To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 25763
25762  |  25764
Subject: 
Re: “family-safe” ? (Re: Lavender Brick Society)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 17 Sep 2004 07:22:11 GMT
Viewed: 
2942 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks wrote:
   Now there’s a topic worthy of off-topic.debate!

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Kollross wrote:

   Parents should feel comforatable letting their kids view and post to LUGNET without fear of encoumtering topics they may feel are inappropriate for their childs age.

I agree! Parents should feel comfortable, knowing that no topics contained herein will harm their children. It is a very serious shame that many parents are so confused aout right and wrong and health and harm that they might consider the exposure to homosexuals “inappropriate for their” children.

Don’t try and turn this into a homophobic issue. Topics WRT to sex are inappropriate for a family-safe site like LUGNET (save off-topic.debate)

John, I have mixed views on this but I’m pretty sure Ed is a nice guy who would not want to offend anyone and he would make sure all his posts fell within the ToS. So before we talk about what is “family-safe”, why not cancel your posts which contain xenophobia, intolerance, inferred-profanity and actual-profanity?

Scott A

1999? Five years ago?? You have got to be kidding.

Looks like you dug pretty deep for this one, Scott. Why does it seem you’re able to so readily present examples such as this against the likes of John, Lar, [insert person you clash with here]? Almost as if you deliberately index these sorts of examples for convenient times like this.

Always ready with the dagger, eh?


If intolerance is supposed to be a criteria for cancelling posts, most of the homosexualists’ posts would also have to be pulled off as well. It’s rather hypocritical to be tolerant (read ‘approving’) of only those people who are tolerant of you, and intolerant of those you feel are intolerant of you. Basically this is a kindergarten mindset of “I’ll like you if you like me, but I’ll hate you if you hate me.” Welcome to the new tolerance.



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: “family-safe” ? (Re: Lavender Brick Society)
 
(...) What does this term mean? (...) Just to be clear, cancelling posts without prior request by the author is exceedingly rare here (it has happened one time in the entire history of the site and that was to avoid legal action and was done when (...) (20 years ago, 17-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)  
  Re: “family-safe” ? (Re: Lavender Brick Society)
 
(...) If I get you, you're saying that people can only be considered "tolerant" when they are willing to endure any level of abuse from all comers. Is that right? By placing "tolerant" in a position that no human being can reach, you eliminate the (...) (20 years ago, 17-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: “family-safe” ? (Re: Lavender Brick Society)
 
(...) 1999? Five years ago?? You have got to be kidding. Looks like you dug pretty deep for this one, Scott. Why does it seem you're able to so readily present examples such as this against the likes of John, Lar, [insert person you clash with (...) (20 years ago, 17-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

207 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR