Coren's Off-Wiki Activities, Would you have voted for him if...? Options

[Coren]

Moderator's note: This topic was split from the Sam Blacketer thread, as the material deals primarily with Coren (T-C-L-K-R-D) 's "off-wiki" activities, which were presumably not related to those of "Sam Blacketer." In addition, several posts containing speculation relating to Mr. Coren's activities on Usenet in the mid-1990's, and how they might be in some way related to Mr. Boothroyd's activities on Usenet in the mid-1990's, were split from there and moved to a non-public forum. Please note that an extremely large number of people were active on Usenet in the mid-1990's, including several WR members. Past Usenet activity is not necessarily evidence of collaboration, or even personal familiarity, though it could be evidence of one's having had a poorly-developed social life during that time.

_______________________________

I don't think that Coren has much of a choice but to do that, as we shall see shortly...

(Read my last akahele post for clues about this...)

Oh, wait! I realize you might be talking about http://gai-eros.org

And here I thought you were talking about something interesting.

For those of you not in the know, I am the system administrator for a Francophone alternative erotica archive site. It's pretty much the French equivalent of the Nifty archive, though nowhere near as large or old (gai-eros is only 13 or so years old). Not only is it boringly legal, but I don't actually have much to do with the contents itself.

(Note: very much NSFW address).

Someone once said that the Internet is but trolls and porn. I dunno about just the trolls, but good ol pr0n is pretty much universal. I do have very strong convictions on the topic of free speech and sexual freedom, and erotica is the intersection of the two. :-P

At any rate, if anyone was hoping to scare me away with this, or blackmail me... hah!

And no, it's not even a secret from ArbCom. I don't publicize my association with the site on Wikipedia for the simple reason that enwp isn't about getting traffic for a site I'm maintaining, and I very much doubt it's notable enough to be an article topic (though, IIRC, it got some very nice positive press coverage some years ago).

As for what this has to do with my being an Arbitrator... well, I'll be damned if I can guess. I promise to recuse if *any* website I am the sysadmin for ends up being involved in a case? Heh.

-- Coren

This post has been edited by Somey:

[Somey]

And no, it's not even a secret from ArbCom. I don't publicize my association with the site on Wikipedia for the simple reason that enwp isn't about getting traffic for a site I'm maintaining, and I very much doubt it's notable enough to be an article topic (though, IIRC, it got some very nice positive press coverage some years ago). ... As for what this has to do with my being an Arbitrator... well, I'll be damned if I can guess...

I take it you don't believe that the "community," had they known about this prior to the ArbCom election, would have cared one way or the other? And you believe that it wouldn't have reduced your vote count significantly?

I'm not saying it would have, but that strikes me as being the actual issue here - not whether or not it would have any effect on how you vote in ArbCom rulings, now that you're in.

[Kato]

As for what this has to do with my being an Arbitrator... well, I'll be damned if I can guess. I promise to recuse if *any* website I am the sysadmin for ends up being involved in a case? Heh.

-- Coren

I remember your answers to the questions during the Arbitration election. They stank. We highlighted them here:

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...ndpost&p=141422

[Coren]

I take it you don't believe that the "community," had they known about this prior to the ArbCom election, would have cared one way or the other? And you believe that it wouldn't have reduced your vote count significantly?

I'm not saying it would have, but that strikes me as being the actual issue here - not whether or not it would have any effect on how you vote in ArbCom rulings, now that you're in.

Given that the vast majority of enwp users are American, it probably could have. (Then again, it's even more likely that being openly Republican or Democrat would have had more impact).

On the other hand, that kind of thing is pretty hard to guess in advance -- it may have had no effect, or it may have had a positive effect (there are, after all, a surprisingly large number of libertarian wikipedians and votes against me might have roused them to support in backlash).

More importantly, it has no bearing on whether I can do the job right or not, it's part of my professional life (which, frankly, is no damn business of anyone except insofar as it can affect my neutrality), and I couldn't possibly think of a good reason to disclose them or any other client that I do system administration for on-wiki.

*shrug*

It's also possible that the fact someone could have a smaller chance of being elected if they are known to be socialist, or gay, or jewish, or black. In all honesty, does it matter? Should we require disclosure of all those things because it might affect votes?

