So you are simply an editor that is interested in freedom of expression and free speech on the internet, making all types of content available to interested web surfers
Fair enough, but at this point do you feel that AOL can take the heat that the government and the media is putting on this issue when they are marketing child safe surfing in their ISP programs Can they really continue with this in reality at this point
Stop hedging, troll. To be more specific, you believe that material that is legal but promotes "affirmative views" of something that is illegal should be listed (and should be entitled to multiple listings per site) in DMOZ Adult. Let's not pretty it up in the name of free speech.
Anthony, this is turning into a sensible discussion. We had better be careful. There's a strong case to argue that the ODP's adult category (and similar categories in other directories) is a actually a useful step in PREVENTING access to pornography. How so? Well, AOL and many other ISPs use "safe surfing" software to help prevent children accessing unsuitable material. Remember, the ODP's data is free to use (with some restrictions) and it's a good starting point for cataloging adult sites. (This is a through a thing called the RDF dump). If you block access to the sites in Adult, and then mine the adult directories (also listed in the ODP), then you've started to create a good candidate list of blockable sites. I have some experience of working with the blocklists myself. The ODP goes to some lengths to hide the adult content. It's been there since 1998, and really a LOT of people don't know about it, even today. By comparison, Yahoo lists "sexuality" categories in the main directory - many of those listings in the ODP would be in Adult. I will concede you this - I do not believe that the federal government is motivated by protecting children when it approached the search engines for their query database, I believe that their motivations are something different. However, there is some merit in having an analysis of the exact phrases that sexual predators might be searching for, even if only to aid in locating and shutting down illegal sites. Remember, these sites exist outside of the ODP. They will continue to exist even if the ODP does not list them (in fact, as I pointed out the traffic for cherryboys.com - the site that started all of this - appears to be very low, even with multiple ODP listings). On a personal note, I do not find pornography to be "wrong" in principle, as long as the material is legal, and features consenting adults. There is a lot of pornography which I personally find revolting, though, but you must appreciate that some people like the stuff. As a side note - one of the key problems with children accidentally coming across pornography is NOT things like the adult directory, it's cases where domain names expire and are bought up for porn sites. Finding and eliminating these links is a major problem for all web resources and directories, no matter how large or small they are.
Yes Minstrel is right, then those sites link to other sites that are not worth a shit to anyone! Sort of bring the kids in through the back door via these child molesters discussion portals!
It's clear you didn't read my posts properly, Dr David J. Baxter. I advise you to go and read them again before you post some of your self-serving BS. (Are you just trying to drum up business for your psych site I wonder? Is business not going so well for you?)
Come on man, Minstrel has a good point about these discussion sites linking to other child porn sites! I think you will find that if you hold back attacks that you would not be attacked in retaliation!
Thank you to those who defended me by mentioning that personal attack on me has got nothing to do with the issues but there is no need and answering the stupid remarks just increases the number of posts which got nothing to do with the issues discussed and the important questions will get lost among all noise which is popular tactic among some of DMOZ editors. What surprises me that they have tried both blackmail and bribe before but they never learn from their previous failures. How ever there was an interesting idea that was mentioned by Deobfuscator and I would like to ask him a question. I am supposedly involved in porn and because of this my arguments are of no value because it is just natural to draw a conclusion that I must be a bad person, so would you like to explain for good members here how can a person who has hundreds of porn site to be Admin in DMOZ? For those of you that are not aware, admin is the highest level of editor. Doesn't the same logic that you apply to me also applies to the admin and makes this person corrupt and unreliable?
The "directories"? As I said before, I'd view them as being suspect and would personally want to remove them and have them checked over carefully. That's my two cents worth. But on the other end of the scale you have an article at Salon.com written by Professor Camille Paglia, a noted (but extremely contraversial) academic. Don't forget, the "affimative views" category is part of a broad set of categories covering many different types of human sexuality. It's common practice to have subcategories with sites that have a point of view that it different from the main category ("opposing views"). I bet you could find many similar categories, some of which might be equally uncomfortable.
There's no "supposedly" about it, kiddo. If you'd like to discuss individual editors, can I suggest that you start a new thread rather then just adding to the noise in this one?
I didn't say editall, I said Admin. We are all ears, so you can explain for us, how the owners of hundreds of porn web sites can be Admin or as you mentioned editall and not use their position and only selflessly to work to make Internet a better place for porn and why the same things that you post about me, doesn't apply to them?
No you cannot. This isn't the Resource Zone. You are not a moderator here. You're not even a welcome guest here. You do not and can not make the rules. Get used to it.
Minstrel, you are not a moderator here. I cannot believe that you would be qualified as a moderator for ANY site. You are certainly not adding any value to the discussion. Why don't you just go away?
I hate to break the news to you but Minstrel is one of the foremost experts on forums and owns a few of them in addition to administrating and moderating many in his day!
God, those must be insufferably awful places to go and post if you have a point-of-view that's not the same as his.
Not at all, I have argued with Minstrel many times on his forums, he is fair and objective, try to hold back your anger, he is senior to you here and you will find out!
Trust me, Dr David J. Baxter is not senior or better than me in any way that I am able to determine. You seem to hold him in high regard. Good for you. I do not.