According to the terms of use, we are forbidden to make posts of a sexual nature, yet I find thread like “oral sex techniques” and the like out here.
Perhaps someone could tell me why enforcement of the terms of use is so selective and inconsistant?
Contestant #3
What you’re really trying to get us to say is that a moderator took advantage of his position to win an argument with you.
Well, I aint gonna do it.
Ease off, C3. Provocation leads nowhere. No one has THE truth here. It’s a game of give-and-take.
Long week-end coming up: go out, breathe in the fresh (?) air, relax. Get back, wipe the slate clean. Start anew. We miss the old C3.
And please try to remember that this Uncle Cecil’s house, and we are the guests. Would you act like this at someone else’s house?
“Perhaps someone could tell me why enforcement of the terms of use is so selective and inconsistant?”
I don’t know. Probably because the Chicago reader is afraid of being sued for copyright violations, but not for “obscene, profane, sexually oriented” postings. Otherwise, it makes no sense, because there certainly are obscene, profane, and sexually oriented postings on the SDMB even though they are forbidden in the rules & policies.
Obscene,profane,sexual------by what yardstick?
Well, there are certainly obscene, profane, and sexually oriented postings on the SDMB by my yardstick. I see your point though, Ezstrete, those violations can be hard to define and open to interpretation. Also, the copyright violation can be hard to define, which I think is how this whole mess with C #3 started. His interpretation is different than the moderators.
C #3, maybe the moderators are not perfect and appear to be inconsistent sometimes, but they do a good job most of the time. We can all post to this board for free. You get what you pay for, right? I think the moderators are volunteers who work for free and aren’t paid.
All in all, I think the moderators here do a good job. If you think you can do better, why don’t you volunteer and become a moderator? See how you like it.
This topic would be better served in the About This Message Board forum. However, here is what the SDMB Rules & Policies say:
http://www.straightdope.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/Ultimate.cgi?action=agree
“We have one basic rule: Don’t be a jerk.
You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person’s privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this BB.”
If you want to see a posting that is abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, and profane, see the posting (from 6-10) by pldennison in the Great Debate forum in the thread “How did we go from British accents to Country?” started by c-man. Unfortunately, the moderators did not delete it.
Please tell me the humor here is intentional, and not just a fabrication of my own dirty mind…
Like many other things in life, it’s all relative. What one person finds offensive, someone else finds exactly their cup of tea.
For the most part, we take the view here at the Straight Dope that participants on this board are intelligent, responsible adults and that their demeanor and behavior will likewise be intelligent and responsible. This board is shaped as the forum members choose to make it and we have faith in what our folks do. For the most part, the people here are smart, fun, witty; moderating and administrating is a joy.
It doesn’t always work that way, but that’s our hope and we’re even sometimes willing to overlook approaches that fall far short of the mark if they’re trying to do better or at least, they’re entertaining.
And of course, you have this great tool available to you, if there’s something you don’t approve of or want to look at; you can simply close the thread. Not every topic is for everybody, or designed for every taste.
Note that I’m not talking about stuff that is obviously way beyond tolerating; most of you know what that is and have no problems recognizing it or bringing it to our attention when cleanup is necessary. Quite a few of those postings have come from . . . oh gee, not Contestant#3?
Our first and best rule, as already mentioned in this thread is “Don’t Be a Jerk.” Having read some of your postings from your time on this board, I can’t help but wonder why you don’t give that one a little consideration sometime.
your humble TubaDiva/SDStaffDiv
for the Straight Dope
The obvious answer is that the Oral Sex thread was a question looking for a legitimate answer, seeking information. That’s highly distinguishable from something obscene. I left the Oral Sex thread up, though I do check it to make sure it stays informational. I will delete anything I consider obscene. And in the words of Potter Stewart: “I know it when I see it.”
-Melin
Board-Goddess-In-Training
Ezstrete asks “by what yardstick?”
I presume that one may make sexual references
…as long as you don’t go “the whole nine yards.”
I also suspect that the question has to do with the READER’s fear of legal repercussions – for example, we wouldn’t want anyone trying to advocate (or to demonstrate) child pornography on this site.
It’s really called an Acceptable Use Policy or AUP. The ISP you use to call here has an AUP too.
Ezstrete asks “by what yardstick?”
I presume that one may make sexual references
…as long as you don’t go “the whole nine yards.”
What constitutes unacceptable ‘sexual references’ is rather undefined just about anywhere. My ISP still hasn’t defined it other than to say that it depends on what local community laws are.
C3 has a point that there are numerous sexual posts and this appears to be against regulations, and it is, just isn’t enforced. Perhaps the AUP here should refer to ‘illegal sexual references,’ more specificially.
At any rate, it does appear to me that sometimes people write sexual questions because they are titillating to the person writing them and not for some ‘information,’ if you get my drift.
Perhaps i’d have better used ‘whose’ instead of ‘what’.
But,like the feller axed, “ain’t it all in fun”?
Yes, I thought so. Hence my “9 yards” reply.
Never thought THAT would be taken seriously!
(see thread regarding that expression)
Look folks,
I’m not issuing a complaint. Go back and read my OP if you re confused about that. I’m not insulted or offended by sexual language or situations either.
The whole point is this:
The TOS says this specifically:
You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is:
knowingly false and/or defamatory,
inaccurate,
abusive,
vulgar,
hateful,
harassing,
obscene,
profane,
sexually oriented,
threatening,
invasive of a person’s privacy,
or otherwise violative of any law.
I certainly didn’t invent this. It’s there for anyone to read. I simply asked an honest question about #9. I could also make a strong case with plenty of examples of regular violations of numbers 1-6 as well.
There is no need for anyone to get so defensive, turning the tables toward me. If you can’t or won’t answer the question that I have posed then simply admit it.
I suspect that I already know the answer. It is this:
That the TOS are a joke. The TOS needs to be modified to remove items 1-6, and 9. Why? Because those items are not actionable violations (in practice), rather they are normal and accepted types of posts here on the SDMB.
That is all.
Contestant #3
[[I also suspect that the question has to do with the READER’s fear of legal repercussions – for example, we wouldn’t want anyone trying to advocate (or to demonstrate) child pornography on this site. ]] CKDext
Actually, I’d be disappointed if a poster was censored for merely ADVOCATING child porn. Of course, said poster would be rightly assailed for such sliminess, but that’s another story.
Maybe our old AOL “friend” Ben will come by and explain why such an age distinction is abominable. <g>
Please…
I always heard you should be careful what you wish for.
Sue from El Paso
members.aol.com/majormd/index.html
The rules are against material that is “… sexually oriented, …, or otherwise violative of any law” (my emphasis). Sounds to me like sexual topics are bad only if they violate the law.
Holger