Unk please, PLEASE delete that thread!

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Unk's Wild Wild West : One Thread

Unk, Bob posted a thread with a picture of Hillary (new look). It needs to go immediately! Please!

-- Maria (maria947@hotmail.com), February 01, 2001

Answers

Agreed. At least remove THE one picture.

-- (Bump@Bump.Bump), February 01, 2001.

Thanks a lot, Maria. If you hadn't mentioned it, I would'na looked. Warning to those who haven't: Do not look.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), February 01, 2001.

I agree (I'll never post a photo of Hillary again, sorry)...

-- Uncle Bob (unclb0b@aol.com), February 01, 2001.

Bob it wasn't you, it was that creep Hawk! PS I see a lot of crap posted against you and it's wrong. I don't believe any of that garbage, please keep on posting.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), February 01, 2001.

You have already had that foul image burned into your brain, what good is deleting it now?

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), February 01, 2001.


I liked the picture.

-- (nemesis@awol.com), February 01, 2001.

Unk Duh,

That is REALLY bad. Why on earth would you not delete it?

-- Debra (Thisis@it.com), February 01, 2001.


You said a mouthful Unk...sorry couldn't resist..lol

Maria, just don't click da link :)

-- Peg (pegmcleod@mediaone.net), February 01, 2001.


OK, which picture is the one that is offensive? Dyke Hillary or Poop- Boy? I can argue that either of them would be offensive depending upon your world view, and the opposite is also true. If you find a picture of puppys offensive does that mean that I need to delete it? And what good does it do to delete the pic after you have already seen it? Does knowing that it has been deleted make a difference if you are not going to look at it again anyway?

If I get good answers to these questions I will consider deleting it, until then ignore it.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), February 01, 2001.


I believe they are refering to Poop-Boy.

My personal problem with pictures like this is, if I open the link while one of my kids is around...but then that's the chance I take personally by even reading this board. So I do try to be careful and can be very quick with the back button on my mouse.

Another problem is what you've already written about this place becoming a porn palace...when is enough, enough?

-- Peg (pegmcleod@mediaone.net), February 01, 2001.



I'm afraid to go to that link now. I'm having nightmares, night sweats, and it has ruined my ability to have sex...please help me. Delete hillary...

-- Uncle Bob (unclb0b@aol.com), February 01, 2001.

The grocery bill is probably lower as a result.......

yuck, yuck...

Deano

-- Deano (deano@luvthebeach.com), February 01, 2001.


Another problem is what you've already written about this place becoming a porn palace...when is enough, enough?

Sorry Peg, I'm the inquisitor around here, stick to answers.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), February 01, 2001.


Uncle Deedah,

Actually, any picture of Hillary is offensive to some, as are the altered Bush photos that have been posted relentlessy by Coup2k. But the offensiveness finds it roots in politics, not in humanity.

While puppies may indeed offend some; "Poop- Boy", as you have chosen to call the other picture, is offensive to nearly all of the population everywhere. I can make such a broad generalization only because it is true. In my estimation, we are not talking 50%-60%, or even 80%-90%, of the population finding this offensive. I would venture a guess that it would be over 99%.

You are correct in that, deleting that vile image will not help those who have already seen it. However, it will help those who have yet to have the misfortune to click on that thread.

I would also consider what point the poster was trying to make by posting such a thing. Possibly, he was trying to kill the thread. Wouldn't it be ironic that if by playing to your known (and almost always correct) reluctance to exorcise any form of censorship, this poster succeeded in a de facto censoring of the thread?

In closing, it is your forum, and you must do what you feel is best for the forum. I caution you, however, that allowing someone to post this type of filth under the guise of testing your free speech mettle could lead to a complete deterioration of the forum, much the way that spam of any kind does.

-- J (Y2J@home.comm), February 01, 2001.

Wait a minute Unk, do you have a double standard? I didn't (and have never) ask for censorship before. You deleted the photo of a man having anal intercourse with another man, yet you don't find this photo objectionable? THat sounds homophobic to me, unk. To me poopy boy is on the very same level, if not lower. IMO poopy boy is much *more* disgusting than gay boy. It's unhealthy in every sense of the word. And I'm going to have nightmares about it.

