Originally posted by jimmyf
This is GFY that's how
This is GFY that's how
Fifty anarchistic censorists
-
Exactly.
Fifty anarchistic censoristsPromote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634 -
People who just don't understand what someone is saying no matter how much they dumb it down for them, I suppose.Originally posted by Alex From San Diego
And what "type" is that?
I hoped my subsequent re-wordings have been helpful to you.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
Very good post/points you made!Originally posted by jayeff
I do not believe for one second that the writers of the US Constitution intended to legalize the dissemination of racial hatred. Lawmakers agreed and found some ways of limiting those who think otherwise. Information relating to national security may not be broadcast. You are not even allowed to speak as you want about another individual without risking legal repercussions.
Like it or not, we long ago accepted the principle of censorship and the only real issue now is where the lines are drawn. Unless you believe that existing forms of censorship should all be torn down, it is emotive nonsense to cry "censorship" whenever someone wants to argue about one of those lines. It is equally absurd to suggest that drawing a line in one area impacts automatically on another.
However, it is also true that the issue of censorship shows up a major flaw of democracy, namely that very few people actively participate. So there is always someone trying to push a minority view through, relying on the apathy of the majority to get away with it. And others exploit the freedoms that exist, relying on that same apathy.
It may be practically easier for organisations like ACLU to fight the broad issue of freedom of speech, rather than dealing with each case on its own merits. But someone who tells individuals that they should not express an opinion about specific areas, is guilty of the very censorship they claim to oppose.
Having said all of that, I would point out that in the couple of posts I made about the burned cat, I did not suggest that it should be illegal to display such material. Nor did many others, so in any case it is misleading to accuse us all of wanting censorship. I simply expressed my disgust at the owners of a business who display such material, not to protect freedom of speech, not to educate anyone, but solely to make a profit.
Should I be censored and not allowed to express that opinion?Comment
-
CDSmith,
Tell me something...Do you wish that there was total unrestricted free speech laws in place where anyone could write absolutely anything they wanted and have it published?Comment
-
Agreed. His post was very well put together.Originally posted by notjoe
Very good post/points you made!Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
Amazing. You write the answer, yet they later still ask the question.Originally posted by notjoe
CDSmith,
Tell me something...Do you wish that there was total unrestricted free speech laws in place where anyone could write absolutely anything they wanted and have it published?
Jeezuz Joe, shall I phone you up and read it to you as well?
What I said earlier hasn't changed....
Let me repeat the part you might not yet still understand.....Originally posted by CDSmith
I'm not advocating removing existing censorship laws here.
What I'm saying for the umpteenth time is that I don't support FURTHERING the cause of censorship. I don't advocate removing existing rights in the area of freedom of online expression, I don't support adding in MORE censorship.
And what I'm saying is, neither should you. (you as in "you all").
I'm not advocating removing existing censorship laws here.
Let me know when what I'm saying is clear enough. Thanks, I appreciate it.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
Anarchy - Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.Originally posted by CDSmith
Exactly.
Fifty anarchistic censorists
Are you saying that there should be no standards by which we live by?We are what we repeatedly do.-AristotleComment
-
Yeah and the truth is that horrible things have been going on here on earth for as long as mankind has been around, and that's just our species.
Babies and kittens tortured, people raped and killed. Its horrible but it does go on and has forever. We are all just fucking animals.
But now that we have tv and the internet, and everyone has a video camera, technology is bringing these horrors to us in all sorts of fun ways.
Its sad and horrible but it is real. I do not believe in the cushy soft reality most of you like to live in. The world is fucking harsh, and maybe sometimes people need to be reminded of this instead of just tuning into some whore star billionaire chick on tv pretending to live in a trailer all the time.
Awareness of the cruelty in the world will make it easier to cope with your own lives when some horrible shit happens to you, like losing a loved one or worse. That is the way I see it anyhow.
There are children on this planet that probably have seen worse horrors than that kitten video. Its terrible, but censoring things on the internet is not going to fix anything.
One's main concern should be protecting their children, if they have any.Last edited by cherrylula; 07-22-2004, 07:45 AM.Comment
-
Most of these issues aren't true censorship per se but I think silencing voices by a vocal minority is disgusting and anti-American. A boycott is one thing, forcing the removal for those who want to hear/watch something is completely different..Comment
-
Do you feel then that Viacom, etc.. should have THEIR rights suspended?Originally posted by mardigras
Most of these issues aren't true censorship per se but I think silencing voices by a vocal minority is disgusting and anti-American. A boycott is one thing, forcing the removal for those who want to hear/watch something is completely different.
It's their right to remove from THEIR business whatever they want. Disgusting or not, it's essential to preserve that or else we're in for a total shitstorm.Penis Pill Sponsor List and Reviews:
http://www.pillsponsors.comComment
-
I'm dealing with a dense person here.Originally posted by Alex From San Diego
Are you saying that there should be no standards by which we live by?
Can anyone translate my posts for this guy?Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
You're still not answering my question and i dont know how to ask it any other way..Originally posted by CDSmith
Amazing. You write the answer, yet they later still ask the question.
Jeezuz Joe, shall I phone you up and read it to you as well?
What I said earlier hasn't changed....
Let me repeat the part you might not yet still understand.....
I'm not advocating removing existing censorship laws here.
Let me know when what I'm saying is clear enough. Thanks, I appreciate it.
I dont care what you advocate or don't. I am asking for what YOU BELIEVE IN...this question isnt hard and there are really only two possible answers so pick one
1) I believe there should be no restriction on freedom of speech.
OR
2) I believe there needs to be some form or censorship
Which is it going to be?Comment
-
Bin Laden gets his audio tapes published. The Nazi Party is allowed free speech to and so on.Originally posted by notjoe
CDSmith,
Tell me something...Do you wish that there was total unrestricted free speech laws in place where anyone could write absolutely anything they wanted and have it published?Comment
-
Originally posted by CDSmith
I'm dealing with a dense person here.
Can anyone translate my posts for this guy?
NOPE
Epic CashEpic Cash works for me
Solar Cash Paysite Plugin
Gallery of the day freesites,POTD,Gallery generator with free hostingComment
-
But "Hate literature" is illegal.. obviously there needs to be some sort of censorship as people have not advance enough to see past races and borders...Originally posted by Roger
Bin Laden gets his audio tapes published. The Nazi Party is allowed free speech to and so on.
The G8 Nations burn crops to keep prices stable rather than shipping it off to countries where people starve.Comment
-
Joe, for christs sake man, I've SAID IT SEVERAL TIMES here. Can you not read?Originally posted by notjoe
You're still not answering my question and i dont know how to ask it any other way..
I dont care what you advocate or don't. I am asking for what YOU BELIEVE IN...this question isnt hard and there are really only two possible answers so pick one
1) I believe there should be no restriction on freedom of speech.
OR
2) I believe there needs to be some form or censorship
Which is it going to be?
Nevermind, I know the answer to that.
By saying "I'm not avdocating removing existing censorship laws" by the very definition of that sentence it answers your question. Duh.
It clearly means that I agree with existing censorship laws, or at least the ones that pertain to CP, true obscenity, hate crime, counselling and advocating real violence etc. Again, it CLEARLY means that.
clearly.
As in, no room for doubt.
Helloo? Anyone like, hoome?Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
This is such a delicate issue, and I think what jayeff said about democracy hits the nail on the head. It's a fantastic system...in theory...but in practice, it falls short of the intended results.
I'm all about protecting children's right to innocence, but adults' rights? They have the right to change the channel, turn off the computer, or close the book. I'm not condoning irresponsible use of the right to free speech to protect unlawful activities (and burning a cat is illegal, isn't it?). But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
My concern is when government concors indirectly....by putting pressure on private companies to cencor. For example, Nightline was doing a special on the fallen soldiers in Iraq a month or two ago. There was no political overtones to the program...just a show of respect and appreciation for those who couragously fought and lost their lives in service to our nation, regardless of their personal feelings about whether we belonged there or not. The production company in charge of seven major markets of that network refused to air the program, claiming it was an anti-government statement. Incidentally, that company reported first quarter preliminary results for net broadcast revenues reached $158.3 million. The Q1 increase over the previous year -- about $4 million more than the company expected -- came in part from $1.3 million in additional political advertising revenues in key election states such as Ohio, Florida, West Virginia, Illinois and Maine, where they own stations. Forthermore, 98% of the company's total of over $65,000 in political contributions went to Bush.
So here's a situation in which a private company made a decision....but it was a decision that was clearly biased.
Anyway, my point is that the line isn't as clear as it seems, and because of situations like the one involving Sinclair Broadcast Group, I am less likely to support censorship of responsible free speech in any capacity.Need Hosting? Reality Check Network services me purrrfectly!
Comment
-
Stripping away all the emotion that tends to accompany the topic of censorship, it is just another area of the law. As such it NEED be no different than any other. And while there are probably no laws with which everyone agrees, many genuinely reflect what one might call "community standards" and as such are entirely compatible with the concept of democracy.
In the context of democracy as it is popularly understood, it is no more fundamentally logical to try to prevent censorship per se, than - for example - calling for a repeal of laws relating to violence because some people feel that a fist is a reasonable response to an insult.
That said, censorship rarely reflects community standards: it is far more likely to reflect the views of a minority interest, political, religious, or whatever. That is not an inherent flaw of censorship itself, but as I noted in my previous post, a consequence of peoples' apathy.
You could even argue that it is something of a copout to tackle the relatively easier issue of censorship instead of the broader issue of that apathy. And it really is a nonsense that we can find no better way to protect freedoms with which the majority would have no problem, than by tolerating things which most likely do find unacceptable.
Nor should we forget that public apathy frequently leads to the will of a minority prevailing in many other areas of our lives.Last edited by jayeff; 07-22-2004, 08:15 AM.Comment
-
Sorry for the spelling issues, lolOriginally posted by chase
My concern is when government concors indirectly....by putting pressure on private companies to cencor.Need Hosting? Reality Check Network services me purrrfectly!Comment
-
Originally posted by CDSmith
Joe, for christs sake man, I've SAID IT SEVERAL TIMES here. Can you not read?
Nevermind, I know the answer to that.
By saying "I'm not avdocating removing existing censorship laws" by the very definition of that sentence it answers your question. Duh.
It clearly means that I agree with existing censorship laws, or at least the ones that pertain to CP, true obscenity, hate crime, counselling and advocating real violence etc. Again, it CLEARLY means that.
clearly.
As in, no room for doubt.
Helloo? Anyone like, hoome?
Listen you tool,
There is a big difference between something you believe in and something you advocate against.
There are many things in life which i do not like and wouldnt complain if they changed but am content with them at the moment. From the way you've posted you made it sound like you're against censorship laws (Just look at topic of this thread) but are content with it.
Since you do support censorship laws (because you dont advocate against them) i have a question to ask you and that question is "Why do you support censorship yet continue to work in porn?"
Why even start this thread if you do not advocate for censorship reform and are ok with the forms of censorship we have now?Comment
-
Okay, you're being a nitpicky tool yourself here. How many of us are guilty of miswording a topic title? Probably all of us at one time or another, yourself included.Originally posted by notjoe
Listen you tool,
There is a big difference between something you believe in and something you advocate against.
There are many things in life which i do not like and wouldnt complain if they changed but am content with them at the moment. From the way you've posted you made it sound like you're against censorship laws (Just look at topic of this thread) but are content with it.
Since you do support censorship laws (because you dont advocate against them) i have a question to ask you and that question is "Why do you support censorship yet continue to work in porn?"
Why even start this thread if you do not advocate for censorship reform and are ok with the forms of censorship we have now?
but the meaning of the title isn't wrong, it is merely a tad incomplete. After all joe, is not supporting MORE censorship supporting censorship?
