> If we could agree on what is "Porn" the problem would be easier to manage.
> While I found the mentioned site interesting, I did not find it
> interesting enough to subscribe.
> Personally, it has to get pretty coarse for me to object. Even
> then if it is not forced upon me, I can choose to ignore it!
>
> ....
>
> John Ferrell


There's a question that'll take forever to resolve!

At a previous job, we ran voice mail dating services, as you find in
newspapers, etc.  One task was to screen & censor messages (we screened the
ads, not the responses as only the advertiser could hear those).

The dividing line between go/no go was as Russell described, you might think
it's ok, but what would your 13 year old daughter think?  This came down to
deleting the obvious ones with rude words, but what of "I'm looking for a
girl who enjoys fun times"?  These were usually let thru, unless the
advertiser 'sounded' a bit sleazy.  A very grey line.

One notable message was a bloke who said he was in a wheelchair, but still
sexually capable.  I let it though, but someone else wanted to delete it
since it had a 'sex' word in it.

Another was a prostitute who advertised.  She worded her message very
carefully, it was obvious to an adult what the subtext was, but not to a
child.  As you might imagine, her mailbox went ballistic.

I can certain see Russell's point, and I'm sure most people who claim to
have no problem with porn would be uncomfortable with "Well, watch it with
your daughter then...".  Religion/Christianity has nothing to do with it.
Plenty of atheists have the same opinion.

Anyone else remember the idea of having a .xxx domain to shove all the porn
in, leaving the rest of the 'net clean?

Tony



-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist