Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
No copernicus its has nothing to do with paedophilia as a subject matter.
Perceptions of sciforums moderation
- Thread starter James R
- Start date
- Status
No copernicus its has nothing to do with paedophilia as a subject matter.
Oh no, we mustn't discuss paedophilia.
we shouldnt, or rather it serves no purpose. that is where the mods and admins are too lenient. forget cesspooling a thread, just delete it and be done with it.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Oh no, we mustn't discuss paedophilia.
Its been discussed here often in the past without any issue or problem just like everything else.
Bells
Staff member
Oh no, we mustn't discuss paedophilia.
There is a difference between discussing it and advocating it.
So we should censor people who advocate reprehensible activities? Don't mention that to James R, he'd have a field day deleting all the posts which advocate meat eating!
of course.
Why? Why can't we just let people express their opinions, no matter how objectionable?
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
You can't be serious
You seem to purposely be missing the point here. Anyway this site is ok, maybe not to you but by and large its fine. Its a community and like all communities it controls who can or should be part of the community and what is or is not acceptable. You are not going to change this place because you have grievance with one or all of the mods, it would see the back of you first. The mods are members as well as representatives.
Bells
Staff member
Should we allow members to advocate fucking children, to put it bluntly?
Eating meat is legal. Having sex with children is not.
Can you tell why one is not acceptable on this site and why one is?
:wallbang: yep
because we try to be civilized. i see no point to be controversial just for the sake of being controversial with nothing creative or even remotely intelligent to be derived from it.
YES! No matter how objectionable such an opinion is, a member should be allowed to express it. Let me do a Baron Max and put things in perspective. Many posters on this forum argue in favour of a war in Iraq, and said war results in thousands of children being blown into iddy bitty bits. Are you going to censor anyone who argues in favour of a war?
So we can't argue in favour of activities which are illegal? Oh well, no more threads which argue in favour of pot being legalised.
I know *why* advocating pedophilia is not accepted on this site, but I don't necessarily agree with the justifications. Just because society as a whole finds such behaviour reprehensible doesn't mean we should censor people who would advocate such behaviour.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
The member who shall not be mentioned wasn't being sensational nor creative nor controversial. That should tell you everything right there.
On this forum? HAH!
I don't think individuals who advocate pedophilia (or attempt to minimise its effects) are trying to be controversial just for the sake of being controversial, they genuinely believe what they are saying. But even if they *are* being controversial just for the sake of it, why not let them? Sometimes such controversy is beneficial, it offers up a different perspective, allowing us to understand even the most perverse portions of society.
How would you know that, if you don't even allow the discussion to flourish in the first place? You find pedophilia so reprehensible that whenever someone wants to discuss it in a way which defies social convention, you just erect a defensive wall in a knee-jerk fashion.
You can't be serious
You seem to purposely be missing the point here. Anyway this site is ok, maybe not to you but by and large its fine. Its a community and like all communities it controls who can or should be part of the community and what is or is not acceptable. You are not going to change this place because you have grievance with one or all of the mods, it would see the back of you first. The mods are members as well as representatives.
If the owners of the site wish to prohibit discussion of pedophilia, fine, it's their site. I'm not attempting to redefine rules or defy their wishes, just ensure that moderators are held accountable to them.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
copernicus not only are you climbing up the wrong tree you have missed the branches and are in danger of falling to your demise. You are a member of this community but like all communities it chooses who they can tolerate and who they can't. If you try and change basic community values and functioning the community boots you out.
So now the members decide who goes and who stays? The majority can over-ride the wishes of the moderators and admin? Cool! All I need to do is behave in a charismatic fashion and win enough members over to my cause!
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
I have been here since 2003 and like I said threads on that subject have been discussed without issue. they are not prohibiting any discussion
Bells
Staff member
Oh?
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2238716&postcount=193
Care to not contradict yourself?
We do adhere to that rule in that we don't advocate paedophilia. But you're saying we should and then saying if the owners wish to prohibit it, they can since it is their site. Make up your mind.
- Status