So how it should have read is "Why do you show support for more censorship yet work in porn?"
picky picky picky. It appears that most others comprehended my meaning, espeicially after reading my posts.... like the one I had to quote for you twice.
I realized going into this topic that I would have to deal with a few denseoids, but I'm always amazed to find the depth of that denseness. It's like dropping a coin down a bottomless well.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
CD
Dont confuse choice with censorship - newspaper chains have the right to choose what content they wish to put into their publications, just because their political point of view is different than your does not mean that they are censoring material - they are choosing, as the have a right to, not to include material that they find offensive. Do you not think that they have this right?
You live on the west coast I believe - you must remember the case of the convicted pedophlie who was arrested for writing stories invloving k****** p*** - he said it was theraputic. Many writers came to his defence and offered money and fundraisers in order to help with his legal fees. Is this censorship, or a legal issue?
In Toronto here, the customs agents routinely destroy gay pronographic books, magazines and other material due to what they interpret as legal issues. Many people, as do I, see this as censorship.
Promoting adult material and appreciating what can and cannot be said in public or even in privately owned materials does not have to be a conflict of issues. After all not all porn meisters are liberal fanatics or even a little to the left of center, many can be as far right as Nixon on Prozac.Comment
-
Originally posted by CDSmith
People.... tell the guys at CJ how outraged you are by that title.... sure. What I'm saying is, be careful about how you cry out for the right to post something contraversial should be taken away, because you're opening up a pretty dangerous cavern if you do.
It is frustrating when people fail to see things clearly. CD, in my case I asked advertisers to boycott CJ. That is my way of, as you say "tell(ing) the guys at CJ how outraged (I am) by that title".
I didn't ask for their rights to post that video to be taken away. And I didn't ask for their rights to be juvenile while titling that video to be taken away.
I asked that someone hurt their pocket book to show them that we DO NOT think it's funny to laugh at severe animal abuse.
That is all.
Clear now?Comment
-
The only "censoring" I do is in my own home. By changing the channel, or closing a thread maybe if pic grosses me out. That type of thing.
You've read it, you can't unread it.Comment
-
probably because they don't care
porn sites are their hobby/fun project to make some beer money of and wank off to all day long......
eight,eight,two,eight,eight,four,two
......Comment
-
Had you been the only one talking about it on another thread I would be able to see the validity of your post. But you weren't. There were many others, several of whom were saying things like "they shouldn't be allowed to post that"... "they shouldn't be allowed to say that" etc.Originally posted by DonovanPhillips
It is frustrating when people fail to see things clearly. CD, in my case I asked advertisers to boycott CJ. That is my way of, as you say "tell(ing) the guys at CJ how outraged (I am) by that title".
I didn't ask for their rights to post that video to be taken away. And I didn't ask for their rights to be juvenile while titling that video to be taken away.
I asked that someone hurt their pocket book to show them that we DO NOT think it's funny to laugh at severe animal abuse.
That is all.
Clear now?
Where did I ever say Donovan Phillips was crying for more censorship?Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
simple, because they are hypocrites.
kids are being gunned down in the streets, where are these crusades?
a 6 year old girl was shot playing in her yard this week in LA.
these losers will cry more about a kitten and will step over a homeless guy to buy their kid an xbox game.
go pretend somewhere else hypocrites
Want an Android App for your tube, membership, or free site?
Need banners or promo material? Hit us up (ICQ Fletch: 148841377) or email me fletchxxx at gmail.com -
recent work - About meComment
-
Excellent.Originally posted by Tom_PM
The only "censoring" I do is in my own home. By changing the channel, or closing a thread maybe if pic grosses me out. That type of thing.
But.... how do you feel when some guy down the street from you tries to tell you that you shouldn't be allowed to even have the choice of weather to watch a certain program or not?
Censorship takes many forms, not just the traditional cutting room floor variety.
There are many programs and internet content that I find distasteful, but I'm not about to start shouting that others shouldn't have the right to view them (or show them/post them)Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
Yeah, I disagree with trying to shut people down just because I dont agree with content of whatever kind. Who am I to judge for others?Originally posted by CDSmith
Excellent.
