Should sex-explicit topics be allowed on Modified? VOTE NOW!

shredzilla · Post by **shredzilla** » 12 Mar 2008 14:49

Last time I was upset over user content on Modified I tried a "guerrilla tactic" according to Matt to try and get rid of what I felt was vulgar and inappropriate in someone's signature. Dave proved that his method of starting a topic and voting on an issue would be better.

We should just vote, as a community, on whether we feel that sex is an appropriate topic for Modified. Other forums have more clearly defined rules as to what's allowed, the reason being is it IS offensive to a majority of their members. Since modified is pretty small compared to other forums, it should be pretty clear how everyone feels after voting.

I think this is a good way to solve this once and for all. If more people vote that sex is deemed appropriate for an all ages forum, then there's nothing I can do about it, it's not my website. If however the majority votes against it, then we should establish a rule that you cannot do that. Then the gods...er I mean Mods need to come up with a punitive system for those who violate said rules. Also, there's obviously going to be a gray area like when someone says 'Oh I had to spoon with Ken Somolinos and he hit on me all night long' or something where it's not even an entire thread but a joking post, and that would be up to the mods to use judgement in those cases.

I've set up a Poll, but I feel everyone should at least say Yes or No, I or Nay, just so that the voting system cannot be corrupted by multiple votes from different IP addresses.

shredzilla · Post by **shredzilla** » 12 Mar 2008 14:50

Zeb Jackson · Post by **Zeb Jackson** » 12 Mar 2008 14:54

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 12 Mar 2008 16:25

The internet is not just a limited information resource, but is actually quite similar to the real world. Parents need to talk with their kids about the dangers of the world. Sending kids online with no idea of what is out there is irresponsible. Kids are going to talk no matter what, and it isn't our job to police them. At best we can provide a safe environment for the exchange of information and ideas. Sucks that teenage boys are idiots, but that is what we have, so lets just deal with it.

Moderation is never the answer, and only creates an blinder to the real world, postponing the inevitable.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 12 Mar 2008 16:42

I'm pretty sure the solution is just to post like the europeans.

I think we should respect minority view points, and not strive to have a majority opinion forced upon everyone. Just because someone is in the minority doesn't mean they are wrong and need to be punished.

Iain · Post by **Iain** » 12 Mar 2008 17:14

would this be considered sexually explicit?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ceBxQSRLrg

dyalander · Post by **dyalander** » 12 Mar 2008 17:41

Firstly the current rule is

-Posting pornographic material and/or links is unacceptable and mods will remove such material from posts or remove the entire thread if necessary

It is designed to work in conjunction with the rule

- Repeated breaches of these guidelines may also lead to a user's posting
privilages being temporarily taken away. Such action is to be avoided where possible. Any permanent removal of posting privileges will only be undertaken as a last resort.

Secondly - this forum is not run by voting but by discussion - This thread is an excelent way for users to propose a change they wish to see on the forums but mods will not simply change things because a few users have a vote - I have not seen one of these polls actually involve the majority of active users and without that involvment it can't simply be left to the vote - that said we certainly won't ignore it - it is definitley an effective way of telling us who thinks what and how many people agree with them - even if it doesn't always give equal voice to both sides of the argument.

Thirdly, I already see a problem here -

there's obviously going to be a gray area like when someone says 'Oh I had to spoon with Ken Somolinos and he hit on me all night long' or something where it's not even an entire thread but a joking post, and that would be up to the mods to use judgement in those cases.

So how is this different from the current rule? Aren't you really just saying that the mods should be stricter about what they interpret to be "pornagraphic material". It seems to me that this is more about defining exactly what is pornagraphic and not a hole in the rules.

pips · Post by **pips** » 12 Mar 2008 17:59

I don't mind occasional statements about something like sex or drugs, but more specific topics, getting very detailed? No. Normal people do not talk about stuff like that so openly in public. Go talk about that stuff to your tight-knit little group of friends in private.

dyalander · Post by **dyalander** » 12 Mar 2008 18:06

But surely you see how that statement is too vague to be something enforcable? You guys need to be far more specific about what you want if you ever want to see it implemented. Also this is why the poll needs to be taken with a grain of salt - are all those people who vote "no" doing so with the same definition of what is innapropriate?

ALso Zeb and I have discussed this issue in another thread and I'll quote that discussion here where it is more appropriate:

Zeb wrote:

if modified is a community first and a recource second, then is it okay if we have some perverts, and some a-holes living in our community? What if old man jenkins was tellin little kids he likes to get bjs from hot blonds? (if you were a parent, you would make sure those kids never spoke to old man jenkins.)

isnt whats going on right now technically the same thing?

and shouldnt we have some sort of neighborhood watch program? ( ok, so that was kind of a joke, and we pretty much already have a neighborhood watch program.)

I replied:

The community establishes its values in its rules.

It seesm to me that what you want to discuss is going on in the other thread started by shredzilla

The example you use is also overstating what is actually occuring.

Also is it the age gap that is the problem here? If childern in a schoolyard are overheard talking about blowjobs and sex in the schoolyard by parents is that equally inappropriate? Would they pull them from the school preventing access to its resources or simply tell them to choose better more mature friends within it? Obviously it will depend on a lot of factors.

Furthermore is it not possible for users to accept responsibility for themselves - if you are a child or in a situation where you are around a parent or employer or whatever who is going to punish you in some way for viewing certain material surely you can simply avoid it. Modified is fairly well regimented in that respect - that is to say the resources are separated from the other stuff. If you are caught looking at the other stuff and subsequently are barred from looking at the resources then that is your own fault so long as the regimented structure of the forums hasn't been breached. Those in the community who wish to talk about mature subject matter (even if they wish to do so in a somewhat immature manner - within reason) should not necessarily be prevented from doing so because certain individuals disapprove but still want to be able to use modified's resources.

Also children in nunneries have footbag.org and probably don't have internet access. Sorry, I've been pretty mature over all, and clearly do take this matter seriously, surely I'm allowed a moment of glibness.

This all said, I am not necessarily opposed to a stricter policy on this matter than already exists and think discussion about it can potentially improve the clarity with respect to what is and isn't allowed.

dyalander · Post by **dyalander** » 12 Mar 2008 18:18

I think it has also been a mod problem not a rule - we should have moved the blow-job or sex thread into discussion sooner.

That discussion should not occur anywhere other than discussion or footblogs. And those who do not want to have to see or participate in those threads can simply steer clear of discussion.

I think that makes more sense than trying to change the rule again - after all we only just had this discussion when we brought it in a few months back. I don't see what has changed since then.

shredzilla · Post by **shredzilla** » 12 Mar 2008 19:29

dyalander wrote:Thirdly, I already see a problem here -
Quote:
there's obviously going to be a gray area like when someone says 'Oh I had to spoon with Ken Somolinos and he hit on me all night long' or something where it's not even an entire thread but a joking post, and that would be up to the mods to use judgement in those cases.

So how is this different from the current rule? Aren't you really just saying that the mods should be stricter about what they interpret to be "pornagraphic material". It seems to me that this is more about defining exactly what is pornagraphic and not a hole in the rules.

"Pornagraphic Material" is different from "Sexually Explicit Topic" Dylan.

I'm not saying the mods should be stricter with the CURRENT rule, I'm saying they should add ANOTHER rule. That's what this thread is about. Sorry you had a discussion about the current rule, but I'm now talking about a new rule in addition to that rule, which would be 'No explicit sexual topics or posts allowed'. I consider pornography to be more visual or auditory in nature rather than a frank discussion about explicit sex.

In regards to the 'gray area' I was more saying that mods should use common sense and judgment when analyzing these cases, it really didn't even need to be stated honestly, it's assumed that mods have common sense...

Wasabi · Post by **Wasabi** » 12 Mar 2008 19:56

I certainly don't like talking about what my favorite sex position is, or explicate what turns me on concerning a woman's biological make-up. In a joking manner, yes this could be taken and performed with a different sort of mentality, but I believe the user should be aware of what they're saying and moderate with the best of their knowledge of what they are saying. Kids will be reading what they post. Both men and women will be reading what they post. And the list goes on.

I don't know. It's a hard subject to tackle.

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 12 Mar 2008 20:16

shredzilla wrote: when someone says 'Oh I had to spoon with Ken Somolinos and he hit on me all night long' [/b]

Mirken hardly posts anymore, and it's usually in topics about net.

Moxie · Post by **Moxie** » 12 Mar 2008 20:21

shredzilla wrote:In regards to the 'gray area' I was more saying that mods should use common sense and judgment when analyzing these cases, it really didn't even need to be stated honestly, it's assumed that mods have common sense...

I feel like this is where the whole problem is. Yeah, having a set of rules is great and all but when a mod looks to those instead of using common sense the system fails. "Yes, this person is annoying everyone and pissing people off, but it's not technically against the rules, so we can't do anything about it." You don't have to ban them, but you can tell them to knock it off. I know this won't go over well with some people, but it seems like a lot of Brad's mod tactics worked a lot better than what's in place now. I much prefer the feeling on the forum when mods use their own judgment rather than a set of rules to make decisions. As long as there are other mods to keep each other in line, there won't be any big long term problems.

shredzilla · Post by **shredzilla** » 12 Mar 2008 20:31

Moxie wrote:I much prefer the feeling on the forum when mods use their own judgment rather than a set of rules to make decisions.

Why is one mutually exclusive from the other? Can't there be both? You look at the rules, AND use your best judgment to make a decision on if the user is violating them. Seems pretty simple to me.