-- Coren

[Kato]

It's also possible that the fact someone could have a smaller chance of being elected if they are known to be socialist, or gay, or jewish, or black. In all honesty, does it matter? Should we require disclosure of all those things because it might affect votes?

But it wasn't any of those things.

Coren, back in December when you were trying to get elected, you wrote:

A serious reexamination of Wikipedia governance will become increasingly important as time passes;

No shit. When do you start?

[thebainer]

I take it you don't believe that the "community," had they known about this prior to the ArbCom election, would have cared one way or the other? And you believe that it wouldn't have reduced your vote count significantly?

Why would computer nerds disapprove of a porn site?

[Coren]

A serious reexamination of Wikipedia governance will become increasingly important as time passes;

No shit. When do you start?

To some degree, it has already started. The audit subcommittee is a step in the right direction (though not as far as I would have wished). Have you seen my original review board proposal?

It's always a bit depressing to feel like you're rearranging deck chairs, and the very great inertia of such a large apparatus as Wikipedia is... overwhelming.

I am, after all, just 1/15th of the Committee. And the Committee has influence but little "legislative" power; even if all the cats could be herded in the same direction, we could not effect revolution.

I plan on revisiting the theme of governance in a few months; to start a real public discussion about moving a little closer to a constitutive system with actual teeth. Expect much wailing and gnashing of teeth as the more anarchist elements of Wikipedia battle this with conviction and zeal.

Ad-hoc governance was good enough to bootstrap the project, but I don't believe it's enough now. *Changing* things will be hard. I'm willing to take the banner up, but I obviously won't be able to singlehandedly give you the revolution you are hoping for.

I can, however, do my best to push in the right direction.

-- Coren

[Coren]

Why would computer nerds disapprove of a porn site?

Because it has teh gayz? :-) But then again, there is a number of hot girl-on-girl action in the archive too, so it would have been a toss-up. :-P

-- Coren / Marc

[No one of consequence]

And no, it's not even a secret from ArbCom. I don't publicize my association with the site on Wikipedia for the simple reason that enwp isn't about getting traffic for a site I'm maintaining, and I very much doubt it's notable enough to be an article topic (though, IIRC, it got some very nice positive press coverage some years ago). ... As for what this has to do with my being an Arbitrator... well, I'll be damned if I can guess...

I take it you don't believe that the "community," had they known about this prior to the ArbCom election, would have cared one way or the other? And you believe that it wouldn't have reduced your vote count significantly?

I'm not saying it would have, but that strikes me as being the actual issue here - not whether or not it would have any effect on how you vote in ArbCom rulings, now that you're in.

Of the terms French Alternative Erotica web site, the only one I can imaging Wikipedians objecting to is "French."

[tarantino]

Of the terms French Alternative Erotica web site, the only one I can imaging Wikipedians objecting to is "French."

Different strokes for different folks, and all that stuff I guess.

[Coren]

Different strokes for different folks, and all that stuff I guess.

Uhuhuh. You said "stroke". Uhuhuh. :-D

-- Coren

[the fieryangel]

It's also possible that the fact someone could have a smaller chance of being elected if they are known to be socialist, or gay, or jewish, or black. In all honesty, does it matter? Should we require disclosure of all those things because it might affect votes?

-- Coren

Yes, and you should also be required to disclose your real life identities, occupations and other things that might affect your positions as an arb.

(Actually, the website wasn't the issue, although that was known...)

[Kato]

Why would computer nerds disapprove of a porn site?

Because it has teh gayz? :-) But then again, there is a number of hot girl-on-girl action in the archive too, so it would have been a toss-up. :-P

-- Coren / Marc

Different strokes for different folks, and all that stuff I guess.

Uhuhuh. You said "stroke". Uhuhuh. :-D

-- Coren

I don't know "teh gayz", but I reckon the material about sex with horses would probably have put off a few voters on your Arbitration election bid.

[Somey]

Of the terms French Alternative Erotica web site, the only one I can imaging Wikipedians objecting to is "French."