But.... how do you feel when some guy down the street from you tries to tell you that you shouldn't be allowed to even have the choice of weather to watch a certain program or not?
Censorship takes many forms, not just the traditional cutting room floor variety.
There are many programs and internet content that I find distasteful, but I'm not about to start shouting that others shouldn't have the right to view them (or show them/post them)
So the reverse is true also; I dont appreciate someone else trying to determine if I should be allowed to make that choice for myself.
You've read it, you can't unread it.Comment
-
I confused nothing. And AGAIN I'll say it.... I'm not saying a company shouldn't be allowed to decide their own policies. I am merely strongly suggesting that those of us in the adult industry not support censorship... and weather you want to believe it or not, it IS censorship.Originally posted by Captain Canada
Dont confuse choice with censorship - newspaper chains have the right to choose what content they wish to put into their publications, just because their political point of view is different than your does not mean that they are censoring material - they are choosing, as the have a right to, not to include material that they find offensive. Do you not think that they have this right?
Do Torontonians really believe that Winnipeg is on the west coast?Originally posted by Captain Canada
You live on the west coast I believe -
Sorry, had to laugh. *ahem*
Are you speaking about the R v Sharpe decision? I know that one of the points of law in one of those pedo cases was over the right to privately possess and view such material. Posting it, sharing it, distributing it or broadcasting it is still illegal. Personal possession/personal use is as far as I know now protected by law thanks to that case. It's a civil rights issue, not one of censorship, if this is the case you speak of.Originally posted by Captain Canada
you must remember the case of the convicted pedophlie who was arrested for writing stories invloving k****** p*** - he said it was theraputic. Many writers came to his defence and offered money and fundraisers in order to help with his legal fees. Is this censorship, or a legal issue?
At any rate, I've pointed out in several posts on this and other threads that CP and other illegal material is NOT included in any anti-censorship points I've ever made.
Can you tell I really hate having to repeat myself?Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
Just as an off-topic note, CDSmith did your trouble out there ever get sorted out? Last I read about it, it was in limbo - waiting for something.Penis Pill Sponsor List and Reviews:
http://www.pillsponsors.comComment
-
"Censorship", as a concept, only applies to things that ARE legal to consume, but someone thinks you shouldnt be ALLOWED to consume.
I didnt know the subject was being confused with illegal things. Thats a different topic entirely.
You've read it, you can't unread it.Comment
-
You mean my own battle with the forces of censorship and the violation of civil rights? It's not over yet.Originally posted by Dusen
Just as an off-topic note, CDSmith did your trouble out there ever get sorted out? Last I read about it, it was in limbo - waiting for something.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
Most of the goons on this board don't have a real business and have never had to make the tough decisions on what to post or not to post. Hell, most of them should go ahead and put everything on their site because they won't get in trouble. No one will ever even see their site.Originally posted by CDSmith
Why?
Why do so many of you support censorship? Do you not realize that you are shooting yourself in the foot every time you open your mouth on one of these topics? If you don't realize it... why? Are you blind and stupid as well?
I don't get you people.
Someone says something on a talk show or radio program that is negative against the govenrment and their show later gets axed and some of you say "good riddance".
Someone posts a horrific outrageous contraversial video clip and you want to hang that person and censor them instead of punishing those responsible for making the video.
Someone does a regular political satirical cartoon in a newspaper, the cartoon is cutting edge and often-times contraversial, and they end up getting CENSORED for it..... and many of you support that censorship.
In fact, there are dozens if not hundreds of posts on this very board where someone has posted some kind of LEGAL porn (legal mind you) that several people find distasteful and what do I see people saying?...... they say "That shit shouldn't be allowed", "That's sick and should be removed" etc.
Un freaking believeable!
Tell you what. Keep it up, and one day those wonderful censorists you love to support will be coming for your site, your content, YOUR business.
