---

Quote: from Forever Angel at 9:22 pm on Aug. 14, 2008

---

Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 8:07 pm on Aug. 14, 2008

---

Even the legal definition of obscenity relies on personal interpretation on the part of the arbitrator.  

  Everyone shut the fuck up forever.

---

Are you attempting to stifle the free exchange of ideas and opinions?

---

Yes, through my own freely exchanged ideas and opinions.

---

---

Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 8:29 pm on Aug. 14, 2008

---

Quote: from Forever Angel at 9:22 pm on Aug. 14, 2008

---

Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 8:07 pm on Aug. 14, 2008

---

Even the legal definition of obscenity relies on personal interpretation on the part of the arbitrator.    

   Everyone shut the fuck up forever.

---

Are you attempting to stifle the free exchange of ideas and opinions?

---

 

 Yes, through my own freely exchanged ideas and opinions.

---

So it won't be a big insult then if I fail to comply?

---

Freely exchanged ideas and opinions can, of course, insult. They do not hold any substantial, binding weight by virtue of their nature, however.

-------
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

---

Freely exchanged ideas and opinions can, of course, insult. They do not hold any substantial, binding weight by virtue of their nature, however.

---

Post edited at 6:53 pm on Aug. 14, 2008 by Forever Angel

-------
"God does not play dice" - Albert Einstein
"God does play dice" - Stephen Hawking

Bohica

haha, and shows the ignorance of some users in this forum.(woohoo, can't wait to see if they'll be leaders...not)

-------
livewire's temporary resident furry, until FurryPanther returns

---

I was speaking the language of the common man when I told everyone to shut the fuck up. This last bit was more like an exchange between two people than a general address.

---

---

Was I one of "the people" you were addressing? I thought I was making some reasonable points.

---

This and another topic seems to boil down to "why is this questionable thing allowed but not this clearly wrong thing?"

My answer is that this isn't black and white, issues have to be weighed in individual cases, and mods have to make their own judgments, just in the way that the legal judgment of obscenity relies on subjective opinion.

-------
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

---

Quote: from Forever Angel at 10:41 pm on Aug. 14, 2008

---

Was I one of "the people" you were addressing? I thought I was making some reasonable points.

---

This and another topic seems to boil down to "why is this questionable thing allowed but not this clearly wrong thing?"

---

---

My answer is that this isn't black and white, issues have to be weighed in individual cases, and mods have to make their own judgments, just in the way that the legal judgment of obscenity relies on subjective opinion.

---

But, if you haven't read all of my posts here, the point I've been pushing is... whatever side of the fence any decision comes down on, all decisions should be consistent with that one, no matter what the subject of the argument is. A zero tolerance policy, as long as it's both absolutely clear and absolute followed, would at least be a consistent policy. LW would most likely die, but hey, the rules were being adhered to.

On the other hand, we can go with absolute adherence to some rules (but members don't need to know all of them until a Mod hits them with one of them) and a lackadaisical adherence to others which the members should know by heart because they accepted the "terms" by signing up. And if the 'young' members' parents expect the promises of the "Letter to Parents" to be observed, well, 'hey, this is the internet, don't be so naive.'

Or, the third option... common sense.

-------
"God does not play dice" - Albert Einstein
"God does play dice" - Stephen Hawking

Bohica

---

So you have judged one as questionable and one as clearly wrong? My view would that one is questionable and the other probably should not be allowable, but still, has been allowed.

---

I termed one questionable to at least offer a concession. Would "art" and "nearly softcore pornography" have offered a better dichotomy?
 

---

But, if you haven't read all of my posts here, the point I've been pushing is... whatever side of the fence any decision comes down on, all decisions should be consistent with that one, no matter what the subject of the argument is. A zero tolerance policy, as long as it's both absolutely clear and absolute followed, would at least be a consistent policy. LW would most likely die, but hey, the rules were being adhered to.  

On the other hand, we can go with absolute adherence to some rules (but members don't need to know all of them until a Mod hits them with one of them) and a lackadaisical adherence to others which the members should know by heart because they accepted the "terms" by signing up. And if the 'young' members' parents expect the promises of the "Letter to Parents" to be observed, well, 'hey, this is the internet, don't be so naive.'  

Or, the third option... common sense.

---

Common sense is what is applied, but the issue with that is that it isn't nearly as common as you'd think. Not in the sense of its frequency, but in the sense of being the same in all people.

-------
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

---

Quote: from Forever Angel at 12:27 am on Aug. 15, 2008

---

So you have judged one as questionable and one as clearly wrong? My view would that one is questionable and the other probably should not be allowable, but still, has been allowed.

---

I termed one questionable to at least offer a concession. Would "art" and "nearly softcore pornography" have offered a better dichotomy?
It doesn't matter what you call it, it's still a matter of opinion. What you may see as porn (hard or soft) is another man's art. While I may not care for the idea behind the picture in the OP, and for sure wouldn't have been the model, I don't have a problem with it as a stand alone "piece of art."    
 

---

But, if you haven't read all of my posts here, the point I've been pushing is... whatever side of the fence any decision comes down on, all decisions should be consistent with that one, no matter what the subject of the argument is. A zero tolerance policy, as long as it's both absolutely clear and absolute followed, would at least be a consistent policy. LW would most likely die, but hey, the rules were being adhered to.  

 On the other hand, we can go with absolute adherence to some rules (but members don't need to know all of them until a Mod hits them with one of them) and a lackadaisical adherence to others which the members should know by heart because they accepted the "terms" by signing up. And if the 'young' members' parents expect the promises of the "Letter to Parents" to be observed, well, 'hey, this is the internet, don't be so naive.'  

 Or, the third option... common sense.

---

Common sense is what is applied, but the issue with that is that it isn't nearly as common as you'd think. Not in the sense of its frequency, but in the sense of being the same in all people.

---

---

It doesn't matter what you call it, it's still a matter of opinion. What you may see as porn (hard or soft) is another man's art. While I may not care for the idea behind the picture in the OP, and for sure wouldn't have been the model, I don't have a problem with it as a stand alone "piece of art."    

---

Hence the need for individual discretion on the part of moderators. The end result of 34 individuals applying their judgment on a case by case basis might not be seen to be fair due to inconsistency between them. Of course, we could rigidly adhere to strict rules. The strictness would undoubtedly prevent a number of things most might consider reasonable to be posted, so that would be fair.

Oh well, I guess people are stuck with sand in their pants either way.

---

No, common sense would dictate that decisions made would have a common reason for being made. That's not done here.  And I do know that 'common sense' is not a common occurrence.

---

Thanks for your own subjective view of what is common sense.

-------
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

---

Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 8:44 pm on Aug. 14, 2008

---

Freely exchanged ideas and opinions can, of course, insult. They do not hold any substantial, binding weight by virtue of their nature, however.

---

While I can appreciate your eloquence, personally, I would rather speak the language of the common man so that I may be understood by all, rather than the language of the elite which confuses most and causes even the few to ponder on its meaning.

---

STFU!

-------
join this group only if youre a mod