I personally suggested an official warning and then changed my vote as others had convinced me that this was a very serious situation. I stand by that decision. My response wasn't to say I wasn't involved only to say a kind of "hey why are you being so accusatory as if I personally banned you because I hate you as a person" type thing. It was a team decision. We did what we thought was best. It wasn't anything personal against you.

Indeed yes. Don't point fingers at Losty. We discuss things and act as a team, we don't just randomly ban established members on our own.

(July 6, 2016 at 12:20 am)Losty Wrote:

(July 6, 2016 at 12:11 am)bennyboy Wrote: I've already offered to pay for the site outright if it means people can express themselves without the influence of corporate sponsors.  Any two or three members could easily pay a year's costs (about $400), but I could do it alone if necessary (with probable concessions to my wife).

I'm guessing that's not going to happen, though.  Because this really isn't about money.  It's about the collision of world views.  You guys clearly think mine is dysfunctional (hence the ban for something I consider perfectly normal and harmless), and I have to say it goes the other way-- I think Americans have sick and twisted views on sexuality and on the psychological health of children, and that it is currently doing a very great deal of harm in your country.

But I think that might be a good start for a new thread.  Thank you for coming forward and describing your situation honestly.  Respect.

To be clear, there is a difference between a host and a sponsor. The host has nothing to do with financing the site. If ever Tibbers comes forwards and says that allowing adult nudity is an option, I would likely vote for it. As of now, it's not even up for a vote.

You're right about the host stuff, so there's no disagreement there but I am sort of wary about adult nudity in the main board. That would make the whole board 18+, would it not?

I think everyone just needs to step back and take a few deep breaths.

No one is happy about it. Actions have repercussions and those have been meted out and done with. We're obviously not going to agree on this.

That's fine.

We all have rules to live by, including Tibs.

Now, honestly, we can all move on or just keep this quagmire going and sinking into it, dragging others down with us.

That's my $1.23 (don't you hate inflation?).

I'll stay out of it from here.

(July 6, 2016 at 12:28 am)Bella Morte Wrote:

(July 6, 2016 at 12:20 am)Losty Wrote: To be clear, there is a difference between a host and a sponsor. The host has nothing to do with financing the site. If ever Tibbers comes forwards and says that allowing adult nudity is an option, I would likely vote for it. As of now, it's not even up for a vote.

You're right about the host stuff, so there's no disagreement there but I am sort of wary about adult nudity in the main board. That would make the whole board 18+, would it not?

I made my point based on the assumption that it would never be an option unless we didn't have to make the board 18+ to do it.

(July 6, 2016 at 12:35 am)Losty Wrote:

(July 6, 2016 at 12:28 am)Bella Morte Wrote: You're right about the host stuff, so there's no disagreement there but I am sort of wary about adult nudity in the main board. That would make the whole board 18+, would it not?

I made my point based on the assumption that it would never be an option unless we didn't have to make the board 18+ to do it.

Ah. Okay.

(July 6, 2016 at 12:24 am)robvalue Wrote: You posted pictures of naked children to make a point? And you're surprised at action being taken against you?

You put us in an extremely difficult situation by doing so, when you could have just used words to make your point.

Don't try and make out it's the staff that have a problem here. You need to let this go.

I can see where when people who accept the responsibility to enforce the rules are forced to ban people for obvious violations, even people they like and respect .. those mods might well feel resentful about being put upon in such a predicament.  If it was me I might feel like damn, here I am taking the garbage out for everyone and this bozo-bud is making me do something that makes me uncomfortable.  That might piss me off to the point where the person who got banned thinks I'm mad at them for violating the rule.

(July 6, 2016 at 12:24 am)robvalue Wrote: You posted pictures of naked children to make a point? And you're surprised at action being taken against you?

You put us in an extremely difficult situation by doing so. . .

Not really.  Nudity, in any form and at any age, is not intrinsically illegal, nor is it immoral.  The difficulty is one that you guys have decided to make up.

I wasn't surprised that I got banned, I mean not really.  But that's not because I felt I was doing something wrong.  It's because I know there are many people in the world who are less natural-minded and liberal than I am-- I really have to see that a behavior is likely to cause real harm in order for me to demand people not engage in it.  In individual cases, like this one, I'm surprised to discover exactly what bugaboo it is that is eating at people's brains.  However, overall, I'm really never surprised to discover that people fixate on issues I consider pointless or even harmful.

I should point out that I don't debate that mods have the right to make or enforce rules, WHATEVER their nature.  It's not my site, and my membership is implicitly contingent on following those rules, whether I agree with them or not.  You could have a law against being named "bennyboy," and I sometimes think you do.  But so long as I'm considered part of this community then I will use my voice to add weight to those ideas I see sensible, and against those which I see as corrupt.  This is the only democracy to which I have access.

And in this thread, I really want to say only this:
1)  Nudity is healthy, natural, and I think it should never be sexualized.
2)  I would tend to favor expression over limitation of expression.  Whether or not I want to see breasts (or a penis, for that matter), if it was important to someone else that they be allowed to express themselves, I'd be in favor of it.  So I support the OP, and not those who were against her view, or who called her "troll," or otherwised expressed themselves negatively toward her.
3)  Being banned sucks, and it didn't need to happen to me.

(July 6, 2016 at 12:44 am)bennyboy Wrote: Not really.  Nudity, in any form and at any age, is not intrinsically illegal, nor is it immoral.

Upon which planet are you living?

(July 6, 2016 at 12:45 am)Maelstrom Wrote:

(July 6, 2016 at 12:44 am)bennyboy Wrote: Not really.  Nudity, in any form and at any age, is not intrinsically illegal, nor is it immoral.

Upon which planet are you living?

Inclined to ask you the same.