...threadid=56352

The moderator Jacey said it was locked for "obvious reasons." I guess that's because he or she could not provide any actual reasons. I would like to point out that this identical thread, right next to the one that got closed down by Jacey in Elsewhere, has not been closed or censored at all. Why...?

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...threadid=56282

All I ask for is the fair and just application of the forum rules. Is that too much to ask? Neither thread breaks any forum rule whatsoever.

99Percent

Not to worry, that thread will be closed promptly, and if you insist you have the right to post whatever you want you will be banned and soon, because we hate to have our time wasted.

Genghis Pwn

I'm sorry, I have posted well within the rules of this forum. I follow the rules, and I ask that the admins here follow them as well, instead of making up outright lies to censor me.

Rules are made to be followed.

Thanks.

missus_gumby

Genghis, we are all here at the behest of the people who lay the money out for us to contribute our various posts. It is not a democracy. As users we are subject to the rules and regulations, of which we all are party to and have agreed to uphold. The Administrators have appointed those they consider will uphold and enforce the Rules, in the manner required of them, as moderators.

In the thread in question I allowed the things to stay as they were. I must assume that Jacey considered the thread should be closed because the threshold of what he considered to be offensive, and therefore breached the Rules, was slightly lower than mine. There are no absolutes here, and Jacey was perfectly justified to take the action he did. As a fellow moderator, and user, I endorse his position and action.

As a user I would ask you not to post any of this stuff again. It is verging on child pornography, and does not reflect well on you in the least. It does not reflect well on the Internet Infidels either. Please, take the hint and have a little consideration for your fellow members in the future -- by keeping your sexual preferences and fantasies to yourself.

Martin

Genghis Pwn

Wait a minute... I am playing by the rules. Jacey is not. Those pictures do not even COME CLOSE to bordeing on child porn, any more than the picture of Rebbeca Stamos borders on mainstream "porn." These are just simple bikini pictures, like out of PEOPLE magazine.

The two threads are exactly the same. Only the girls in the pictures are different. Their ages are utterly irrelevant because the pictures are NOT pornography in any way. They are just modeling pictures of pretty girls.

Please.. all I ask is that logic and critical thinking be applied before censorship. Jacey failed to provide even one reason for closing the thread. His "obvious reasons" sounds like how religious people justify believing in superstitions. Critical thinking requires logic and thought, and proof. I suspect Jacey failed to tell us why he closed the thread because he could not think of any good reason or excuse for closing it.

I could be wrong, and I will apologize if I am.

missus_gumby

Genghis, I repeat, "It is not a democracy". Whether you like it or not, Jacey's "obvious reasons" were perfectly valid within the remit of the moderator duties and privileges we both have been granted by the administrators. It's that simple.

Martin

The Other Michael

Hello Genghis Pwn,

I notice your location shows "Spain". I am going to assume that you are not very familiar with conditions in the United States.

The Secular Web is a non-profit organization incorporated under United States laws. As such, it is going to be much more concerned with the legal situation extant in the USA than with laws in other countries.

With the current legal environment in regards anything even remotely related to what might be construed as "child porn", pedophilia, or even just somewhat revealing photos of minors (with the cutoff often being 18 years in many of the states) we may be much more conservative than people in other countries in determining what is acceptable/not likely to provoke unwanted official attention.

This may not be the situation we'd like to have, but it is the situation we have to deal with.

Therefore, you need to accomodate our situation when posting on our discussion boards.

If you continue posting items that you've been asked on multiple occasions to not post, you are going to end up being banned from posting at IIDB. You've been told how we'd like you to deal with this subject, and have also been told that you are welcome to start a thread to discuss these photos/your thoughts as long as you do it in the proper forum and in the manner we request.

You've had things explained to you now by several different moderators and administrators. Your choice is to either abide by our rules when you post on our discussion boards, or continue on as you have and receive a level of sanction that we find appropriate for your actions.

Michael
IIDB Administrator

Philosoft

Genghis, I don't want to jump to conclusions, but I can't help but notice that a great many of your recent threads are little more than excuses to post pictures of scantily-clad women. While there's nothing especially wrong with this in principle, it doesn't particularly conform to the mission of the discussion board in general. If I wasn't a giving-the-benefit-of-the-doubt sort, I might wonder if you were doing this to try to offend someone in particular, or to see how far you can push limits.

Either way, in the moderators' judgements, your topics don't have enough relevant content to remain in any of our fora. The rules may specifically prohibit posting of obscene or pornographic material, but neither do they specifically permit posting of material intended only to titillate.

You questioned why the moderators are allowed to flaunt the rules. Well, as I have shown, the moderators' actions are well within acceptable limits, and they have administrative support. Everything permissible, or not, is not covered by IIDB's codified rules. Sometimes the moderators have to draw their own lines. A line has been drawn, and deemed acceptable. Let's move on.

Genghis Pwn

Michael, thanks for the thoughtful and rational response.

I am a big fan of beautiful POST-pubescent girls, as are 99% of straight males alive today. If I wish to start a thread discussing oh, let's say, a sixteen year old fashion model, on what forum should I post it? I thought the lounge was the correct place, but my Rebecca Stamos thread (link above) got moved to Elsewhere?

I will try my best to provide insightful commentary along with the TOTALLY LEGAL photos, which will frame a productive debate on the subject related to the photos.

I want to continue to abide by the forum's rules perfectly. This far I have broken zero rules, though I have been censored many times. To me this is not logical at all, but I realize that people get emotional and mistakes are made.

Peace,
Genghis

pescifish

First off, why are you posting two exactly the same threads? Perhaps the mods will consider your duplicate thread titles and contentless threads as the equivalent of post-slutting, which was clearly announced to be no longer acceptable. I consider the type of duplicate, contentless posting you have demonstrated in the past several days as a form of post-slutting, except that it is not harmless.

The threads may have started very similarly, but the thread that was closed had devolved (as I suspect most threads of similar content will) to a flame war. IMO, Jacey was right on target for closing that thread because of the direction the posts had taken.

Genghis Pwn, we have posters who break the rules and we have posters who openly push the line with outrageous and inflamatory material without actually crossing it. When that happens, it tends to cause other, normally rule abiding, users to result to insults and flames. In many ways, the second category, the ones who post inflamatory material while still toeing the line, is just as disruptive (or more) than those who constantly cross the line.

The fact that you seem to be rule lawyering here in BP&C and in your threats to report posts provides even more evidence of trollish behavior. We do have rules you should consider as you continue to post here: and Although I cannot speak to Jacey's motives on closing the thread, I support his action due to the flame that was building. Not the two rules I've quoted above, you aren't.

If, as your protest here suggests, you posted those two identical (your words and your emphasis) threads in order to see if one would be handled differently due to the age of the model, you have clearly ignored the instructions provided repeatedly in moderation and in your other BP&C thread:

If you want to discuss or explore the morality and political correctness of child sexuality, nudity or the modelling industry in general, do so in the proper forum: MF&P. Formulate a cogent opening argument and if you feel the need to provide visuals, link to them, do not post the photos directly. This board provides a place (and a set of MF&P specific rules) for the debate you seem to want to launch. No, Genghis Pwn, you have not abided by the forums' rules perfectly. Those rules include following the requests and instructions of moderators.

pescifish, Administrator