To me, the system that you're referring to never worked. We have these sex topics every month now, sometimes 2 or 3 a month. It's offensive to a lot of people, and probably the majority. The current system isn't working.

shredzilla · Post by **shredzilla** » 12 Mar 2008 20:47

One more quick point I want to make is that we DO have under 18 users on this forum, and thanks to Google, children of ALL ages can find modified as the 'hackysack forum' and read whatever we post. Just because you say 'oh well most of the users are over 14', well that's REGISTERED users. You don't have to register to read, and I'd be willing to bet there are people from time to time that come and just read and never even sign up.

Not only is it disrespectful to a child's parents for us to have sexually explicit topics, but why would we want to do anything to drive away potential new footbaggers? Shouldn't we make this place inviting, respectful and welcoming instead of sleazy?

Just another side-note to this topic.

mc · Post by mc » 12 Mar 2008 21:28

Dyalan and Emily, I agree with you guys.

as I said in Zeb's thread with edits to make this more situation-appropriate,

As the youngest members and readers go, no, I don't think it's appropriate for them to be privy to inappropriate stuff, so their parents should monitor what is influencing them on the internet. I shouldn't have to babysit myself because of a person that may or may not be reading my posts at any given time.

A footbag tournament and the events there surrounding are not the place for unsupervised people who need supervision (ie: young teens who need positive guidance, not bad influences like me), just like a casino or a strip club. it should just be assumed that things go on there that are not appropriate for young unsupervised kids, and as such, that kind of person exists there at his or her own risk.

The same goes for a footbag forum, and the whole internet in general. Watching my mouth here doesn't prevent any given kid from going to some other site where he can read nasty words, so I really really really don't see the point in me misrepresenting myself and the reality of footbag for the sake of kids who need to be looked out for by their caretakers, not me.

For the record:

I don't want to have excessive offensive stuff on modified, but at the same time, I don't want to have to stifle my humor or my discussions because I'm suddenly expected to maintain a demeanor that could be associated with a well-behaved high schooler.

Chris, I KNOW we can make it through this difference of opinions without being at each others' throats. Just wanted to set that out from the beginning

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 13 Mar 2008 00:05

I voted no. It clearly depends on the context.

A topic about what you prefer; penetrative sex or oral sex is clearly not appropriate in any kind of public area. A topic about how to have "safe sex" clearly would be appropriate, especially given the ages of the people on this forum, the fact that about 54% are American, and many US states don't teach any safe sex at all, meaning that America has the highest rates of teenage pregnancy and STDs in the developed world. There's obviously a degree of inter-sexual relationships within the footbag community, so it's clearly in the best interests of the whole community if people don't spread their syphilis around, or indeed if people don't miss tournaments because their gonorrhoea makes urinating too painful.

Wasabi · Post by **Wasabi** » 13 Mar 2008 01:08

Remind me never to lend or borrow any shorts from other footbaggers during tournament season, Jeremy.

shredzilla · Post by **shredzilla** » 13 Mar 2008 09:28

Matt Cross wrote:For the record:

I don't want to have excessive offensive stuff on modified, but at the same time, I don't want to have to stifle my humor or my discussions because I'm suddenly expected to maintain a demeanor that could be associated with a well-behaved high schooler.

Chris, I KNOW we can make it through this difference of opinions without being at each others' throats. Just wanted to set that out from the beginning

I wholeheartedly agree with the statement you just made. What's funny, is that's exactly my point. I don't want offensive stuff (porn, sexually explicit topics) on modified. It does 2 things:

Offend a good number if not the majority of users that currently browse modified

And deter parents from letting their children browse Modified because it contains many threads with adult-related sexual content.

Your argument for saying the parents should monitor their browsing habits is completely true. But that means that we're EXCLUDING potential members whose parents deem sexually explicit content inappropriate for minors.

I browse other internet forums all the time. Do I register for every single one? No, not even close. Because of Google and such, children as well as teenagers can easily find the 'hackysack forum'. In all actuality, there could be young kids and/or parents who find modified, and at first consider it a good resource, but then the parent sees the sex stuff and tells their child not to go there anymore.

The reason children can't go to strip clubs is not because of good parenting, it's because it's against the law. If it were up to good parenting, strip clubs in the US would be filled with nothing but horny 13 year olds haha. You're right Matt, children WILL find a way to look at nasty pictures and stuff like that on the internet. But why make this a place that has that stuff? What's the purpose behind it? And no one is stifling your creativity or language, or humor or anything. Like I said, JUDGMENT by the moderators should eliminate that concern for you.

Modified is a place where young hackers should feel welcome and not have to hide the site from their parents. Coarse language? Eh most parents will let that slide. Graphic sex talks amongst young teenagers? I doubt it.

modified

Should sex-explicit topics be allowed on Modified? VOTE NOW!

Should Sexually Explicit Topics/Posts Be Allowed On Modified?

Should sex-explicit topics be allowed on Modified? VOTE NOW!

Re: Should sex-explicit topics be allowed on Modified? VOTE