Please All Read

[Linkster]

Now that Bill and I have for the last two days been trying to take the low road on modding and let things play out - we need to make two things perfectly clear here evidently.

1. We do not tolerate personal attacks on other posters - I dont care if you want to slime the queen of england or Mandela - as long as they dont post here its well within the boundaries here - we run this as an adult conversation board - if you cant handle adult topics or discussions - you dont need to be here.

2. We will not accept any posts that are illegal by the laws of the US - while we promote complete free speech (with the exception of #1 above) - we will not spend 5 years in a federal pen. for that freedom for you - so if youve got something you really want to shout out but the law prohibits it right now - start your own board and good luck

[LadyMod at scam.com]

Is there a list of what is illegal by U.S. laws to post other than pornography?

[Linkster]

Actually pornography would be protected speech as of right now - I would refer you to Title 18 of the US Code - especially say around Part 1 Chapter 115 :) to find where this issue came from that I made this post about

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18/parts/i/chapters/115/sections/section_2385.html

[LadyMod at scam.com]

Actually pornography would be protected speech as of right now - I would refer you to Title 18 of the US Code - especially say around Part 1 Chapter 115 :) to find where this issue came from that I made this post about

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18/parts/i/chapters/115/sections/section_2385.html

OK, cool. Thanks.

[Jesse Hemingway]

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Article. VI. - Debts, Supremacy, Oaths
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

THIS COUNTRY IS OUT OF ORDER:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[LadyMod at scam.com]

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18/parts/i/chapters/115/sections/section_2385.html

I've read that before.

Well, I won't advocate taking over the government. Cleaing house with our votes maybe but not taking up arms and taking over. :noway:

I wouldn't want to be held responsible for all those innocent deaths just for taking back the country by the people.

[Bill]

Illegal means stuff like child porn, incitement and conspiracy to commit crimes, statements that could reasonably considered to be slander and libel, threats of physical violence or threats to commit other crimes against persons, stuff like that.

Free speech abuses, like posting plans for bombs or plans for attacks, would also be bannable.

I use a "reasonable man" standard - if a reasonable man would conclude that a specific statement was slander and libel, or an incitement to violence, then we have to ban and delete.

My standards for personal attack are looser than Linksters, and may be looser than Tommys - I figure if a personal attack doesn't exceed what has become common discourse on the internet, it's allowed here.

But, I make a distinction between a few attacks, and a consistent pattern of attacking. If it threatens the community, if it turns into a brawl, if it stops being attack for a political point and becomes purely personal, then, as far as I'm concerned, it's no longer adult, it's out of control, and banning is a reasonable way to let everybody else continue debating and arguing.

The plan is to warn before banning, except for stuff that is clearly illegal. Because nobody likes to get visited by the secret service or fbi.

[Cat slave]

Hmmmm.....that will thin out some of the "scammers"! Not me of course,
Im always sweet and well behaved.:p

[Frankg]

Bill , Linkster and Sir Moby

There will always be people who like to see the firefights

At scam.com namecalling is ok, as a matter of fact , LadyMod has stated he that she enjoys it, she did however make a rule that attacking a moderator will result in a ban, so some us were unsure how to react when we started getting attacked and / or baited by her

I'm an ordinary average guy , average(maybe a little below) intelligence and being a new poster I intend to keep a low profile but if I get personnally attacked then will retun fire

How about this, start a new thread just for the flamers call it "Take it out Outside " or something

just a suggestion

PS : Its refreshing to be on a forum with fair and rational moderators, good job guys

[LadyMod at scam.com]

Bill , Linkster and Sir Moby

There will always be people who like to see the firefights

At scam.com namecalling is ok, as a matter of fact , LadyMod has stated he that she enjoys it, she did however make a rule that attacking a moderator will result in a ban, so some us were unsure how to react when we started getting attacked and / or baited by her

I'm an ordinary average guy , average(maybe a little below) intelligence and being a new poster I intend to keep a low profile but if I get personnally attacked then will retun fire

How about this, start a new thread just for the flamers call it "Take it out Outside " or something

just a suggestion

PS : Its refreshing to be on a forum with fair and rational moderators, good job guys

I never minded the names frank, still don't. But racist is not a name, it's a state of being. And I'm not one. And for someone who never knew how to act, it didn't stop any of you from starting threads complaining about me either. I good naturely accepted MANY attacks from you Neocons, some unprovoked. 15 threads Cupcake. I think I hold a record.