Perhaps... I mean, personally I doubt that having "admin of a French erotica site" on one's wiki-resumé would have made that big a difference overall. I, for one, wouldn't have had a problem with it, given that the "You must be an adult to enter this site" warning stays in place - something that doesn't exist on Wikipedia, I might add... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

Of course, I myself am something of a nerd, and male, and fairly liberal-minded, so I'm more likely to not care. IMO, women of all political/religious stripes would have been more likely to object than men, and religious conservatives looking to stir up trouble for others would have objected most of all - but then again, User:Ottava rima opposed you anyway, so maybe not much difference on that score either.

It also might have occurred to a few people that the experience Mr. Coren has gained from administering such a site might color his perceptions of how people behave online, and what they're likely to do in the event of a dispute... But personally, I doubt that any but a tiny handful of WP'ers really think in such subtle and complex terms. (And to be fair, I doubt much of anyone does these days.)

Still, I've found it's best never to underestimate Wikipedians' propensity for self-righteousness and hypocrisy! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)


Btw, I suppose we'll want to split most of this Coren-related stuff to another thread soon, since it's off-topic for this thread....

[GlassBeadGame]

I take it you don't believe that the "community," had they known about this prior to the ArbCom election, would have cared one way or the other? And you believe that it wouldn't have reduced your vote count significantly?

Why would computer nerds disapprove of a porn site?

Again, Wikipedians are not all that matters. It probably wouldn't matter in an election on Wikipedia. It might well matter in the wider world. Especially given:

• Wales' Bomis past.
• Moeller "sex with children is ok if the kids consent" statement.
• FT2 "sex with animals is ok"statements.
• The volume of pornographic images contained on Wikipedia.
• David Gerards "skull dance"'response to thwarted efforts at some minimal limits on the offensive material.
• WMF's refusal to take any steps at all in the direction of child protection.

Given all of this another Wikipedian selected for a position of trust with a career in pornography might in fact matter.

[Coren]

I don't know "teh gayz", but I reckon the material about sex with horses would probably have put off a few voters on your Arbitration election bid.

I suppose, though there is some rather icky stuff involving the "wrong" body excretions in there that probably would give some even more pause. (The french slang word you're looking for is "crade").

I don't actually write any of this, I manage the CMS that stores it. Given the stats, I can tell you there are more people who actually enjoy the really... different... stuff than you might guess (though most of the traffic goes to the "tame" stuff).

I'm still quite mystified about why any of this would impact my ability to be an Arb.

-- Coren

[Casliber]

<snip>
Incidentally, "Marc-Andre" is a fairly common first name, and "Pelletier" is, last I checked, the second most common last name in Quebec (second only to Tremblay) -- I'd be careful to ascribe things you find to a random "Marc-Andre Pelletier" to me. In fact, I even know of one that's a dentist that flies small prop planes that was born on the same day I was (which, lemme tell you, makes getting insurance a pain).
<snip>
-- Coren

Wow, never knew any in Oz (surname Pelletier that is), but then again there are very few francophones here. Ya learn something new every day (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

[Coren]

Wow, never knew any in Oz (surname Pelletier that is), but then again there are very few francophones here. Ya learn something new every day (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

It's a common French name, though especially so in Quebec. It means furrier, if you're wondering. It's very common especially in Quebec because 3 or the the original 100 settlers (the "Cent Compagnons") were Pelletiers; and I'm in the 14th (very prolific) generation off of the Guillaume branch. Not counting the later arrivals, the original 3 have, I think, around 25000 living descendants in Quebec and New England (though, in the States, the name has often been spelled "Peletier" over the years).

-- Coren

Well, that's one of the things that I wanted to have discussed. There are other issues which are being examined. It would seem that other venues are also discussing these issues.

My main question is why weren't these issues discussed before, as in before the arbcom elections?

Well, for your first point, there is the obvious question: Why not just ask me? I mean, too simple? Too straightforward?

As to your "main question", the answer is trivial: Because it had no effing relevance to those elections? I suppose that's also too simple for your tastes -- it is much more fun to evoke all sorts of silly conspiracies and covert things for some people.

-- Coren

[Kato]

In that particular case, I was that Marc-Andre. I think my stance of freedom of expression is well known. And, again, that still brings the same question forward (which nobody has answered with anything else than victorian outrage that I might be *shudder* involved in the pr0n "millieu"): what the hell does that have to do with my capacity to be an Arbitrator?

