1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

DMOZ Supports Child Porn?

Discussion in 'ODP / DMOZ' started by dvduval, Jan 26, 2006.

  1. EveryQuery

    EveryQuery Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,039
    Likes Received:
    366
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #101
    By the way you'll need a PayPal account, both for the eBay auctions and for the editor's bribe. :D
     
    EveryQuery, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  2. DustyG

    DustyG Guest

    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    15
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #102
    First off, the point raised about UGAS becoming a content provider might be a legitimate issue. Years ago (back when these sites were listed) UGAS was an AVS (Age Verification System) and not a content provider. All they did was check the age of people wanting access to adult material. They provided memberships and then people could view the sites associated with their network. Each site provided their own content. Everything listed was appropriate.

    If UGAS has become a content provider than it could be that it is no longer appropriate to list affiliated sites. The facts have to be checked out before hundreds of sites will be removed. I'm not an editor in the Adult branch, so I don't know for sure but I am guessing if UGAS has reorganized, it is probably due to something related to the 2257 issue.

    No editor can act unilaterally in something involving this many sites. We are talking about hundreds upon hundreds of listings, not just cherryboys.com/.net it affects a whole section of the directory.

    You guys know DMOZ is a community and any large scale changes like this must be agreed upon by editors... it's the reason sometimes things take longer than if there were just one person making these kind of decisions.

    I appreciate that this issue has been raised so we can address it, just too bad it took so long to get to and we had to wade through so much noise to get to the heart of the matter.
     
    DustyG, Jan 28, 2006 IP
    anthonycea likes this.
  3. brizzie

    brizzie Peon

    Messages:
    1,724
    Likes Received:
    178
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #103
    A large number are blissfully unaware, never venturing into Adult. I was unaware of that category until today. Though there were other Adult branch issues I had strong feeling on before I left, nothing as serious as this though. On these sorts of matters it is rare for discussion to be held outside a dedicated Adult branch forum. Non-Adult editors do not like to venture in there. Entering an internal discussion on Adult matters is not for the faint of heart. Adult editors have been attacked externally and internally for years and have answers for everything - see my previous devils advocate questions. It is extremely difficult to argue anything when the guidelines are so weak and ill worded. Hence the need for them to be clarified beyond doubt. That category is pretty obscure, it is unlikely more than a handful had ever come across it even amongst Adult editors.

    There are some Adult webmasters there, and given how many editors have been expelled you can guarantee every one of them has been investigated several times with no abuse proven despite perceptions sometimes. There are also ordinary folk who edit there who like porn I guess, and in today's society there are plenty of people who don't think it's anything to be ashamed of. It's not my thing but live and let live. I wouldn't say they were bottom feeders, some are very nice people.

    Problem here is that DMOZ culture is that change has to be by consensus. So you can't get change unless you have the Adult editors willing to support it and a very small number can block change. Even so, the existence of that category is likely to be a shock to most of them.

    There are many areas of Adult which are not contentious and are legitimate and should be in an Adult category. Where freedom of speech is an argument that carries some weight. As long as it is dealt with responsibly and IMO that is one area where it falls down badly.

    Dustyg - I think you missed something. The thread has moved on past a red herring quality control issue and back to the title. Adult/Computers/Internet/Chats_and_Forums/Activities_and_Practices/Pedophilia/Affirmative_Views/ - I'd be interested in any possible reasons for its existence.

    The sites originally mentioned in this thread were not illegal, not even close. And had they not been in breach of affiliate content rules as the guidelines stand (or omit to stand) the galleries could have been listed until a ruling to the contrary. No-one, as far as I know has made any assertion about the legality or otherwise of pedophile forums or any defence of them being listed in DMOZ (at time of writing).
     
    brizzie, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  4. gworld

    gworld Prominent Member

    Messages:
    11,324
    Likes Received:
    615
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #104
    Does this mean that as long as a "small" group of editors support corruption then everything is fine and corruption continues? :rolleyes:
     
    gworld, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  5. brizzie

    brizzie Peon

    Messages:
    1,724
    Likes Received:
    178
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #105
    No, corruption is prohibited. Therefore the guidelines could not be changed to legitimize it without consensus. Since there is no consensus in favor of corruption it will remain prohibited. So don't bother to apply. ;)

    But if you want to distract from a legitimate and serious issue from a moral responsibility failure perspective by carrying on repeating your unsubstantiated paranoid theories then that would be very sad.

    What am I doing? Troll feeding time was over hours ago :rolleyes:
     
    brizzie, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  6. DustyG

    DustyG Guest

    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    15
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #106
    briz, I commented on the issue I was directly involved in. As for the pedophilia issue, I haven't even started to look at it... but I guess Wikipedia will be next in the cross hairs of the very same folks that are posting in this thread.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia
     
    DustyG, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  7. anthonycea

    anthonycea Banned

    Messages:
    13,378
    Likes Received:
    342
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #107
    You guys are editors, this is a free speech forum with little censorship if any, so most anything can be discussed, the funny thing I have noticed since the DMOZ threads have become popular here are all you editors that have joined the forum!

    We are happy about this, but at the same time don't expect that the views of the members who made these threads popular should be silenced because a bunch of DMOZ editors joined Digital Point!

    SEO chat banned me and censored threads because I took open shots at CBP for posting propaganda against a member calling him a liar and a spammer if I remember correctly.