And I spelled it out for you guys several times there. If you started a thread about another member it would be considered a personal attack on that member and you would be banned. If you harrassed that member in every post and carried it through to other threads harping on it, it was considered a personal attack and you would be banned. Debating them, calling them names, and anything short of physical threats as long as it was centered around a threads topic was fair game ON THAT THREAD. That's pretty damned lenient.

You guys don't want to debate me, God only knows why. Maybe I make you look stupid, who knows? But it wasn't because there were any rules keeping you from it. There certainly aren't any here but you still won't debate with me. I find that odd. We are on equal footing here.

We had a thread dedicated to flame throwers on scam once. Called the Venting room. It worked for a week. I doubt it will be any different here. They have 2 forums here and 3 or 4 moderators and an admin who is here a lot. I see him. I believe they can handle the sudden load of controversy.

There's 14 forums on scam and I have one moderator who shows up to help. Occassionally the admin makes an appearance, he's a busy guy. The only thing that FUBARred things here was people bringing scam.com issues wth them when they joined. For my part in that I apologize to the moderators here, to the admin and the owner.

You seem to have stopped, I applaud that. Though I'm still calling you Cupcake, call me Bitch if you like. :D RG needs to let his resentments go. It's unhealthy and unproductive. The moderators will protect him if needed.

Other than that, it's going to take a week more or less for things to settle. Ian needs to understand that not everyone reads the same threads at the same time, so comments from old posts are still going to be made in the next few weeks by new people or those who haven't read those particular threads. The only way to stop that is to delete the threads. That's not an insult, just an invitation to future peace and usually unacceptable to everyone else.

So there you have it. Lecture over. I'm going back to being a regular person now. Who just happens to have known some of your for the last two years.

Lady Mod

[Betty Blowtorch]

Actually pornography would be protected speech
as of right now
http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/897/homersimpsonbigmouthet5.jpg

Hey! Did somebody say...


... porn is protected speech? http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/392/boobs2vu0.gif


Free at last... free at last... http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/7019/moretitssr1.gif
Thank god almighty, we are free at last!!


Just don't tell Lady Mod. http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/1407/homere0tz9.gif
She doesn’t like to see naked boobs.

[kres24GT]

Now that Bill and I have for the last two days been trying to take the low road on modding and let things play out - we need to make two things perfectly clear here evidently.

1. We do not tolerate personal attacks on other posters - I dont care if you want to slime the queen of england or Mandela - as long as they dont post here its well within the boundaries here - we run this as an adult conversation board - if you cant handle adult topics or discussions - you dont need to be here.

2. We will not accept any posts that are illegal by the laws of the US - while we promote complete free speech (with the exception of #1 above) - we will not spend 5 years in a federal pen. for that freedom for you - so if youve got something you really want to shout out but the law prohibits it right now - start your own board and good luck


I am offended when Bill calls me a "right wing apologist". What steps can I take to have him properly disciplined?

[Betty Blowtorch]

I am offended when Bill calls me a "right wing apologist".
What steps can I take to have him properly disciplined?
Does somebody here need to be disciplined?

http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/9448/dominatrix44rq2.jpg

[Kinky Jones]

I am offended when Bill calls me a "right wing apologist". What steps can I take to have him properly disciplined?

I'm tired of being called un-American, anti-American, or "a terrorist supporter" but we dont need discipline kres ole buddy, I demand reparations!

[UserName]

Does somebody here need to be disciplined?

http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/9448/dominatrix44rq2.jpg


I believe you need to take your tools of the trade to http://www.gop.com/.
You would be welcomed with open arms and discarded pants. But be careful.....

"A NYC escort writes on her experiences with Republican clients during the RNC, including one about an escort who never takes Republicans as "....invariably they were fat, BAD about paying and almost all of them had a kink too weird to deal with. Usually the 'mommy spank me, beat me, fuck me' kind - to the extreme".

[Peregrine]

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/897/homersimpsonbigmouthet5.jpg

Hey! Did somebody say...


... porn is protected speech? http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/392/boobs2vu0.gif


Free at last... free at last... http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/7019/moretitssr1.gif
Thank god almighty, we are free at last!!


Just don't tell Lady Mod. http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/1407/homere0tz9.gif
She doesn’t like to see naked boobs.


Also free to take it someplace else!