Some of you need to rethink your point of view on censorship. Pronto.Regards,
Rick Latona
http://latonas.com
Latona's - We Sell Money Making Web Properties
Note to buyers of websites and traffic: please check our inventory at http://latonas.com/websites-for-sale. If you would like to make an offer on something, just let me know.Comment
-
People seem to want to lump in illegal things on this issue all the time. How many dopes have we seen on these threads saying "So, you think cp should be okay too?"...."So, you think total anarchy is okay?"....etc.Originally posted by Tom_PM
"Censorship", as a concept, only applies to things that ARE legal to consume, but someone thinks you shouldnt be ALLOWED to consume.
I didnt know the subject was being confused with illegal things. Thats a different topic entirely.
All we can do is try to simplify our words for the those leading a simpler existence.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
Brutal man. That's immediately what came to mind when I first read your post.Originally posted by CDSmith
You mean my own battle with the forces of censorship and the violation of civil rights? It's not over yet.Penis Pill Sponsor List and Reviews:
http://www.pillsponsors.comComment
-
This fall will be four years since the start.Originally posted by Dusen
Brutal man. That's immediately what came to mind when I first read your post.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
lol CDsmith.. well, the topic is really central to the ENTIRE industry since there's so much grey area that has to be constantly tested it seems to me..
It seems to me that "obscenity" is really a grey term which, when crossed, the content should be censored according to the government. So it's a really important thing to think about carefully.
And now, it's lunch time.
You've read it, you can't unread it.Comment
-
Wrong. society has decided that we don't want this on our public airwaves. Just becuase a minority want it, means nothing. A minority want kiddie porn too.Originally posted by CDSmith
Hmm.
I suppose I have a problem with that kind of censorship as well. People out there in the world have the right to not tune in to Stern's show. The certainly have the right to turn it to another station. They even have the right to bitch and moan about it openly.
I completely disagree. I see no ugly forms of censorship.Originally posted by CDSmith
but to shut someone up simply because some people don't like what someone is saying? Some censorship is needed, and no one in their right mind would disagree with some of it..... but a lot of it is pretty ugly, and quite frankly... scary.I'm not a dinosaur, I'm a crocodile. I've seen dinosaurs come and go and I'm left unimpressed.Comment
-
You are indeed right and i have mislabeled a topic or two but i do not believe this is a mistake of topic.Originally posted by CDSmith
Okay, you're being a nitpicky tool yourself here. How many of us are guilty of miswording a topic title? Probably all of us at one time or another, yourself included.
No, like i said you can be against censorship and yet be content with the censorship laws in place but when you keep on saying things such asOriginally posted by CDSmith
but the meaning of the title isn't wrong, it is merely a tad incomplete. After all joe, is not supporting MORE censorship supporting censorship?
"I am merely strongly suggesting that those of us in the adult industry not support censorship... and weather you want to believe it or not, it IS censorship."
you make it seem that you support no censorship at all and without censorship I believe the infrastructure of civilization would fall apart. The moral decay of our society would just be accelerated.
The answer to this question is fairly simple as well...Originally posted by CDSmith
So how it should have read is "Why do you show support for more censorship yet work in porn?"
We need to make changes because things such as "Nude Model" sites are still "Legal"...Things as such still need to be shut down and there isnt the ability to do it.
You can quote yourself as many times as you'd like but if i didnt understand what you meant the first time chances are i wont the second time, not rocket science hereOriginally posted by CDSmith
picky picky picky. It appears that most others comprehended my meaning, espeicially after reading my posts.... like the one I had to quote for you twice.
So in closing, I do support censorship but only to a certian extent. I am pretty happy with what is in place now but there are things which need to be changed. The real fight is to protect ourselfs while allowing them the ability to deal with the things such as "Nude Model" sites and whatnot. We have to make sure that all checks and balances are in place before making any changes though.Comment
-
Society decided nothing from what I can tell. The government made that decision, did it not?Originally posted by 12clicks
Wrong. society has decided that we don't want this on our public airwaves. Just becuase a minority want it, means nothing. A minority want kiddie porn too.
I completely disagree. I see no ugly forms of censorship.
