Quote:
Originally posted by Kimmykim
Brad, you know I like you and I respect your opinion. However, 90% of the people that scream the loudest about stuff have and use accounts at CCBill, and the other company that processes these sites.
While I dont work there any more, I can tell you the policy has been -- for more than two years -- that no one nude and under 18 was allowed on sites they processed. Did certain companies change their tours and members areas after they were approved? Sure. Did some people do it repeatedly? Sure. And in the end they were terminated. Even MET had to clean house a few months ago or be terminated.
As for the non nude teen sites -- which is what this guy appears to be talking about, if their parents sign a release, which is what was required when I was there, there is not much that a processor can then find wrong with a legal site.
It's very easy to say you don't like this, you don't like that, but the problem is that there is always something that someone doesn't like.
|
ya thats what i was asking. clothed teens r legal, so why did every1 jump all over him? frankly id rather pedos were looking at legal clothed kids and jerking off than looking at dads raping their daughters and going out to perpetrate the crimes.
im sure plenty of guys watched max hardcore videos and went and did sick shit 2 their girlfriends/whatever ... id bet that rule applies as well to pedophiles. im all for protecting kids but it seems like we r going after the wrong ppl here no?
