This is not a sex site Tek......

What about mine?

Because sex has nothing to do with life.

No, because a post such as the two tagged regarding the matter thus far are blatantly inappropriate for this website.

I disagree, but that makes no difference. Thanks for responding.

wait what sex doesn't have anything to do with life? are you stupid man, but tek we do not discuss does terms in here.

I was being sarcastic. Just imagine a 'NOT!' on the end of the sentence.

And why folk don't think that kids know far worse is beyond me. Nobody's going to be shocked by what they read, and if they are, they shouldn't be on this site in the first place.

This forum and this site as a whole are not for kids, even if some kids visit it.

Those things aren't deleted because any of us think that "kids don't know". It was deleted because the material in the thread was inappropriate. Not because of the broad subject matter itself.

I guess we need to stick to calling it "Doing It".

...and of course, the 'weed' thread stays...

Some people spend their entire lives indoors, Narrwald. :-P

Please leave site content to others.

Let me spell it out for you in plain terms, as you're misunderstanding what I've said:

Talking about sex in the Life forum is acceptable.

But,

Asking the strangest place you've ever had intercourse or how many cherries you've popped is not.

Understand the difference?

What do you mean by inappropriate? Irrelevant? Offensive? I don't think it was either, but oh well. I also think it was inconsistent to tag that thread and not others.

By inappropriate I mean inappropriate. I don't mean offensive or irrelevant. I mean inappropriate. Asking such a question as was asked in the post in question is not appropriate for this website, regardless of the forum.

Are there other threads I should get rid of?

Entire forums would be good for a start.

"Are there other threads I should get rid of?"

What, is that some limp threat?

lol... It was a question, actually. If there are other threads I should get rid of so as not to be "inconsistent", I would rather I was told about them.

Troll much?

No, I misunderstood you. Overuse the term 'troll' much?

...and really, if I disagree with you on this one, it's entirely likely I may disagree with you on another one.

I report stuff to complaints like a good reg, rest assured.

You can disagree with me all you want, Tek. That's actually for the best. It wouldn't be a good way to kill time if I couldn't get online and argue. 8P

I'm done in this thread, so anyone else who has an issue they'd like to discuss with me should head over to Complaints, where I'll still be checking today.

This forum and this site as a whole are not for kids, even if some kids visit it.

Not really... Just this forum... I mean, who's going to visit the GAMES part of the site. Not all games are for teenagers. Right?

Meh. Inappropriate usually has some sort of meaning behind it. Nevermind.

Not really... Just this forum... I mean, who's going to visit the GAMES part of the site. Not all games are for teenagers. Right?

I was a bit ambiguous. What I mean, is that this site was not made specifically for kids. It was made for everyone.

"It wouldn't be a good way to kill time if I couldn't get online and argue. 8P"

HA HA! Joke's on you. I'm at work doing this! I may constitute a time-killer for you, but you constitute a time-killer for me PLUS pay. MWA HA HAAA.

" Not all games are for teenagers. Right?"

Right, but all forums are accessible to teenagers and those under 13. And it is fairly obvious that Life attracts a young crowd as well as older people. Can you imagine in real life sitting your young niece on your knee and telling her how many women you've deflowered or recounting stories of where you've 'done it'?

I wouldn't and didn't tag the first topic about strange places when I saw it but I can see how it can be seen as verging into inappropriate territory and respect Kiwi's decision here. Otherwise, I would untag it.

As for the weed thread and allegations of inconsistency, I do not see the parallel. In any case, when we discussed why posts will be tagged if they instruct people to do illegal things, I mentioned that we'll be lenient with the topic of marijuana.

Ah.

My family is open and fairly forthcoming with/about the subject of sex, so I guess I'm coming from a different perspective. The most graphic jokes I know I learned in the fifth grade.

"In any case, when we discussed why posts will be tagged if they instruct people to do illegal things, I mentioned that we'll be lenient with the topic of marijuana."

Rightly so, especially considering that I try and always mention that the reason smoking pot is stupid is mainly due to it's illegality.

''Can you imagine in real life sitting your young niece on your knee and telling her how many women you've deflowered or recounting stories of where you've 'done it'?''

You swing that way Qwey?

And it is fairly obvious that Life attracts a young crowd as well as older people. Can you imagine in real life sitting your young niece on your knee and telling her how many women you've deflowered or recounting stories of where you've 'done it'?

Kids know a lot about sex. More than most adults assume they do. For those who don't, kids that young and innocent shouldn't be coming to an open forum like this. Their parents should be the ones who are reponsible enough to prevent that, not us. So, it's not really like sitting your young niece on your knee and telling her how many women you've deflowered. It's more like letting your niece have a nice long chat with a maniac who only talks sex. As in, keep your kids away from sex maniacs, keep your kids away from GameTalk.

Nasty stuff always crops up in these forums. Attempting to tag it all is like the war on drugs. It's not going to achieve anything. I think tagging should be done on threads or posts which drag the forum down, but no more than that.