Let's not go the kiddie porn route, I've addressed that ad nauseum.
And I on the other hand see a great deal of "ugly" censorship, not to mention useless and unwarranted. Do you ever watch TBS, the Atlanta superstation? It is syndicated, so you probably have it available as we do. That station airs content that is censored beyond belief. You can't say the word "ass" on that station, even when it is 2 in the morning. Movies are cut to ribbons before being run on stations like that.
Censorship is everywhere. My entire central point here is that I think we should strongly think about what kinds of extra censorship we choose to support and cry out for. I believe that if left unchecked, the censorists would love to turn their scissors on you and everyone here. Love it. Removing the right to speak one's mind on a subject, or make fun of something, the displaying on one's own site of something in life that really happened, is not a good idea. So to is it not a good idea, especially for adult webmasters, to support it. I am in favor of more rights, or at least preserving those that we have.
I'm sorry, I don't see how anyone can disagree with me on that or why they would.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
CD, you just don't get it. TBS if free to do as they please. You keep trying to make your point with businesses who have no obligation to afford anyone free speech.
You don't have an argument.
you keep saying you're not for MORE sensorship but then you give examples of current censorship and when challenged on it you go,"no, no. I mean MORE censorship"
Here in America, the FCC regulates the airwaves and has for decades. this isn't *new* or *more* censorship so please don't use it as an example.
If companies "decide not to play, run, broadcast, something they think is controversial and could cost them business, that is NOT censorship so please don't use THAT as an example either.
so what's left?I'm not a dinosaur, I'm a crocodile. I've seen dinosaurs come and go and I'm left unimpressed.Comment
-
My other posts clarified that point and revealed my meaning. This is why it is so important to read or listen to what the other person is saying before formulating a response, else risk making oneself look foolish.Originally posted by notjoe
No, like i said you can be against censorship and yet be content with the censorship laws in place but when you keep on saying things such as
"I am merely strongly suggesting that those of us in the adult industry not support censorship... and weather you want to believe it or not, it IS censorship."
you make it seem that you support no censorship at all and blah blah blabbety blah..
Uh Joseph.... what is wrong with nude model sites? I don't get it, you lost me here. Models are all over this board, posing nude, running amok, having sites. Is there something wrong with nude models I should know about?Originally posted by notjoe
The answer to this question is fairly simple as well...
We need to make changes because things such as "Nude Model" sites are still "Legal"...Things as such still need to be shut down and there isnt the ability to do it.
You're right about one thing Joe..... it really isn't rocket science. :DOriginally posted by notjoe
You can quote yourself as many times as you'd like but if i didnt understand what you meant the first time chances are i wont the second time, not rocket science here
Then, we are pretty much in agreement, although I'm still a bit lost on this whole "nude model" issue you keep yammering on about. Do perhaps mean "UNDERAGE nude models"??Originally posted by notjoe
So in closing, I do support censorship but only to a certian extent. I am pretty happy with what is in place now but there are things which need to be changed. The real fight is to protect ourselfs while allowing them the ability to deal with the things such as "Nude Model" sites and whatnot. We have to make sure that all checks and balances are in place before making any changes though.
If so, we are in agreement there too.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
So, we're in agreement that we need to change the censorship laws and possibly add to them?! NO NO NO, that cannot be!!Originally posted by CDSmith
Then, we are pretty much in agreement, although I'm still a bit lost on this whole "nude model" issue you keep yammering on about. Do perhaps mean "UNDERAGE nude models"??
If so, we are in agreement there too.
(And i was referring to underaged model sites)Comment
-
LOL.... okay okay. Here's what I don't get.Originally posted by 12clicks
CD, you just don't get it. TBS if free to do as they please. You keep trying to make your point with businesses who have no obligation to afford anyone free speech.
You don't have an argument.
you keep saying you're not for MORE sensorship but then you give examples of current censorship and when challenged on it you go,"no, no. I mean MORE censorship"
Here in America, the FCC regulates the airwaves and has for decades. this isn't *new* or *more* censorship so please don't use it as an example.