-- Coren

Is it now "Victorian" to shudder at the idea that you managed a website promoting bestiality?

One of the more curious features of hard-core Wikipedians is the inability to understand boundaries, and the inability to differentiate between exploitation and erotica. During the numerous debates about pedophilia and sexualized images of children on Wikipedia, it became apparent that many Wikipedians actually saw the matter as one of Freedom of Speech. This was extraordinary to observe. Wikipedians also seemed unable to distinguish between what was adult pornography, and what was gross exploitation / abuse of vulnerable subjects.

Another feature of their arguments was the use of cringy Internet-speak to defend themselves. Lots of "Think of The Children" mocking against complainants.

Coren, you can write things like "pr0n" all you like to try to play the site down, but a place that advocates abusing animals isn't anything to do with "pr0n" or "freedom of speech".

[Coren]

Is it now "Victorian" to shudder at the idea that you managed a website promoting bestiality?

[...]

Coren, you can write things like "pr0n" all you like to try to play the site down, but a place that advocates abusing animals isn't anything to do with "pr0n" or "freedom of speech".

Your definition of "promoting" lies somewhere outside of reality, Kato. Stories about people defecating on each other, or having sex with animals, or rape fantasies, or -- well, you get the idea -- do not "promote" any of those things. Nor do stories about graphic murders, vast conspiracies, or sex and corruption in the government (or perhaps you'd turn away Christie, Moliere and Huysmans as promoting those things)?

You may not like such tales, and you are in no way obliged to write or read them. You may disagree that they are literature. (Indeed, most of what is on gai-eros is prurient trash in my own opinion as well (though there are a few genuine gems)). Nevertheless, the ability to read and write those stories are a matter of freedom of expression.

-- Coren

[Kato]

Coren is another FT2? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

I don't know. I wasn't satisfied by the evidence against FT2 - and thought a lot of it was overblown and came from a whispering campaign against him.

I've seen Coren's site with my own eyes, unprejudiced, and take a dim view for what its worth.

And Wikipedians need to understand that there is a big, big, big difference between reactionary outrage at some erotica or adult porn, and genuine disgust at the promotion of abusive acts like zoophilia.

[Sarcasticidealist]

Your definition of "promoting" lies somewhere outside of reality, Kato.

Stories that are prefaced with "I tried with this story to make a compilation of everything or almost everything that a man can do with a horse. Though this story is fiction, everything described in it is something that I or a friend of similar taste has done, which is why you won't find an exact inventory of absolutely every practice imaginable, but only those in which I actually engage and are within my physical abilities." come pretty close to promotion, in my view.

(Apologies for the shoddy translation - my French isn't what it once was.)

This post has been edited by Sarcasticidealist:

[Coren]

(Apologies for the shoddy translation - my French isn't what it once was.)

Your translation is pretty good, actually.

Eww.

Would you like to bring that crusade over to nifty? I see have have a vastly more expansive bestiality section at http://www.nifty.org/nifty/bestiality, and a cursory look at the titles show much greater diversity. (There are also more sections there, including man-boy sex which isn't allowed on gai-eros).

It's not "promotion" either. That archive (the biggest in English) has existed for some 20 years at least, and for a long time at CMU on University equipment. I'm sorry if your sensibilities are vexed by not everyone agreeing with the desire to quash authors whose topics of fiction you find distasteful.

-- Coren

[Sarcasticidealist]

Would you like to bring that crusade over to nifty?

No.

I'm sorry if your sensibilities are vexed by not everyone agreeing with the desire to quash authors whose topics of fiction you find distasteful.

I'm actually in favour of liberal laws on questions of what fiction should be allowed (I thought R. v. Sharpe probably didn't go quite far enough in that direction, though I'd rather it go not far enough than that it go too far). But
i. just because I think something should be allowed doesn't mean that I have to respect people involved in purveying it (or want them running Arbitration Committees on websites I frequent), and
ii. that fellow's preamble established him as something more than the author of fiction I find distasteful; it established him, by his own admission, as an animal abuser and a criminal.

(I'm assuming here that that story describes illegal acts; I admit that I haven't actually read past the preamble, because it seemed neither desirable nor necessary.)

