 | | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
Hello folks, Some of you may know me, others may not. I'm Jason Rowoldt, the founder and webmaster of the site www.brickfilms.com. Someone posted this article and the associate press frenzy in the Danish media on the forum of Brickfilms.com. We have (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch) !!
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) No, to me the issue at hand is the lack of responsibility and common sense on your part. Creating "adult" movies out of LEGO MFs is just plain stupid and tasteless. (...) Oh, really Jason? Are all LEGO hobbies that equal? I sell bricks on (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) The phrase "adult movies" has become a euphemism for pornography, but I believe Jason meant it in the sense of "movies targeted at adults", which is what most of the films you see in theatres are. Adult characters, themes, situations - not (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Well, I hear about MFs being depicted as gay. How else can one know the sexual orientation of a MF unless one sees that MF engaging in sexual activity. Depictions of sex is the definition of pornography. (...) If it were just one or two (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Your definition of "pornographic" is clearly out of sync with the generally-accepted definitions in society, then. I haven't seen the brickfilm in question, but my understanding is that it is not *about* sex, though it happens to have sex in (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
"William R Ward" <bill@wards.net> wrote in message news:m23d242o2n.fsf@...rds.net... (...) Well - if according to you its similar to "R" rated films, then they should be treated like "R" rated films. Those films are restricted to people over 18 (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
Hi John, Since you have personally attacked me, I feel I need to respond. However, I'm (going to try to) not personally attack you in response. I don't think that's going to do anything. From the nature of the comments you have left, I can tell (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, John Neal writes: <snip> I'm having a hard time reconciling "Jason Rowoldt" and "merely another slimeball" as phrases that belong in the same *post*, frankly. Jason has done a great deal of good for the hobby with his efforts, (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Equal? No. Different. I can certainly imagine some of the more privilaged of us on Lugnet who aren't after pieces, but after the collecting part of the hobby (or some such) who might value movies above Brickbay sales. I don't think you have (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
"John" <johnneal@qwest.net> wrote in message news:GopoH3.CFF@lugnet.com... (...) on (...) and (...) John - I hope you can settle down and move beyond personal attacks and discuss this rationally. I know you're above this. Jason - I see merit in what (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Why? Just because the US _tries_ to restrict the showing of "R" rated material -that doesn't mean that the material should be restricted. Go to your local public libary. Ask for a copy of Lolita. I'm fairly sure you can get it on most libary (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
"James Powell" <wx732@freenet.victoria.bc.ca> wrote in message news:Goq2K4.Irv@lugnet.com... (...) material (...) local (...) on (...) are (...) monitor (...) how (...) I never said it wasn't the parent's responsibility to monitor what material a (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) I get (from Pocket Oxford) 1. A human creative skill or its application (snipped some stuff about beauty). I would say that the films _do_ represent "a human creative skill or its application", therefore are "art". I think they are at least (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Well, you're wrong. I'd love to have a rational discussion about this subject. Basically, you are ignorant of the (...) If you would, I would like to hear from you what the issues are here, because I think we are talking about 2 different (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
"James Powell" <wx732@freenet.victoria.bc.ca> wrote in message news:GoqCy3.F37@lugnet.com... (...) many (...) attacked. (...) people (...) an (...) I'm sorry, I wasn't clear enough and because of that you misinterpreted my intent. I meant to say - I (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) .... (...) Your opinion, and entitled to it, however it is also your choice to participate. Or to allow those you are responsible for knowing whether they should participate. (...) I think Lego was right in making a statement, however I think (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Mark, you are taking my "rant" a little out of context. Assuming you are an adult, I couldn't care less about what you watch-- my concern is protecting children from unsuitable material. It is our *duty* as adults in a civilized society to (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Sure, a computer whiz-kid could probably defeat blocking software, but the real intent of such products, in my mind, is to prevent random hits from search engines when a child is researching breast cancer, for instance. I am more worried about (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Jason has listed every movie he has recived (I think) and I don't think its his responsibility at all. It was listed on the site as a "Brickfilm" not a porn film. (...) "Display?" It is hosted on another site and made by a totally diffrent (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) I almost would. (...) The rape and non sex violence is more a problem than the sex. I mean, sex is just sex. (...) Hunh? Why the heck not? Chris (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Because if kids were to know more and understand more about being an adult, they wouldn't _need_ you as much. They could practice at being adults themselves instead of being kept powerless and ignorant by their aged opressors. Man, that's (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Brickbay, (...) enjoying (...) *Anybody* (...) require (...) your (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) So? (...) John, good point! At least Jason is promoting creativity. (...) Filth is in the eye of the beholder. (...) Sorry to break it to you, but 'porn' and 'quality' are not mutually exclusive. It is an economic happenstance that porn is (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) "Adult content" is a ludicrous phantom. It is a code word for anything that biggotted right-wing Bible thumpers want to excise from society in order to "protect" the ignorance of children. (...) No. Sex is a topic. It is an appropriate topic (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Tim, do you really think that watching Rick and Steve is unsafe for children? Chris (Who thinks the responsible thing to do is warn viewers of the content and let them decide for themselves.) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) require (...) Wait a minute! Kissing is (or often is) sexual. When twelve year olds hold hands at the mall, that's sexual too. Sexual describes a huge range of behaviors, the vast majority of which are healthy. Why should age verification take (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) I said why. 3 is in my view too young to get into the anatomical details of how exactly gay love works. Or straight love for that matter. It's frankly, likely to be boring to the 3 year old anyway and not particularly relevant. But the part (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Read that again, "explicit sexual content" Explicit; that means clearly defined. In this case the sexual act itself which is what we are discussing. Age verification has become somewhat standardized across the internet. (some of it by law, (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) real (...) Why? Take a look at the 2600 page- or even better : (URL) you put too much faith in a computer to censor? If you do any research, you will find that the blocking engines don't work-and _do_ block some sites they shouldn't on (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