If companies "decide not to play, run, broadcast, something they think is controversial and could cost them business, that is NOT censorship so please don't use THAT as an example either.
so what's left?
I don't get that my point about not supporting censorship get's lost in translation. I've said it at least 3 times here..... I'll say it one more time.....
I'm not saying that private business should not be allowed to regulate itself or decide it's own policies. I'm simply advising my fellow webmasters as to why it is inadviseable to SUPPORT such things as someone or something being shut up, shut down, or silenced in some way over an opinion. It is a form of censorship, and it is my opinion that it is wrong. The companies can do what they want, but I don't have to support it.
I do see what you're saying though. If the question is "Should private companies be allowed to decide their own policies" of course the answer is yes. Anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. But to draw a parrallel here if I may..... this is Lensman's board. If he started deleting your posts for you being "too political" or "too contraversial" that would be his right as a business owner.
But would it not also be my right to voice my objection to that censorship? I think so, and that is precisely what I'm doing. I am also cautioning others to think before they cheer on the cause of censorship whenever such an issue arrises. That's all.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
Not much reallyOriginally posted by 12clicks
CD, you just don't get it. TBS if free to do as they please. You keep trying to make your point with businesses who have no obligation to afford anyone free speech.
You don't have an argument.
you keep saying you're not for MORE sensorship but then you give examples of current censorship and when challenged on it you go,"no, no. I mean MORE censorship"
Here in America, the FCC regulates the airwaves and has for decades. this isn't *new* or *more* censorship so please don't use it as an example.
If companies "decide not to play, run, broadcast, something they think is controversial and could cost them business, that is NOT censorship so please don't use THAT as an example either.
so what's left?
Comment
-
CD
Every single example you have shown regarding censorship is simply a business choice made by a private company.
And when people disagree with you - you try to make them out as feeble or simple minded - 12clicks already said it - you have no argument.
If you wish to talk about censorship post some examples of censorship.Comment
-
See what happens when you drop the "you're a tool" and "get off the cock" retardedness? Anything becomes possible.Originally posted by notjoe
So, we're in agreement that we need to change the censorship laws and possibly add to them?! NO NO NO, that cannot be!!
(And i was referring to underaged model sites)
And I figured you was referrin' to underage models Joe. I wuz jus givin' y'all a hard time. hyuk.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
Private companies have the right to make decisions. It was never my contention to suggest otherwise, and if any of my previous posts led anyone to believe that it was, I apologize for my vagueness.
That does not mean we have to agree with or support those decisions.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
But I will.Originally posted by CDSmith
LOL.... okay okay. Here's what I don't get.
I don't get that my point about not supporting censorship get's lost in translation. I've said it at least 3 times here..... I'll say it one more time.....
I'm not saying that private business should not be allowed to regulate itself or decide it's own policies. I'm simply advising my fellow webmasters as to why it is inadviseable to SUPPORT such things as someone or something being shut up, shut down, or silenced in some way over an opinion. It is a form of censorship, and it is my opinion that it is wrong. The companies can do what they want, but I don't have to support it. you've given no examples that I disagree with.
Lensman has every write to do anything on this board and while you have the right to protest it, it doesn't make YOU right. It just means you disagree with it.Originally posted by CDSmith
I do see what you're saying though. If the question is "Should private companies be allowed to decide their own policies" of course the answer is yes. Anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. But to draw a parrallel here if I may..... this is Lensman's board. If he started deleting your posts for you being "too political" or "too contraversial" that would be his right as a business owner.
But would it not also be my right to voice my objection to that censorship? I think so, and that is precisely what I'm doing. I am also cautioning others to think before they cheer on the cause of censorship whenever such an issue arrises. That's all.
At that point, you open you own chat board and invite me to speak politics.
Thats all the government is doing as well. giving you the oportunity of free speach but not forcing others to give it to youI'm not a dinosaur, I'm a crocodile. I've seen dinosaurs come and go and I'm left unimpressed.Comment
Comment