[Bill]

I am offended when Bill calls me a "right wing apologist". What steps can I take to have him properly disciplined?

Which illustrates one of the points I'm trying to make, which is that simple offense, and the politics of offense, is a dangerous force and a dangerous principle to use for applying force.

The question that I've been asking myself is, when does offense stop being simple offense, such as Kres is talking about, and when has it moved to the point of being a weapon used to threaten a portion of the community?

Lets take Betty's softcore images - I see them as making a political point, and while they aren't exactly considerate of the feelings of others, and could easily offend some, the cost to everyone of making a big deal out of them is greater than the cost of the offenses that could be causing.

But, if they appear over and over, they could become a kind of weapon - in this case, a weapon to force women, who could reasonably feel bad to see breasts used a distracting and sexualizing rhetorical device, to avoid the board.

This is actually an interesting oppurtunity to study the "politics of offense".

[LadyMod at scam.com]

But, if they appear over and over, they could become a kind of weapon - in this case, a weapon to force women, who could reasonably feel bad to see breasts used a distracting and sexualizing rhetorical device, to avoid the board.

This is actually an interesting oppurtunity to study the "politics of offense".

Do the wants of the many outweigh the wants of the few or do the wishes of the few outweigh the wants of the many?

.

[Betty Blowtorch]

Also free to take it someplace else!
Apparently you don't like the bouncing boobies,
but I couldn't help noticing that, by quoting my
original post, you succeeded in re-posting the
naked boobies a second time. Thanks!

You definitely deserve a giggling piggy for that. http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/6088/piggygigglingyj6.gif

[Peregrine]

Apparently you don't like the bouncing boobies,
but I couldn't help noticing that, by quoting my
original post, you succeeded in re-posting the
naked boobies a second time. Thanks!

You definitely deserve a giggling piggy for that. http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/6088/piggygigglingyj6.gif

Your absolutely right...my mistake...but can I ask: Was it necessary to post graphics to prove your point? It could have been left to the imagination. I don't come to a political forum to see naked boobs...I can go someplace else.
Thats a loaded sentence.. and I'm sure you will tell me where I can go!..:laugh: Love the piggy pic

[LadyMod at scam.com]

Your absolutely right...my mistake...but can I ask: Was it necessary to post graphics to prove your point? It could have been left to the imagination. I don't come to a political forum to see naked boobs...I can go someplace else.
Thats a loaded sentence.. and I'm sure you will tell me where I can go!..:laugh: Love the piggy pic

Personally I think it detracts from the thread and it will bring the porn bots and spammers. But hey, if they want a porn site now instead of a politics forum, that's up to them. LOL


On scam, it's not allowed.

[Frankg]

I never minded the names frank, still don't. But racist is not a name, it's a state of being. And I'm not one. And for someone who never knew how to act, it didn't stop any of you from starting threads complaining about me either. I good naturely accepted MANY attacks from you Neocons, some unprovoked. 15 threads Cupcake. I think I hold a record.

And I spelled it out for you guys several times there. If you started a thread about another member it would be considered a personal attack on that member and you would be banned. If you harrassed that member in every post and carried it through to other threads harping on it, it was considered a personal attack and you would be banned. Debating them, calling them names, and anything short of physical threats as long as it was centered around a threads topic was fair game ON THAT THREAD. That's pretty damned lenient.

You guys don't want to debate me, God only knows why. Maybe I make you look stupid, who knows? But it wasn't because there were any rules keeping you from it. There certainly aren't any here but you still won't debate with me. I find that odd. We are on equal footing here.

We had a thread dedicated to flame throwers on scam once. Called the Venting room. It worked for a week. I doubt it will be any different here. They have 2 forums here and 3 or 4 moderators and an admin who is here a lot. I see him. I believe they can handle the sudden load of controversy.

There's 14 forums on scam and I have one moderator who shows up to help. Occassionally the admin makes an appearance, he's a busy guy. The only thing that FUBARred things here was people bringing scam.com issues wth them when they joined. For my part in that I apologize to the moderators here, to the admin and the owner.

You seem to have stopped, I applaud that. Though I'm still calling you Cupcake, call me Bitch if you like. :D RG needs to let his resentments go. It's unhealthy and unproductive. The moderators will protect him if needed.

