Subject:
|
Re: Why these news groups were created
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Fri, 24 Sep 2004 20:37:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5012 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, David Laswell wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.nntp, John Neal wrote:
| |
That’s not the point. What are you saying? That because someone can
legally get married at age 16, adult content on LUGNET should be made
viewable by a 7 year old? Because a 17 year old knows about same-sex
relationships, a 10 year old should be allowed to view graphic conservations
about it?
|
WHAT GRAPHIC CONVERSATIONS?!?!?!?
|
Please. Go do a search for “oral sex”, for instance, and you tell me.
| |
LUGNET is not a sexetorium.
|
I’ll take your word for it, because I think you made it up;-)
| |
The LGBT
group (and again, it’s pretty clear that your vocal objection to All Things
Off-Topic stems from the addition of that group)
|
That’s not quite fair to say. I have always been a little uncomfortable
discussing adult topics on LUGNET, but this was the proverbial straw that
motivated me to begin this conversation addressing this topic.
| |
is not a place for LGBTs to
announce and describe their latest conquest, discuss which videos they’ve
rented, or have online-sex. It’s a place where they can congregate and find
comfort and support in dealing with the ill-treatment they receive from
society.
|
Maybe, maybe not. I was curious, and so I
asked what the purpose was for the
group. HERE is the answer I got. It
appears that the group will not be anything like what you’ve described.
| |
I’d say that younger LGBTs need this sort of group more than adults
do, since they have less experience with dealing with this sort of thing, and
schools are often the cruelest places in the free world, especially since
nothing stays private for long, and nothing that becomes public is ever
willingly forgotten.
|
They need support, period. LEGO has nothing to do with that fact.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) (URL) Just because you find content in other areas to be objectionable is no excuse to lay it at their feet. (...) Whoops, I spelled it wrong. It's "sexiteria". I was watching the TESB commentary when I typed this, so I couldn't just pop in (...) (20 years ago, 25-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) WHAT GRAPHIC CONVERSATIONS?!?!?!? LUGNET is not a sexetorium. The LGBT group (and again, it's pretty clear that your vocal objection to All Things Off-Topic stems from the addition of that group) is not a place for LGBTs to announce and (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
151 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