I believe in free-speech but I agree with J, this goes over the line.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), February 01, 2001.



One can turn off Show Pictures under your browsers options menu. You can always right-click and select Show Picture in order to view any picture you might wish to see.

I haven't seen the picture in question, nor do I need to in order to 'vote' against deleting it. If this becomes a constant occurence as opposed to this single incident, Unk will surely take measures as he sees fit.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), February 01, 2001.


Unk, After your initial post on this thread, the picture in question had turned into a link with a warning from you on click at your own risk. Now the picture is back, what gives?

-- (Bump@Bump.Bump), February 01, 2001.

Why can't you just alter the img tag so that it shows up as text? Anybody who actually wants to view that gross picture can then cut and paste the url. Less than censorship IMHO.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), February 01, 2001.

When I posted that "I liked the pic", I had only seen the pic of the butch babe. The scatology does not belong. It is not censureship to delete it. What's next, S&M? Snuff?

-- (nemesis@awol.com), February 01, 2001.

When I posted that "I liked the pic", I had only seen the pic of the butch babe. The scatology pic does not belong. It is not censureship to delete it. What's next, S&M? Snuff?

-- (nemesis@awol.com), February 01, 2001.

J,

. I caution you, however, that allowing someone to post this type of filth under the guise of testing your free speech mettle could lead to a complete deterioration of the forum, much the way that spam of any kind does.

You mean this forum has room to deteriorate even further? OH MY GOD, NO NO!

Maria,

The homo photo was on the old forum, not this one. And no, I am not a homophobe. Now that the subject of gay porn has been raised I’m sure that one will be posted now to test me. But I do find it interesting that the poop-boy thing was on it’s way out, and would have died a natural death through attrition, but the calls to delete it have given it a notoriety that it did not have before. By the way I agree with you, eating poop is probably not good for you at all.

Bump,

Outstanding observation! Good show! I turned that picture into a link but then had second thoughts, I decided to return the filthy thing as it was and use it to explore the issue of censorship and what should or should not be allowed here. I am loathe to delete a one time deal, no matter how foul, but I will not let it get out of hand.

And Buddy, that is what I did and then reversed. I will do that again now, to protect everyone from it so that the good people of Unkville can sleep sweetly and dream nice dreams.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), February 01, 2001.


nemesis,

Actually it is censorship to delete it. Popular censorship is censorship still, it makes no difference that a million people call for censorship, it makes no difference that the item being censored is foul and universally hated. The Bill of Rights gives no person the right not to be offended, even God cannot give you the right not to be offended, there is no such right, there never has nor can there ever be such a right.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), February 01, 2001.


Unk, Actually it is censorship to delete it. Absofuckinlutely.

But we create the world we want to live in. I know where to go to find trash on the internet and I know where to go to avoid it. The choice is mine. However, I've come to know this world as "somewhat" similar to my real life. People are people, we say things, sometimes crude and rude but most get over it. If I feel like I can click on a thread to find that stuff, I won't be clicking anymore. I know my choice however also my restriction.

I won't accept certain things in my little world, my kids need to behave in an "acceptable" manner, my friends are treated kindly and with respect and return that treatment. Of course, my kids and friends can make any choice they want but with that comes consequences.

This is the world you want to build. The choice is yours.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), February 01, 2001.


Maria,

It is okay to post a degrading picture of Hillary Clinton, but not to post an image of defecation, a natural process?

LOL, your hypocrisy shines through as always!

-- (repug@double.standard), February 01, 2001.


an image of defecation, a natural process?

Yes, defecation is a natural process...but defecating into someone's mouth is NOT.

-- Peg (pegmcleod@mediaone.net), February 02, 2001.


You made the right decision, Unk. People should have the option to view it or not.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), February 02, 2001.

What about the picture of Hillary? Do we have the option to view that?

-- (hey.einstein@get.a.clue), February 02, 2001.

She is pretty scary looking lately.



-- (no@photo.tricks used), February 02, 2001.


For the record, I never asked that the picture be deleted. I simply proposed a compromise which fell short of censorship in my opinion. As it turned out, Deedah had already thought of my solution.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), February 02, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