[Kato]

Would you like to bring that crusade over to nifty? I see have have a vastly more expansive bestiality section at http://www.nifty.org/nifty/bestiality, and a cursory look at the titles show much greater diversity. (There are also more sections there, including man-boy sex which isn't allowed on gai-eros).

Do you think people writing erotica about "man-boy sex" is a "freedom of speech" issue?

[Coren]

ii. that fellow's preamble established him as something more than the author of fiction I find distasteful; it established him, by his own admission, as an animal abuser and a criminal.

(I'm assuming here that that story describes illegal acts; I admit that I haven't actually read past the preamble, because it seemed neither desirable nor necessary.)

It may or may not. Personally, I wouldn't take their preamble at face value. I've only skimmed the text, but some of the things in there look a little... implausible.

For what it's worth, "the narrator did it" is a fairly old trope in mystery stories, and I very much doubt the authors went and killed someone to write them too.

-- Coren

Do you think people writing erotica about "man-boy sex" is a "freedom of speech" issue?

If they write about it rather than go out and do it, yes, without a doubt. I'd suggest castration with a blunt instrument for those who do rather than write, though.

And if it were promotion, "go out and do these things", then repeated application of a brick to the cranium sounds about right.

-- Coren

[Kevin]

Do you think people writing erotica about "man-boy sex" is a "freedom of speech" issue?

If they write about it rather than go out and do it, yes, without a doubt. I'd suggest castration with a blunt instrument for those who do rather than write, though.

And if it were promotion, "go out and do these things", then repeated application of a brick to the cranium sounds about right.

-- Coren

Even if such writing is illegal - http://www.efc.ca/pages/law/cc/cc.163.1.htm? Much the same law as Australia, so far as I am aware.

Glad to find out where you stand though.

[Sarcasticidealist]

Even if such writing is illegal - http://www.efc.ca/pages/law/cc/cc.163.1.htm?

That definition was narrowed somewhat by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Sharpe - not sure of the legal situation in Australia, but in Canada statutes will often stay on the books after they're declared unconstitutional, so you really need both the statute and case law to know what the law is.

[Obesity]

It's not improbable that Coren, like FT2, is {involved in usual sexual practices} (Note: Substitution by moderator) or something like unto it. I'd bet a modest sum of money that he is.

However, I'll get behind him (figuratively speaking) him on the freedom of expression front, as it pertains to the realistic depictions of upsetting and despicable acts (though I stop well short of affiriming one's "right" to post gross images Wikipedia).

There are quite respectable genres of heavy metal, hentai, literature, horror flicks, etc, that deal exclusively with such subject matter, in a manner that--ambiguously or otherwise--seems to condone or celebrate the acts.

For example, any serious student of cinema will tell you that Salo is a meaningful and groundbreaking movie... Unfortunately, the fact that Passolini actually was a twisted fuck and a pederast in real life, does little to bolster the argument that the knowing-narrator thing is an innocent "trope", entirely separate from the monsters he creates on the page.

I daresay that, for a genius afflicted with such demons, this sort of art is therapeutic/cathartic, and that--whether they were making art or not--they would be up to no fucking good in their downtime. So hate the artist, not the art. Unless it's, like, really amateurish and stupid.... which I suppose most of the stories on Coren's website are... but I wouldn't know.

This post has been edited by Somey:

[Milton Roe]

Your definition of "promoting" lies somewhere outside of reality, Kato.

Stories that are prefaced with "I tried with this story to make a compilation of everything or almost everything that a man can do with a horse. Though this story is fiction, everything described in it is something that I or a friend of similar taste has done, which is why you won't find an exact inventory of absolutely every practice imaginable, but only those in which I actually engage and are within my physical abilities."

Well, then one supposes it doesn't include rupturing one's colon and dying of peritonitis. Since you'd have to be alive to tell about it... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mellow.gif)

[EricBarbour]

Those stories are greatly improved by running them thru Google Translate.
Thus:

We had all taken part in ridding the table, back at the show said Lucia sas hugs with Amandine, they literally ate one undresses the other and vice versa. Pierre, he had had the quilt on the floor after entering Vulcan and Thor, he undressed burning impatience to protrude through one of the dogs, me offering to take care of the second.