Oh, and if those threads were tagged then I do think the one on cannabis should be too. I wouldn't tag any of them personally, but a couple of threads which are pretty harmless are tagged, whilst one condoning illegal activites is not?

"My family is open and fairly forthcoming with/about the subject of sex, so I guess I'm coming from a different perspective. The most graphic jokes I know I learned in the fifth grade."

Fine. Here's a more appropriate parallel then: walking up to some stranger's child in the park and and telling her how many women you've deflowered or recounting stories of where you've 'done it'.

"me they do. For those who don't, kids that young and innocent shouldn't be coming to an open forum like this. Their parents should be the ones who are reponsible enough to prevent that, not us."

Well that's easy for you to say, but you're not the one who is likely to be threatened with lawsuits from angry parents, ja? In any case, there is a standard that needs to be met so that everyone interested can participate.

"Nasty stuff always crops up in these forums. Attempting to tag it all is like the war on drugs. It's not going to achieve anything."

It achieves punishment for dealers who distribute this stuff to kids and therefore prevents them from exposing kids to drugs.

"I think tagging should be done on threads or posts which drag the forum down, but no more than that."

Yes, well, why do you feel Kiwi disagrees? She completely agrees with you that she was not being excessive in her tagging and that allowing such threads to exist on Life would send the wrong message about what a forum that already admittedly lacks a character of its own is about and may lead this forum back into the swamp of crude, sexually graphic posts, racism, sexism, anti-semitism, and rampant cussing and flaming where it was stuck last summer.

" a couple of threads which are pretty harmless are tagged, whilst one condoning illegal activites is not?"

Laws prohibiting the use of marijuana are currently undergoing review and criticism across the Western world. Some places have decriminalised using and dealing. Others decriminalised using but not dealing. Yet others have decriminalised medicinal and religious use. But what is apparent is that there is a large-scale discussion being raised about the reason for its illegality in the first place and if forum-goers are not permitted to chat about it because it's illegal, they're being deprived from joining this discussion on what really amounts to unfair, technical grounds.

But just because something isn't illegal doesn't mean it's appropriate to discuss or encourage it.

hey can one of you guys go to duh and tell yellow jr. to go to the lounge

"Fine. Here's a more appropriate parallel then: walking up to some stranger's child in the park and and telling her how many women you've deflowered or recounting stories of where you've 'done it'."

Should that child have been left in the park by themselves in the first place? And yes, I read the bit about liability.

"Should that child have been left in the park by themselves in the first place? And yes, I read the bit about liability."

Regardless, you still must justify your own actions because you are still responsible for what you do.

But maybe in a society of shift-the-blameism, that is no longer widely understood. GTA MADE ME DO IT!!!!

Well that's easy for you to say, but you're not the one who is likely to be threatened with lawsuits from angry parents, ja? In any case, there is a standard that needs to be met so that everyone interested can participate.

Fair enough. But as for the latter point, if someone doesn't want to participate, then they don't have to. A wide range of topics is a good thing, and I doubt it would put many people off having a few topics they want nothing to do with. They're not going to feel they have to abandon the forum entirely because there are a few topics they feel are inappropriate.

It achieves punishment for dealers who distribute this stuff to kids and therefore prevents them from exposing kids to drugs.

Prevention? Yep, but it's not really effective enough to achieve blanket prevention, and without that, kids aren't really protected. Punishment? Not really.

She completely agrees with you that she was not being excessive in her tagging and that allowing such threads to exist on Life would send the wrong message about what a forum that already admittedly lacks a character of its own is about and may lead this forum back into the swamp of crude, sexually graphic posts, racism, sexism, anti-semitism, and rampant cussing and flaming where it was stuck last summer.

But it seems fine at the moment. When the forum starts to sink to those levels, then go ahead and tag away. But one thread (the other one on 'cherry popping' I don't have a problem with being tagged) is not going to drag the forum down.

Laws prohibiting the use of marijuana are currently undergoing review and criticism across the Western world.

Yep. Today in the UK the government told us all that cannabis will be upgraded to a Class B drug from a Class C drug, so someone in possession can now be imprisoned for it.

" if someone doesn't want to participate, then they don't have to. A wide range of topics is a good thing, and I doubt it would put many people off having a few topics they want nothing to do with. They're not going to feel they have to abandon the forum entirely because there are a few topics they feel are inappropriate."

It's not about what they feel is inappropriate; I'm quite certain your average kid will be more intrigued than disgusted. It's about what IS inappropriate for them to be exposed to. Yes, it's paternalism. Don't like it? Well if you don't want to participate, then you don't have to. :oP It's probably best they don't get their sex education from GTers who are in their late 20s and 30s.

"Prevention? Yep, but it's not really effective enough to achieve blanket prevention, and without that, kids aren't really protected. Punishment? Not really."

"Today in the UK the government told us all that cannabis will be upgraded to a Class B drug from a Class C drug, so someone in possession can now be imprisoned for it."

Well then what are you complaining about. That's hardly punishment according to you!

