Broadly offending content ~ what is it for *you*?

You didn't see this sign when you dropped them off?

In fact you are wrong Mickey. Perhaps you should reread the thread, or get someone to translate it for you accurately, since you are making statements that are 100% incorrect.

Pep (Several people have said that they find NOTHING in sl offensive.)

Perhaps you should reread Pep. I saw no examples of Pedophiles in SL presented in this thread. Did you?

When I used the word Pedophile.....it referred to RL.

Please continue to correct me further.

I shall offer you illumination as long as you demonstrate publicly that you don't have the first clue what is going on here.

Des's question was ALL about sl, and the debate here has been principally about potential sl paedophilia.

Pep (You REALLY need to go back to language school Mickey.)

Lias.

In spite of being asked 3 times, you haven't been able to state what situations the child avs were in in the pictures and, therefore, it has to be assumed that you don't know, and that your statement that it was those situations that crossed the line into pedophilia was a lie. Is that correct?

What I might do to the TOS or CS or what laws I might get rid of or amend is totally irrelevant to the OP's question and would be way off topic as is Lias pedo rant.

There are any number of things that I find offensive at different levels of offense. I stated what I found "broadly"offensive. I guess you missed the OP's question.

Wrestling legislators... now that brings an offensive image to mind. Hope they aren't nude. Of course, I find most politicians offensive even if they aren't wrestling.

Dear Phil, I was just thinking about you. I was saying to myself "Why is this guy stuck on the sordid details of a past AR action Linden Lab completed? The action was done - there is no doubt about that - those groups are gone - and their land also - yet Phil holds onto the fact that no one listed all the counts of pedophilia in this thread. He will not ask the people that were cited for infraction and he will not accept that it happened based on the fact that Linden Lab removed these groups".

Poor tortured soul.

.

Indeed, it is not uncommon to see naked children on public beaches in the UK. Not something I personally approve of (not least because said child might be embarrassed by it in later life...), but no-one starts a pedophilia hysteria when it happens.

Matthew

Ah, you've come out of hiding. I want to know if you lied or not. You made a statement to help your point - to persuade me that your point was good. I accepted it, and wanted to know what situations they were - y'know, the situations that you said crossed the line into being pedophilia. I actually expected you to tell us. But, since I asked you 3 times, none of which got a response from you, it became clear that you don't have any answers, and that you made it up in an attempt to strengthen your points - which makes you a liar, of course.

The reason I'm stuck on it is because I've no intention of letting you just decide not to answer and effectively hide your lies, hoping that nobody will notice. I want everyone to see it very very clearly. Some people just ignore things they can't answer to their benefit, and the things usually fade away without anyone noticing. I'm not a person who will let you get away with that little trick.

So, to sum up - you invented it and, therefore, you're a liar. I hope everyone is clear about that.

I didn't say anything about nudity - I was questioning your view that we should avoid situations which would make a pedophile salivate. Not all situations which would make a pedophile salivate involve nudity.

It is also well known that pedophiles do target schools, swimming baths etc. so these are situations which, like the beach:

a) would make a pedophile salivate
b) are targetted by pedophiles

the answer is not to abolish the situation but to police the situation, to be on the watch for pedophiles and to take action when they appear - this is what the police etc. do with schools and swimming pools, and what the beach-owner does (with assistance from the GTeam) in SL.

Matthew

Ok Lias let's see here... You want to keep discussing RL vs SL.

Now your point with your 9 year old.... The scenario you suggested ye sathere's a major problem.

However if it were a nudist colony where some are actually communites no different than a gated community anywhere. If yo uwere a nudist and lived there you'd have NO problem with your kid being nude at a b-day party and you not around.

I lived in Spokane, WA And went to the clothing optional beach there, which was in a city park no less, and kids would show up all the time unsupervised. Yes the SPD made rounds daily there, but wasn't patrolled constantly whil the park was open. Not ONE case of a child being assaulted was ever recoreded there because the community that used the beach protected the kids as if they were our own.

Now let's get into SL.... If you dropped your daughter in front of the computer and let her log innto SL at all... I'd be the 1st to report her in there and I'd also do my damned best to get her taken from you and placed in a better home that wouldn't allow a minor to be subject to an adult place.

Now as to your place that you run in SL.... That I'm sure a lot would find broadly offensive, and if it were RL c'mon now using people as serving platters dfor food when they were bikinis or less? That violates a few health code laws IRL. (yeah I knowyoure reply is but it's not children.. drop it already, stil lwould get ya a fine at the very least IRL were being in a designated nude recreation area dancing.. would not get any adult or child in trouble with the law)

You keeps saying nude children... NONE of these people are a child that is sitting there nude at theyr computer.. at least I hope not! These are al a dults who are ROLEPLAYING the fact that theye're kids.

It's not the places/people openly gather and "dance nude and frolic" that are the problems, it's the ones in certain groups I looked at an incest group today where those with special titles aren't hidded... oops on the group owners part huh? One AV listed's profile..... said "Im 10" <sarcasm> Nahh there's no possible way this group can be assoiciated with ageplay could it? </sarcasm>

Yesterday you publivally stated here that there were 2 AR's filed against me because an adult was hitting on a kid at my beach, when that person was never ON my beach the day in question, it was another place entirely.. but *I* get the public blame.

Because you run and condone a club that caters to a perversion. Should I start labeling you a pervert? Ahould I get ppl to sneak in undercover and take pics and record chat, and accuse you of things that happened elsewhere?

Nudity isn't a perversion however to some it IS a moral taboo and mankind made it that way. Clothing isn't somethign you're born with. Adam and Eve didn't have a problem with being nude until eve ate the fruit. Tribes in some countries go their whole lives without clothing. It's the bible thumping moral majority who thinks nudity is a taboo.

People will oppose ANYTHING... Tupelo, Mississippi tried gettign a KISS concert banned from their town...fearing for the morals of the towns young women. This is also the town that Elvis Presley was born in.

Now since you cater to a perversion and not a livestyle.. I'dsay clean your own house before go inspecting others. Or as Jesus Christs said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".

Andyou keep saying al lthis info yo uget is from another source not first hand knowledge... you have seen text and pics of it... I've seen stories of bigfoot, the loch ness monster and flying saucers and pics too. Doesn't mean they're 100% fact.

Grammar Nazis are offensive

But this one does Matt.


Really? Use manpower so these people can dance nude with nude child avatars? We can't even get the GTeam in a Welcome area to police that. The owner of said beach already said he cannot police the beach thoroughly.I see no reason to create a atmosphere that is ripe for pedophilia. There are nude beaches all over Second Life. Most do not invite child avatars to be there - actually most forbade child avatars from entering. Better safe than sorry. Unless of course being around naked children while you are nude is such a strong compulsion that you are willing to risk incident.

.

You didn't end your sentence with an appropriate punctuation mark.

*comedy drumroll*

In light of the seriousness of this particular discussion....I'm going to acknowledge your incessant and bizarre fascination with my posts, Pep....this time.....because I did make a sweeping statement.

If you or someone else would like for me to correct the fact that I read each and every post and came up with this conclusion....I'll be happy to correct it. Would you like for me to change it to read the Majority.....rather than 100%....based on the comments in this thread? If so....I'll go back and correct that.

Again you misquote and twist things I say. I said I myself can not be there 24/7 that's why I have beach patrol.

And wanna know WHY most nube beaches i nSL forbid child AV's? One of 2 reasons, either they A: have sex items for sale or use there, or B: They just don't wanna deal with people like you whining about it.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones Lias. You yourself run a place that I bed pedos go to because why? your place caters to a perversion. I see no reason a human would want to eat of of another one in a "resteraunt". Yet hey if that's your thing... have fun.

Keep up the posts and you'l lbe immortalized.... just like Hitler, Stalin, Mao...etc were.. the ones who felt their vision was right and all others MUST follow it. Practice your goosetepping now folks, and get prepared to be exiled to Siberia.

Actually, no. It was you that, in the words of Vic and Bob, "wouldn't let it lie".

In post #280 you said (my bolding) - So much for leaving it alone, because in post #296 (your next post in the thread) you began -Post #298 - By post #322 you were indirectly accusing ASCIIrider of paedophilia -In post #332 you pretty much directly accused him (my bolding again) -Post #338 and more insinuation -Post #340 and many people should be spotting a pattern here -I don't personally give a toss what your opinions are, nor that you subsequently accused Immy of distributing pictures of herself naked as a child, and then proceeded to Godwinise the thread by invoking the saga of the SL concentration camps.

What *you* should give a toss about is that, regardless of what went on on ASCIIrider's beach, you're damn lucky you're not facing a libel suit after all of the above. I note that you stopped referring to him as a paedophile soon after someone else mentioned the possibility of libel.

I am sadly reminded of a thread in which you were involved some time back, about the multiple avatars hanging around your land near the Bear infohub. You kept that one running for ages, and I just kept clicking 'next' with my jaw dropping at your amazing inability to remove the blinders you were wearing.

Carry on. I shall keep reading this one for as long as it runs.

No I don't.
Any parent that drops their child off in a room full of nude adults and then goes off shopping needs to get a visit from Child Protective Services. I asked you would you drop your granddaughter off in a room full of nude men and you said you would not.
But this is not the case with your beach.

And yet you advocate dropping off your nude children in a room full of nude adults and then leaving her there. Baffling.

Thanks for the plug. No child avatars allowed - and no naked child avatars allowed. And I will be on the list (I hope) to move to Zindra later this month.

Hope I believe is not enough. Creating a situation that is easily exploited by a pedophile and then 'hoping' it does not happen is reckless.
You had a conversation with the guy, determined he had in deed solicited a child avatar and then you booted the guy out of your group. What's the problem now?
I guess you can if you want to. But since your property is members only in a closed group - one cannot assume these peopel snuck in. You invited them.
You keep loosing focus on the core issue - and purposely so. You have spent years debating these issues and you have become quite good at smokescreening. The issue is nude children avatar (with no 'parent avatar) walking into a event space and interacting with nude adult avatars they just met. The scnario is as unsettling as my birthday party scenario. And I commented on it. And I feel its a unnessary attarction for pedophiles in Second Life.
You admitted pedophiles come there.

.

No Skell that was imnotgoing on page 17 post 243.
Are you not entertained.

.

I was reading this thread from the beginning up and yeh no one stuck up for pedo, more like we just got called a bunch of pedos for sticking up for "innocent until proven guilty".

I don't have a fascination with*your* posts Mickey. I have an intense contempt for people who have either failed to comprehend the posts of others or who post inaccurate arguments, whether it is because their language skills are inadequate or because they are just stupid. Such posts waste the time of others, contributing nothing but futile distractions and muddying the waters of discussion.

Pep (Don't correct your posts; delete them.)

Or maybe you just enjoy being a jackass.

An obviously ineffective beach control.
Now your catching on.
Desperate smoke screening again. You did not have to post and get this negative spotlight squarely directed at you. This was just something I found offensive and I posted - like everyone else did. Your the one that got out his soap box about some squabble at your place and this being some vndetta and other nonsense.
Honey it was just a thread about what we found offensive. You dived in head first without checking if there was any water in the pool.

.

P(eep) (It's late in England, he is drunken - ignore it )