Why exactly was it closed? The digression on the annoying member thread had nothing to do with the child love thread; it originated because PatrickHenry took issue with a statement made in the racism thread. Where does the child love thread come into it and why was it closed?
Because it was crossing the line into justifying pedophilia.
And I thought Jason explained it quite well. Free speech is great, but certain lines are always going to be there.
Also consider that if you search for a certain combination of words, you might have Volconvo popping up on Google.
There's a better way to broach the topic of underage consentual relationships without bringing in the adult and child angle.
I think there may be some liability issues with forum owners...
But I am not a lawyer, just a guy who thinks about justice.
"Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." -- John Adams
pedophilia is seen as socially unacceptable by the overwhelming majority of people. advocating pedophilia predictably resulted in very aggressive responses in denunciation. the thread spoils the mood here and spilled over into other threads.
in other words, it was not a productive debate and disrupted volconvo's atmosphere. plus, it did not seem that the situation would improve, but rather, deteriorate. that's why the thread was closed - and it's the same exact reason why other threads have been closed in the past.
Actually, Jason's complaint wasn't with the content of the child love thread at all; it was that the topic was spilling over into other threads. I was simply wondering which threads he was talking about.Quote by: Fonceai
Where were the aggressive responses? Granted, there was one bigoted response from compugasm, but that was it. And I've yet to see an example of it spilling over into another thread.
Actually, after the one flame from compugasm, there was nothing but productive debate. I believe the last fifteen or so posts in the thread consisted of a perfectly civilized debate between Kamehameha and myself. Could you explain how the thread was deteriorating?
Last edited by The Bacon Guy; 14th December 2006 at 05:29 PM.
Not every member who read the thread replied in it. There were other instances of the pedophilia thread being referenced in some way and we did get reported posts because of it.
You're more than welcome to start a thread about the age at which children can make their own choices. However, the subject matter of that thread was causing a disruption that—perhaps—was easier seen from the backend of the site.
So are paedophilia discussions now banned?
This is a very general question. Yes, you can use the word. No, you can't start a thread about if pedophilia is okay—considering I just closed a thread with that topic.
When you say I can't start a thread about whether paedophilia is ok, do you mean the act of paedophilia or paedophilia as a sexual orientation? Could I for example start a thread on whether non-active paedophiles should be accepted by society, or would that still be too much for some people's sensitive dispositions?
Can I say "no" for the sake of one less headache to deal with?
Why is it even a question?
When something is unequivocally fucked up, where is the debate?
I personally got several harrassing PMs from the author.
He confronted me about pedophilia on my thread about racism, and constituted roughly 95% of the activity in another thread, about the most annoying members from post 367 to post 385.
It had to be done.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks