 | | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
The scariest part of this whole announcement to me - and something that very few people in this discussion have touched upon - is that for the first time, The Lego Company is telling us what we can or cannot build with Lego! Think about this! Modern (...) (23 years ago, 24-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Good Post. As a parent, I am diligent in censoring inappropriate material. As an individual, I am diligent in protecting free speech. There is a delicate balancing line here. I just hope I do the right thing for my children. That is my (...) (23 years ago, 23-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) I really don't have any interest in LEGO films anyway, so I probably won't watch any of them. (...) I believe that some films can be and are good, I just don't really enjoy LEGO movies, including immoral ones. Curt Tigges (23 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | 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, (...) (23 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 (...) (23 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | 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.) (23 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | 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 (...) (23 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | 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 (...) (23 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: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 (...) (23 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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 (...) (23 years ago, 22-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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 (...) (23 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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, (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
|
(...) Ug. I was trying to read through all the posts on this thread, but I started getting a bad taste in my mouth. I want to go back and get the good feeling that Brad's posts have given me in the Lego Direct newsgroup... As far as the legality of (...) (23 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