In any case, that England is being idiosyncratic does not disprove that discussion is going on. You live in an outlier—contrary to common perception among the English, you don't dictate the trend. :oP

"But it seems fine at the moment. When the forum starts to sink to those levels, then go ahead and tag away."

I would rather it not even start to sink into it and it's the job of a mod to keep the ship in...errr... shipshape rather than letting the icebergs pierce through shoddily maintained barriers and then be like 'lul guyz theres a small prob ifaik!' and start bailing water.

"But one thread (the other one on 'cherry popping' I don't have a problem with being tagged) is not going to drag the forum down."

In your opinion. In my opinion too. But in Narrwald's and Kiwi's opinion, such topics remaining up could give the wrong signal to others in this forum who have a HARD TIME TAKING A HINT ON WHAT THIS FORUM IS ABOUT (disclaimer: no that's not directed at you. Tek) that it's a perfectly appropriate place to start cybering again. And that's valid and I am not sufficiently convinced to the contrary that I would override the tag.

It's about what IS inappropriate for them to be exposed to.

I don't think the word 'inappropriate' suffices on its own. It's got to refer to something. Why is it inappropriate?

Well then what are you complaining about. That's hardly punishment according to you!

I've got all confoozed. I think it started with my comment on the war on drugs, which was meant to be nothing more than an example of something that can never be won. I might be wrong though. But whatever the case, I have no idea what those two sentences are meant to mean. :-(

In any case, that England is being idiosyncratic does not disprove that discussion is going on. You live in an outlier—contrary to common perception among the English, you don't dictate the trend.

But whether you like it or not, Brits come to this forum. You've got to accomodate us and our peculiar, backwards customs.

I would rather it not even start to sink into it and it's the job of a mod to keep the ship in...errr... shipshape rather than letting the icebergs pierce through shoddily maintained barriers and then be like 'lul guyz theres a small prob ifaik!' and start bailing water.

Pre-emptive strikes? I wag my finger at you, UN style.

A few deviant threads are the sign that the GT ship is sinking, not one or two.

But in Narrwald's and Kiwi's opinion, such topics remaining up could give the wrong signal to others in this forum who have a HARD TIME TAKING A HINT ON WHAT THIS FORUM IS ABOUT (disclaimer: no that's not directed at you. Tek) that it's a perfectly appropriate place to start cybering again. And that's valid and I am not sufficiently convinced to the contrary that I would override the tag.

Meh. Fair point. Or, you could just ban those who aren't getting the point. Or threaten them. Take it out on them in some way, rather than the whole forum.

Mm.

We-ll, Tek, myself, a variety of others would report cybering ANYway. Kinda goes without saying.

But, a ridiculous world evokes ridiculous actions. Parental lawsuits, and strange exactings of modly powers alike.

Been to a elemtary school playground lately? I live near one. I could write the strangest pornos EVER, based solely on these kids' discussions.

This place isn't any different, blah, blah, blah, killed an interesting and funny conversation, yap, yap, yap, no-one gives a damn, dum-dee-dum, interesting how one mod overlooks, and another strikes.

(trips as she shuffles off of shoebox)

"I don't think the word 'inappropriate' suffices on its own. It's got to refer to something. Why is it inappropriate?"

It's generally accepted that having children participate in discussions about having sex is not a good thing, and that when we see that they do, it's a sign of a "ridiculous world" and we're more likely to sigh about the loss of innocence and growing up too soon and the media over-sexualising children than we are to nod our heads and think it's normal.

"This place isn't any different, blah, blah, blah, killed an interesting and funny conversation, yap, yap, yap, no-one gives a damn, dum-dee-dum, interesting how one mod overlooks, and another strikes."

Ya, your conversation near the end was one of the reasons I decided to leave it up. When I first saw the topic, I was a little worried about where it would go because there were already some posts I felt were verging on the inappropriate (mentioning specific sex acts) But with Draconum's post in the beginning and yours at the end, I was relieved. All the same though, as I've said, others might not be as perceptive to the difference between those kinds of posts and more inappropriate kinds.

" I might be wrong though. But whatever the case, I have no idea what those two sentences are meant to mean."

Either you say that jail is not punishment (in which case, you must admit that not only is the general trend towards a discussion of decriminalisation, but that England conforms to that trend) or, you say that jaiil is punishment (in which case, you must admit that I am right about the war on drugs and that it provides punishment.)

"But whether you like it or not, Brits come to this forum. You've got to accomodate us and our peculiar, backwards customs."

I already do. My smilies are backwards just so you can understand them. (-:

"A few deviant threads are the sign that the GT ship is sinking, not one or two."

Yes, well, one or two is more than enough when you've got saboteurs in the cargo!!

"Meh. Fair point. Or, you could just ban those who aren't getting the point. Or threaten them. Take it out on them in some way, rather than the whole forum."

I can't ban in this forum. Threatening doesn't work if they're thickies and can't get the message. And I'm working on taking them out in creative (coffcoffstalkingcoffcoff) ways.

The posts were offensive to virgins.

Offensive to-

(sighs)

I quit.

PJH SAID IT, NOT ME!!!