Posted by Lensman as regards sexeducation
 

With everyone talking about proof of this and proof of that...apparently not a single one that claims to have proof...can provide proof to the owner of this board.

What does that say about all of you that claim to have proof? I know what your claims of proof say to me.

Pig shit.

i wish my ignore list could ignore the threads about him..

i have no idea about the pedo thing, i just know he is annoying...prolly way more than lawrenceC ever got....

and definately not an adult webmaster, which I thought lensman was also cracking down on

there seems to be no consistency with this board...one day he bans for someone not being a webmaster, then one day you don';t have to be a webmaster

sig placement.

Thats the closest thing to proof that I have seen since the day I joined the board here

wow thats major proof right there!!!

http://www.top10adult.info/images/sexed.jpg

hahahahaha...oh shit...that is a great graphic

URL is 404 so really you are assuming things by the URL :2 cents:

Wow I busted gut to that one

at best it is a piss poor choice of terms to be using in a website directory structure. It definitely appers that he was using tactics that most of us know are designed to attract one particular audience to the site. Much like these:

http://www.awrats.com/screenshot1.jpg

Ok, so lets say I made a url like this

whateveryouwant.com/sarettah_fucking_dog_in_ass_and_licking_horse_dick/cumshot-1.jpg

that would mean you did all that right?

The child porn was pulled picture by picture from the archie servers as it was reported..

Not at all. But it would indicate, imo, that you were at the least trying to get picked up by the SEs for those terms in some manner. Or it could be an accurate description of the folder content for all I know. I don't remember the 70's very well :(

Well you can take the word of the hundreds of people who have actually seen the pictures on his servers or you can assume you know what the pictures had on it..

I can tell you because i have seen them.. All you can tell me is you haven't . Just like you haven't seen jackson molest any little boys or o.j. simpson murder anybody

lol

lol - forgot to post my point.... All these guys running around saying they have proof. IF they were telling the truth why would they not foward it to Lens? If they did they would get thier #1 wish and have this guy banned.... so whats holding them back? I think also these peopel are full of shit unless one of them stepsup and provides hard core proof to Lens.

if he did it - show it and lets get him out. If they dont have proof they shoud STUFU.


All I know is this shit is old now.

You've seen pictures like that of me ?? Oh shit. Damn, last times e something like this happened it cost me plenty. Ok, where are the pics? I want all the copies too.

On a serious note. I have never accused sexed of being pedo. I think he is way way out there and has used questionable practices in the past.

I emailed lensman several pictures that have since been erased, but if the above quote is correct lensman saw the nude pictures of 14 year old girls and said it was ok..

Some of the other pictures previously contained hardcore pictures of apparent children engaged in sex acts..

Most of the hardcore images have been erased from the archive after repeated complaints regarding them. But the pictures posted in this thread * quote * and the other were from a well documented childrens porn ring in russia..

but if the quote above is a correct quote I am taking that as Lens not seeing anything. "I haven't seen any child porn on any his stuff. I didn't see any in smokey's email."

So did lens see 14-year old girls nude? Or did he not see them?

You say you seen the pictures - did he say they were 14 or did they just look 14? Shit, I can show you some Asian girls that look 12 that are really like 30, lol. Hell, even little april and twanee (back in the day) tried to pull that shit. Could this have been sometihng like that? I have no idea - never saw pictures don't care to see the pictures. And in no way am I defending CP or SexEd but this ENTIRE thing is just fucking old.

I sent lens the thread that was obviously deleted that "masterblogger" posted a CP link on.

He said it wasn't proof enough.

Pageviews over morals.

That about sums it up.

I think maybe you need to go to ASACP and read the definition of CP

well the only way i see to get rid of this guy is everyone to start a thread and complain about him..... i will start it off..


p.s since my next post on gfy will be my last you guys/girls hold the fort down....:1orglaugh

foolio:

I have more than enough "proof" that was started a few years back now.

The reason I'm not giving fuck all info out on this shitbag or providing *any* material to others is there is more at stake. I'm not gonna fuck up work done by others for the sake of some peace on a webmaster board which, when you think of it, means nothing.

Much as tho I'd love to post the whole fucking lot - it sure is tempting when the shitbag goes into a state of denial - I know there are more "relevant" things in line for SexEd. Folks have spent a long time over SexEd and a few others. I also still want to remain on friendly terms with the people who trusted me - so nada info outta me! :-)

Screw his crap on GFY! :-)

PS... I doubt he is still doing his CP shit - he knows stuff - and I'm sure his hard drives are spotless - at least the one's he is currently using.

And it has become "He doesn't NOW have cp on his site."
Can't argue with that one!

Ok we might not have proof but we all know he is a deranged individual and a pure troll . I don't see why he's still here

Using that criteria..you could wipe out 2/3rd of the membership!
:1orglaugh

lol, I think you are underestimating here :1orglaugh

foolio:

You think?? :glugglug

Why would anyone think that?

The board says it all.....

i guess this intro page says it all

http://web.archive.org/web/200011090...education.com/

He did indeed see the pictures , as i sent them to him via email.

look a bit on the archive servers , theres still a few pics up, you have to dig, im not going to post them because lensman will delete them for some reason from gfy , yet he asks for people to post the proof, If it isn't proof why does he delete them , they are hotlinked straight from the servers .

You think that picture of the little girl with a bottle of vodka between her legs is OK?

:ak47:

You have to remember you're talking to someone almost as unstable as sexped although fortunately without the kiddy fixation.

I looked around his site last year when this issue first came up. I say I saw some very questionable stuff going on there. Very questionable. The child-porn-like innuendo on his site was rampant, a few banners were blatant pandering to kids, including the sex connotation.

I don't know, maybe he's changed some things since. I haven't bothered going back there.



But I expect my word to be enough. If it isn't enough for some of you, then some of you just don't get it. I know what I saw.
I didn't like what I saw.


Now you can believe me or not, makes no nevermind to me. But don't go challenging my word and arguing and disagreeing with me and defending the twit. Because, out of the two of us, it is I that actually went and looked at the site and took the time to look around in order to know what I'm talking about. Some of you talking here.... didn't.

Clear enough?

I do not approve of the picture...but I doubt that it meets the legal criteria of being child porn. It is unimportant what I think...it is Lensmans board.

You saying it does not make it true...now does it? BTW...:321GFY whoever you are.

Now thats fucking proof right there!