|
Best Porn Sites | Live Sex | Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar |
Celebrity, Film & Television Discussion For all of your chat, opinion and thoughts on mainstream celebrities, film and television programmes. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
August 29th, 2012, 07:38 PM | #21 | |
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,926
Thanks: 139,848
Thanked 303,397 Times in 15,466 Posts
|
Quote:
Talking to, or back to admins is not sacrilege, though rehashing something that has been discussed, at length many, many times is punishable by death. It has nothing whatsoever to do with us being sued, it has everything with us doing what is necessary to protect this forum, ourselves and our members from being prosecuted for distributing child pornography. It is precisely because we are a hard core porn forum, first and foremost that we have to be very rigid on this point, it was decided by the mods several years back to have an age rule, and that age was 18, in the UK 18 is the legal age to do most stuff kids look forward (or not) to, drinking, gambling, getting married without parental consent, getting a tattoo, posing in porn magazines, movies etc. Where would you draw the line?, seeing an actress in sexy attire such as a bikini or skimpy shorts and top, 17, 16, 15, 14????? Again I say, this is the rule, we expect all members to adhere to it, if you like seeing under 18's then this is not the forum for you.
__________________
We recommend you use a variety of hosts for your pictures Read and follow the To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. and everything will be sweet. Use the To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. button to show appreciation. Use the To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. facility or the A-Z's before starting a new thread. Play nice.
If you find any dead images in any of my celebrity posts, please PM me with details. |
|
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Sam Spade For This Useful Post: |
August 30th, 2012, 02:36 AM | #22 | |
Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 41
Thanks: 10
Thanked 79 Times in 30 Posts
|
I'm sorry if this has been discussed to death, I don't want to rehash anything, but I've read the thread, and up till now, the discussion didn't make a whole lot of sense, I was completely lost when the argument seemed to be made that we shouldn't post Applegates non-nude pictures because she had breast cancer?
Quote:
I draw the line at NUDITY, just like major sites like Youtube do. Where would you draw the line? Showing the face of under 16 girls, that's distributing child porn? Seriously, to equate linking to pics of girls in bikinis with "distributing child pornography.", is quite insulting to the actual victims of child pronography. Also, it's NOT the same. And please, don't try to muddle the issue here with accusations about anyone liking em young. My issue is the extremism in your standards and overzealousness. I really can't believe that you really think that linking to a prime-time/day-time show like MARRIED with Children is the same as child porn. Applegate is always fully clothed in the show, no nipples, no underwear, no bikinis, at most she show legs. if I'm wrong, please point out the specific episode. If that's distributing child pornography, then all the moms from my Midwestern suburb should be sued, because they all have 12-18 year old daughters who wear skimpy shorts to school. Let's be very clear: I fully get your rule "do not show pictures of girls under 18, even if they're fully clothed". What really troubles me is your reasoning behind the rule: You fear to be prosecuted for distributing child porn. So that's weird to me. And to others, it seems, when said girls are fully clothed. Yes, since I don't see police roaming the beaches arresting girls wearing bikinis, bikini wearing girls aren't (Todd) Akin to spreading child porn (pun intended) Last edited by zplonk; August 30th, 2012 at 03:01 AM.. Reason: clarification and minimizing unnecessary rounds of "do you get this? yes I get that!" etc |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to zplonk For This Useful Post: |
August 30th, 2012, 02:56 AM | #23 |
Lean Mean Screencap Machine
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Better you don't know.
Posts: 23,834
Thanks: 10,482
Thanked 207,412 Times in 23,741 Posts
|
The issue is not the over-zealousness and standards of the staff. The issue is the THREAT of legal action, by ANYONE. Any legal action would put this forum out of business. It would simply cost too much to attempt a legal defense.
This site is not linking the posting of pictures of girls under 18 with child pornography. It IS dealing with the reality that many people WILL, for reasons that have little if any connection to reality. This is a PORN SITE, someone, somewhere will link the posting of ANY picture of someone underage by some standard somewhere in the world (or even just their own mind) with child pornography. ("Its a kid, its on a porn site, don't that make it kiddie porn?!") The Age 18 rule is simple, clear and (relatively) easy to enforce. It also avoids problems with different Moderators in different sections applying different personal standards of "acceptable". The staff has chosen to err on the side of caution. If you cannot accept that, then you should not visit here. (And I'm not aware of any serious argument that we should stop posting any pics of someone because they had or have breast cancer. )
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. I rage and weep for my country. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. I can reup screencaps, other material might have been lost. |
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to DTravel For This Useful Post: |
August 30th, 2012, 04:01 PM | #24 | |
Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 41
Thanks: 10
Thanked 79 Times in 30 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to zplonk For This Useful Post: |
August 30th, 2012, 04:58 PM | #25 |
Vintage Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sleepy Old Sussex, England
Posts: 1,157
Thanks: 20,218
Thanked 18,259 Times in 1,144 Posts
|
Zplonk,
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it... This site is free due to (minimal) advertising, and the revenues are just sufficient to cover its operational costs. Even the mods work for free. Any legal defence incurs costs which can be immense and cases can take a long time to resolve, often running into years. TV and movie studios, along with many actors and actresses employ their own legal teams and have access to large cash reserves. The bottom line is that potentially any legal action could see the Forum closed for the duration of any case(s) after which the site may be able to reopen after a successful outcome, but it might then need to raise revenue to recoup the costs of legal fees. If the site is acted against, that may well deter future advertisers and then there remain only two options; close down or become a pay site. I like the site the way it is. I wouldn't want to see more advertising, or have to pay to be here. Worst of all I'd hate to see the place shut down, even if it were only temporarily. The best way to avoid people taking legal action is to not give them any reason to do so. Whether it's a legitimate action, or just some nutcase(s) out to cause the site to close through lack of funds. You may not agree with the rules, but you do have to follow them. As you have stated, the material you talk about is widely available elsewhere on the 'net. So you are not being denied access to it. It's just that you wont see it here. Life isn't always fair, and the way we'd like it to be. Sometimes you just need to accept that; "That's just the way it is." and learn to live with it.
__________________
If you can ID a Model in one of my posts, let me know, I'll update it, and credit you too.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Looking for a favourite, but you don't know her name? There's a To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. , that may help. It's for known models only, don't post requests, or you will be 'Mod-ified.' Last edited by MemoryHunter; August 30th, 2012 at 05:53 PM.. Reason: Slight rewording |
August 30th, 2012, 06:27 PM | #26 | |
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,926
Thanks: 139,848
Thanked 303,397 Times in 15,466 Posts
|
I could trawl through the arguments for a more liberal attitude one by one, but I won't as it's all been said before, many times.
This site has an owner, he lets the mods create and uphold the rules of the forum, we debated the age rule and the consensus was 18, it's much easier for us to police and for members to adhere to. If you have a picture of an actress aged 17 in a short skirt and a tight top you might well wonder "does this image violate the forums rule? (This "rule" is for illustrative purposes only. ) Quote:
You get bent out of shape as you think you have been hard done by, you then debate it with the mod as you disagree with the definition of "sexual" or "titillating". The bottom line is this... The rule is fairly straightforward to understand for both mods and members alike, it is not going to change no matter what you may think or say, if you do not like this rule I suggest you find another forum that allows such images. End of story.
__________________
We recommend you use a variety of hosts for your pictures Read and follow the To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. and everything will be sweet. Use the To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. button to show appreciation. Use the To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. facility or the A-Z's before starting a new thread. Play nice.
If you find any dead images in any of my celebrity posts, please PM me with details. |
|
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Sam Spade For This Useful Post: |
August 30th, 2012, 11:00 PM | #27 | |
Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 41
Thanks: 10
Thanked 79 Times in 30 Posts
|
Don't get me wrong, there's much about this site that I like, and your rules are your rules, (~Removed~) I don't really expect you to change them, because, you know, who wants to admit they've been wrong about anything? I respect that emotion, I really do.
Quote:
Seriously now: has anyone ever threatened the site, or ANY site with allegations of child porn because it has linked to screencaps of Christina Applegate on Married with Children? No one seems to want to give me a straight answer on that one???!! This is specifically about Applegate case. And it's not true that people can just frivolously sue you, threaten to prosecute you, which the D.A. has to do, not "people" and I guarantee you, "Christina Applegate is child porn... because she was filmed fully clothed when she 18 in prime time", does not a good case make. DA's wanna be re-elected and all that. I guess my other question is: Can you give a link to any case where a site was threatened with any legal action, because they linked to screencaps of Christina Applegate on "Married with children"? I agree with the need for clear rules, and the clearest rule is: no nudity. No "sexy clothes" seems silly to me. And the best way to avoid anything is not run a site at all, esspecially a porn one. (Also, with all due respect, this site is certainly not a hardcore porn site, it's quite softcore. Which I like.) PS. you've worn me down. I'd like an answer to my questions, but at this point, I don't think I will get a straight one, so for me, this is quits. Last edited by Sam Spade; August 31st, 2012 at 04:01 PM.. Reason: Removed insult |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to zplonk For This Useful Post: |
September 1st, 2012, 08:03 PM | #28 |
Lean Mean Screencap Machine
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Better you don't know.
Posts: 23,834
Thanks: 10,482
Thanked 207,412 Times in 23,741 Posts
|
Zplonk, you are not going to get an answer to the question as you are asking it. When sites like this go down they do so for one of three reasons. 1) The owner doesn't want to run it anymore; 2) It runs out of money; or 3) Legal problems. AND THAT IS AS MUCH DETAIL AS THE USERS EVER GET 99% OF THE TIME. There are no "This site is being shut down because we were sued by XUZ on DATE over the posting of these images [DETAILS OR COPIES OF IMAGES]. You might get "This site has been shut down for violating the DMCA." But probably not.
This is the simple rule for here. This is an adult oriented site. As part of that the decision has been made that only images of adults will be posted here and the owner and staff have decided that 18 is the minimum age of "adult" for the purposes of this site. End of rule.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. I rage and weep for my country. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. I can reup screencaps, other material might have been lost. |
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to DTravel For This Useful Post: |
November 19th, 2012, 03:06 PM | #29 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9
Thanks: 19
Thanked 60 Times in 8 Posts
|
Actually, yes.
Quote:
|
|
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to 69 chevy For This Useful Post: |
|
|