That is my right, my privalidge. (...) I'm sorry if I insulted you, really I was trying to make a point with a message that embodied what I feared. I actually looked at a number of messages, saw a pattern and had to speak my truth. First, I don't (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) -its just that "family values" are too often used as a codeword to bash gays and lesbians. Having lived in a womans housing coop for 8 years, I was fairly well exposed to most possible combinations of alternate relationships- and I won't (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) I missed that. I'm still missing it, in fact, as I read back through your note. The sum of what you wrote on this specific subthread is: (...) And I agree with every last detail of your note except when you suggest that three year olds (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) My opinion. (...) And I don't want filth in the eye of my or anyone else's child. (...) Please cite examples, or are you speaking hypothetically? (...) Come again? Porn has *everything* to do with money and nothing to do with creativity. There (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
John, first of all, I owe you a thanks. I was kind of excited by your tone in some notes and I wrote more hotly than was wise. You either didn't take it that way or only calmly replied. Thanks. (...) But I'm saying that it might not _be_ filth in my (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) I did not know that. (...) But since we are talking about children who *don't* have sexual urges, then it *isnt't* appropriate. The very nature of having such feelings is indicative of the (...) I disagee. (...) Learning comes in stages. We (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Why not? It is only by exposure to all kinds of stimuli that children are able to understand and begin to make sense of the world around them. (...) This is false. Eroticism is part of what it is to be human. If you want to shut off that part (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) lol Well I came in a little strong, and so now I'm trying to tone down:-) (...) But you agree that at some point it *could* be. (...) hehe I know nothing about the porn industry, except that I hear it's huge, and that it's largely due to the (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Richard, do you think there are any ideas or images to which access should be prevented or restricted? I was once offended by an afternoon TV show about coprophilia at the perfect time for kids to come home from school and flip on the TV. I am (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: <snip> (...) Yah, no kidding. I want to chime in here for a bit. What *is* the big deal about this? I thought the government was supposed to be seperate from the church, yet it seems that most (...) (22 years ago, 23-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
First, let me say that I have not so far in my own life ever had a child. I may never have a child. So perhaps you may think I don't have an educated opinion. In fact, most of my views come from how I was raised. So really, if you have a beef with (...) (22 years ago, 23-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) You will also find that many people who act so liberal about it get very uncomfortable to see a woman breastfeeding a baby over six or eight months old, say. Yet in many cultures (and presumably in ours at one time) children breastfeed for a (...) (22 years ago, 23-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) old, (...) I know four people (two unrelated Africans and two sibling Americans) who breastfed to either 4 or 5. They recall suckling at their mother's teat. My first reaction was to think that would be very odd. But I'm sure they all have (...) (22 years ago, 23-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Well, now you know. Remember it because it will pop up from time to time and only Bible-thumpers (and those supported by them) use it. (...) WRONG! The first thing you learn in Early Childhood Education is that EVERYONE has sexual urges to (...) (22 years ago, 26-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Agreed. John made himself look disgusting and ignorant with that post. Then again, he's the one that wants the machine to do his parenting for him...how's that for ignorant? -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (22 years ago, 28-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Rather narrow-minded opinion at that. (...) Ah, now that's your right... (...) Now here, you need to BUTT OUT! Quit forcing your narrow-minded morality on everyone else. (...) Quality film-MAKING has nothing to do with the content. Is that so (...) (22 years ago, 28-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
Forgive me for jumping in late here, but I haven't been hanging around .debate much the past few days... (...) And at some point it *could* be the finest piece of art ever crafted by humankind; *that* is the point at which we should decide. To (...) (22 years ago, 28-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Well, true significance of a work of art is often only realized until after an artist's death. My point is that if Jason is linking to *all* submissions to his site; it won't take long for some idiot to submit something that even Jason will (...) (22 years ago, 31-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) is (...) No. If he wants support from LEGO, then probably, he will have to be more selective (editorial/censorshipish, however you want to define it). However, if Jason is willing to forgo the actual financial support of LEGO, then he should (...) (22 years ago, 31-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Okay, I am not sure who the anarchist is, but you seem to have a strange view concerning the defense of freedom of speech and expression. Defending freedom of speech generally means defending the right of anyone to express whatever (...) (22 years ago, 31-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) True. But, so? Instances of significant artistic achievement have also often been branded as pornographic for a time. That seems more apropos to the discussion. You wrote "Avant garde. Ptooey." in an earlier note, but what about the avant (...) (22 years ago, 31-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