    I got warned by the moderators who thought it was so important to protect a DMOZ editor because he could answer questions for the members.

    Well they proceeded to censor my comments and then banned me for the second time!

    I got them back in a big way and their forum is mostly dead now, even the moderators moved on to different forums!

    So needless to say the members here have a right to say whatever they wish and so do you editors, that is what a forum should be about and we hope it stays that way here!
     
    anthonycea, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  8. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #108
    DustyG, you are either a moron or a scoundrel.

    Providing a definition of a disease is one thing; assisting in the spread of the disease is quite another.
     
    minstrel, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  9. anthonycea

    anthonycea Banned

    Messages:
    13,378
    Likes Received:
    342
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #109
    Funny, most of the editors should just go back and read the DMOZ threads here with the most views and they will find everything in a nice neat package!

    There really is no reason to go over the same stuff a thousand times :D

    If Nintendo were here he could find all the links for you guys and post them! :)
     
    anthonycea, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  10. DustyG

    DustyG Guest

    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    15
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #110
    Much love back to you...

    Page down to the bottom of that article, you pompous yutz, it links to some of the very same sites that have caused so much outrage in this thread.

    Surely if the problem really is that DMOZ links to these sites, then the problem would be the same for every site that links to those very same sites, or are you all a bunch of hypocrites?
     
    DustyG, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  11. anthonycea

    anthonycea Banned

    Messages:
    13,378
    Likes Received:
    342
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #111
    I never linked to them :eek:
     
    anthonycea, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  12. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #112
    Ahhh... hit a nerve, did I? :D

    That's okay, Dusty. You answered my question. Apparently, you are a bit of both.
     
    minstrel, Jan 28, 2006 IP
    Serious and anthonycea like this.
  13. anthonycea

    anthonycea Banned

    Messages:
    13,378
    Likes Received:
    342
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #113
    Did you link to any of those sites Minstrel :confused:
     
    anthonycea, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  14. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #114
    Nope. DustyG is just pissed that he can't run this place like he can the Resourceless Zone and that we're not accepting his lame justifications for the fact that DMOZ is propping up the porn industry.
     
    minstrel, Jan 28, 2006 IP
    clancey likes this.
  15. anthonycea

    anthonycea Banned

    Messages:
    13,378
    Likes Received:
    342
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #115
    Well porn is what built the internet to what it is today, many innovations in web technology have been invented by porn webmasters, it happens to be the biggest business on the net, so they have some reasons to list this crap.....

    But it should be deleted for sure! :eek:

    No one has answered my question about if anyone has ever watched porn on AOL yet....:(
     
    anthonycea, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  16. pagode

    pagode Guest

    Messages:
    257
    Likes Received:
    47
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #116
    It seems that USA laws don't classify sites like the ones listed in http://dmoz.org/Adult/Arts/Online_Writing/Fiction/BDSM/Spanking/Free/ as illegal.

    See http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_110.html
    They only think "visual depictions" are illegal.
    I also found information on http://www.asacp.org/faq.php
    I'm not pleased with this.
    I much more prefer Canadian law
    I'll continue to try to get this material removed. But now I'm first going to get some sleep (In Europe it now is well past midnight)
     
    pagode, Jan 28, 2006 IP
    anthonycea likes this.
  17. dvduval

    dvduval Notable Member

    Messages:
    3,369
    Likes Received:
    356
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    260
    #117
    Getting back to the topic...DMOZ is clearly allowing child porn to be promoted.

    spanking of pre-teens

    This is not cool at all! People who touch pre-teens inappropriately are among the most loathed in our society, and such acts are most definitely illegal.

    a yummy batch of gay boy sites

    Promoting sex with "boys" is horrendous. Even if it is a matter of semantics, this is still very offensive. I support the right of someone to have a same sex marriage, and I even find this offensive. LOL
     
    dvduval, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  18. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #118
    Okay, pagode, but again I don't think the issue is simply what is or is not illegal - it's also about what is or is not right. DMOZ needs to start worrying more about that and less about "can we cover our asses on this one?"...
     
    minstrel, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  19. dvduval

    dvduval Notable Member

    Messages:
    3,369
    Likes Received:
    356
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    260
    #119
    More great stuff here:
    http://dmoz.org/Adult/Society/Sexuality/Activities_and_Practices/Necrophilia/The third site surely depicts illegal activities. People are making money on Necrophilia sites, but the editors that are working for free have little time to list quality sites that have been waiting for months.

    I'm sorry to show this crap here. I truly am.
    But sometimes we need to actually look at something for what it is!
    Cherryboys, spanking pre-teens and sex with dead people
    These sites and more are very much a part of what defines DMOZ.
    It is BS to say that DMOZ lists all sites, because they are merely librarians listing what is truly on the web. It goes way deeper than that.
    This is a corrupt organization that is allowing this crap to take place in the name of profit. I strongly encourage existing DMOZ editors to think carefully about the organization you are helping.
     
    dvduval, Jan 28, 2006 IP
  20. DomainMagnate

    DomainMagnate Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    10,932
    Likes Received:
    1,022
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    #120
    hey that's gay porn...huh wait a sec now I have an idea why so many people are not accepted to be dmoz editors..
     
    DomainMagnate, Jan 28, 2006 IP