Other than that, it's going to take a week more or less for things to settle. Ian needs to understand that not everyone reads the same threads at the same time, so comments from old posts are still going to be made in the next few weeks by new people or those who haven't read those particular threads. The only way to stop that is to delete the threads. That's not an insult, just an invitation to future peace and usually unacceptable to everyone else.

So there you have it. Lecture over. I'm going back to being a regular person now. Who just happens to have known some of your for the last two years.

Lady Mod
Ok Lady Mod fair enough , and btw , rapist is just as bad , if not worse, than racist and I still maintain I did not start that thread and will do whatever is necessary to proove that

[LadyMod at scam.com]

Ok Lady Mod fair enough , and btw , rapist is just as bad , if not worse, than racist and I still maintain I did not start that thread and will do whatever is necessary to proove that

OK, point taken. We can be friends and I won't make the insinuation again.

:truce:

Do you want me to unban you at scam? I won't unban Grim, he's lost his mind and is a menace but I'll be happy to unban you when the website is upgraded and back up.


Lady Mod

[Frankg]

Ok

Thanks Ladymodhttp://bestsmileys.com/happy/7.gif

[Betty Blowtorch]

Your absolutely right
Of course.




my mistake...
You couldn't help it. You're only human.




but can I ask: Was it necessary to post graphics
to prove your point?
Yup. Actually it was a dig at LadyMod. A couple of months ago
she raised a stink about a boob photo that wasn't even posted
directly to the page, but was hidden by a link. You couldn't see
the photo unless you clicked on the link.

It was obviously intended to be a gag, but LadyMod made an
issue of it. It seemed a bit uppity that LadyMod was coming in
here as a newcomer but wanted to act like a moderator.

To avoid offending her, I complied with her wishes... until...

Linkster was forced to start this thread to put a halt to the unruly
catfights between LadyMod and the scam.com group -- something
which had never been necessary before. LadyMod's response was
to claim that pornography is illegal to post under U.S. laws.

When Linkster responded that "pornography is protected speech,"
I couldn't resist taking a little jab at LadyMod. Hence the whole
"free at last... free at last" gag.

The truth is: there is very little porn to be found on this website.
LadyMod might be well advised not to make an issue of something
that hasn't been much of an issue before.

There are two boob photos in this thread because LadyMod made
pornography an issue and tried to claim that it's illegal to post it.

Linkster responded that "porn is protected speech" and I chimed in
with my own opinion on the subject, complete with lovely photos
of healthy young ladies exercising their... free speech.




It could have been left to the imagination.
Don't be ridiculous. http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/3679/laughingpuppyui0.gif

[Peregrine]

Of course.



You couldn't help it. You're only human.



Yup. Actually it was dig at LadyMod. A couple of months ago
she raised a stink about a boob photo that wasn't even posted
directly to the page, but was hidden by a link. You couldn't see
the photo unless you clicked on the link.

It was obviously intended to be a gag, but LadyMod made an
issue of it. It seemed a bit uppity that LadyMod was coming in
here as a newcomer but wanted to act like a moderator.

To avoid offending her, I complied with her wishes... until...

Linkster was forced to start this thread to put a halt to the unruly
catfights between LadyMod and the scam.com group -- something
which had never been necessary before. LadyMod's response was
to claim that pornography is illegal to post under U.S. laws.

When Linkster responded that "pornography is protected speech,"
I couldn't resist taking a little jab at LadyMod. Hence the whole
"free at last... free at last" gag.

The truth is: there is very little porn to be found on this website.
LadyMod might be well advised not to make an issue of something
that hasn't been much of an issue before.

There are two boob photos in this thread because LadyMod made
pornography an issue and tried to claim that it's illegal to post it.

Linkster responded that "porn is protected speech" and I chimed in
with my own opinion on the subject, complete with lovely photos
of healthy young ladies exercising their... free speech.



Don't be ridiculous. http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/3679/laughingpuppyui0.gif

Oh the puppy is so cute!!!! Well you found a way to my heart with the cute puppy and little piggy...your forgiven:)

[LadyMod at scam.com]

BB, when they fine the owner of the site for having pornography on an open page accessable to school age children I don't think they will find your joke quite so funny.

Pornography is not illegal. But it is when it's on public pages. It's a violation of some child protection laws I believe.

It only takes one parent complaining to make it happen. THAT's why I won't allow it on scam. It nearly happened to us.

And this thread is stickied and is titled "Please ALL Read".

Lady Mod