Coast to coast, we were assembled by him and me by Thor Vulcan, for our pleasure. I took the bite of my new friend to masturbate, it made me politeness. Tortionnant me a bit, I managed to dive head under him for sucking. It was great a big bite of a dog in my ass and a beautiful tail in mouth, I was delighted!

Excellent.......... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

[Milton Roe]

Those stories are greatly improved by running them thru Google Translate.
Thus:

We had all taken part in ridding the table, back at the show said Lucia sas hugs with Amandine, they literally ate one undresses the other and vice versa. Pierre, he had had the quilt on the floor after entering Vulcan and Thor, he undressed burning impatience to protrude through one of the dogs, me offering to take care of the second.

Coast to coast, we were assembled by him and me by Thor Vulcan, for our pleasure. I took the bite of my new friend to masturbate, it made me politeness. Tortionnant me a bit, I managed to dive head under him for sucking. It was great a big bite of a dog in my ass and a beautiful tail in mouth, I was delighted!

Excellent.......... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

Methinks whatever was lost in translation there, was probably better lost. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[Somey]

Methinks whatever was lost in translation there, was probably better lost. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Indeed. Funny though this may be, it's also rather unfair. I mean, if we're going to make fun of Coren here for administering a website that promotes these, er, unusual sexualpractices, we might as well make fun of all the Wikipedia admins for administering Wikipedia, which essentially promotes such practices too.

All I'm saying is that we shouldn't single out one person for involvement in this sort of thing, even if he is doing it on two sites, rather than just one...

[JohnA]

Methinks whatever was lost in translation there, was probably better lost. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Indeed. Funny though this may be, it's also rather unfair. I mean, if we're going to make fun of Coren here for administering a website that promotes these, er, unusual sexualpractices, we might as well make fun of all the Wikipedia admins for administering Wikipedia, which essentially promotes such practices too.

All I'm saying is that we shouldn't single out one person for involvement in this sort of thing, even if he is doing it on two sites, rather than just one...

I think the point is: these are the kinds of people who are controlling an online encyclopedia that any child can see. I also think Coren shows admirably what is wrong with Wikipedia's governance.

[LessHorrid vanU]

...

I think the point is: these are the kinds of people who are controlling an online encyclopedia that any child can see. I also think Coren shows admirably what is wrong with Wikipedia's governance.

Since, as every parent knows, your children are just dying to bypass the Hannah Montana website, ignore the Nicklodean (whatever) page, flick past the Disney channel, just so they can comb Wikipedia for articles on unusual and/or illegal sexual practices...

Yes, any child can see - although in reality they don't because it doesn't appeal to them; but never mind, because it is far more effective to conjure up images of blond haired, blue eyed children (toddler age + 2 years, preferably) with milky white skin recoiling in uncomprehending horror upon viewing Tribadism when they had imperfectly searched for rabbit (I couldn't think of anything "naughty" that might be mistaken for bunny) to project ones own moral minimalism upon those who are inclined to allow access to any adult who wishes to peruse articles upon expressions of human sexuality.

If you want to edit the online version of Pear's Junior Encyclopedia, then by all means ensure that it is moderated by persons who are fit to interact with children and young teenagers. When considering the breadth and - a term that might appeal to you - depth of articles within Wikipedia, it is appropriate that persons are not only mature enough to determine the appropriateness of content, but having experience of involvement in some sites hosting adult material is a bonus (for instance, they are going to know what legally may or may not be published on a website). You have a choice in viewing material that you find repugnant, so please allow others the same freedom of choice and if you do have children - or intend to - take responsibility in managing their web browsing to that appropriate to their age.

[Peter Damian]

If you want to edit the online version of Pear's Junior Encyclopedia, then by all means ensure that it is moderated by persons who are fit to interact with children and young teenagers. When considering the breadth and - a term that might appeal to you - depth of articles within Wikipedia, it is appropriate that persons are not only mature enough to determine the appropriateness of content, but having experience of involvement in some sites hosting adult material is a bonus (for instance, they are going to know what legally may or may not be published on a website). You have a choice in viewing material that you find repugnant, so please allow others the same freedom of choice and if you do have children - or intend to - take responsibility in managing their web browsing to that appropriate to their age.

Oh I get it, it's our fault again.

On the argument that having experience of 'adult' websites is a bonus because of the knowledge of what is legal, why not use one of the admins of Boychat or some other pedophile forum who have very precise judgment about what will land them in prison, or not. That would be the logical choice.

of blond haired, blue eyed children (toddler age + 2 years, preferably) with milky white skin recoiling in uncomprehending horror upon viewing Tribadism when they had imperfectly searched for rabbit

Oh of course, those of us who dislike Wikipedian filthy pornographers corrupting our children are some kind of white-pride racists. Thanks, LHVU.

Also it's not really about content that can be shocking to some. Very little on Wikipedia is shocking in that kind of way. What is more insidious is the constant promotion and advocacy of certain lifestyles that can easily undermine the sense of what is right and wrong for juvenile readers. The quote below, for example, (since deleted from Wikipedia) is clearly arguing that while some commercial bestiality pornography is morally wrong because it is abusive or coercive, other kinds are OK because there is no force or coercion involved, and the animals enjoy it.

An adult with mature judgment will view it as the special pleading and big lie that it is. A child, who views this as coming from an authoritative source, will most likely believe it. And so ultimately less support for campaigners against for a vile industry that is still legal in some places and which causes untold suffering and death to animals.

Commercial animal pornography can sometimes be abusive or coercive, and amount to forcible rape, with restraints and force visible in the final versions of some productions. In other cases involving the filming by permission of established human-animal sexual partnerships, no force or coercion is involved and the act is an established mutual interest. Since animals are very open about their feelings and sexuality, the nature of the material is often clearly visible to, and can be assessed by, an informed impartial viewer familiar with both coercive and non-coercive material.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[sbrown]

Of course. Its a law of nature that wikipeida IS NOT CENSORED. How dare anyone suggest that any attempt should be made to protect children from pictures of naked women and worse. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

We must dance on the skulls of anyone who says such a vile thing. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/angry.gif)

[Somey]

...in reality they don't because it doesn't appeal to them; but never mind, because it is far more effective to conjure up images of blond haired, blue eyed children (toddler age + 2 years, preferably) with milky white skin recoiling in uncomprehending horror upon viewing Tribadism when they had imperfectly searched for rabbit...

I don't think people are so worried about the 2- to 6-year-old demographic - they're more worried about adolescent boys. For that group, I would certainly challenge the notion that online porn "doesn't appeal to them" - on the contrary, I'd say it was practically made specifically for them.

In any case, these "think of the children!" arguments are pretty much irresolvable. If you try to pass off content-control responsibility exclusively to the parents, as most legal systems have done after throwing up their hands and giving up, the parents will still complain - justifiably - about the near-impossibility of maintaining their own filtering regime, they'll turn to third-party services that are run mostly by censorship advocates, and you're back where you started.

I realize that doesn't help much... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unhappy.gif)

Anyway, if we're going to bash Coren for his porn-related activities, I still think it's unfair to single him out. The issue should be whether or not his judgement is fundamentally unsound for thinking it's "no big deal" in a more generalized quasi-social context like Wikipedia, but for that he clearly has plenty of exemplars to support him, some of whom have far more extensive porn backgrounds than his.

[sbrown]

he clearly has plenty of exemplars to support him, some of whom have far more extensive porn backgrounds than his.

Surely you dont mean the sainted Mr Jimbo? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

[LessHorrid vanU]

...

of blond haired, blue eyed children (toddler age + 2 years, preferably) with milky white skin recoiling in uncomprehending horror upon viewing Tribadism when they had imperfectly searched for rabbit

Oh of course, those of us who dislike Wikipedian filthy pornographers corrupting our children are some kind of white-pride racists. Thanks, LHVU.

...

I apologise for assuming that everyone here would recognise a description of cherub - although upon reflection I should have realised that self censoring individuals needed the extra hint of "wings" to distract them from outraged considerations of Aryan perfection being defiled. Blame me for my Christian atheism, since I am unfamiliar with depictions of idealised innocent children in other faith systems.

And anyhoo, it is a small "v" for fucksake!