An Idea For Dailydi And Others

[Diaper666]

this is mainly to DailyDi but i say we need a person to monitor the videos that come in if you look at the new ones just added 3 of them are scat videos.This being said since scat is illegal in the U.S.A why not have a moderator on the video site to delete them as they come in i can do it some my self but im sick of seeing these videos on the site .For those that don't know what SCAT is its poop videos and its illegal in the USA and since this site is hosted in the USA i figure we need to clean this up and also just a thought why not propose we raise the join age of this site from 18 to 21? I mean this way we know who is coming is who they say they are ...... also i would like every one else to voice there opinion on the scat issue and help clean up the videos on the site...

PEOPLE WHO LIKE THE SCAT VIDEOS NEED NOT POST HERE OR I WILL GET THIS THREAD LOCKED LIKE I DID MY LAST ONE

[Missy Q]

That's the first time I've ever heard of scat being illegal...

[Diaper666]

That's the first time I've ever heard of scat being illegal...

well in the USA it is just wait and see when dailydi reply's to this

[Guest Baby-Toa]

I could care less about scat but raising the age for what purpose? I waited a long time to be here i'm not waiting another two year to be able to come back and talk with people with the same interests as me. You know how hard it is for me to find a site that I enjoy being on with others? It's hard and it's very rare to find good communities.

[Codymoogle]

this is mainly to DailyDi but i say we need a person to monitor the videos that come in if you look at the new ones just added 3 of them are scat videos.This being said since scat is illegal in the U.S.A why not have a moderator on the video site to delete them as they come in i can do it some my self but im sick of seeing these videos on the site .For those that don't know what SCAT is its poop videos and its illegal in the USA and since this site is hosted in the USA i figure we need to clean this up and also just a thought why not propose we raise the join age of this site from 18 to 21? I mean this way we know who is coming is who they say they are ...... also i would like every one else to voice there opinion on the scat issue and help clean up the videos on the site...

PEOPLE WHO LIKE THE SCAT VIDEOS NEED NOT POST HERE OR I WILL GET THIS THREAD LOCKED LIKE I DID MY LAST ONE

Moderation on scat? Maybe. Raising the age from 18 to 21? Stupid. 18 years old is the legal "of age" age for everything except drinking in the USA, at least that I know of. Also - people are going to lie about their age. What makes you think that even if DailyDi implemented a "21+ only" rule (which is again, in my opinion, stupid), that that would change? There would still be minors trying to join.

~ moogle

[Guest lucys junibug]

i kinda agree with baby toa....what's the point of raising the age there are many people who need the support of the people on this site.....by the time we were 21 we had been ab's for a number of years, we moved outta home, and had a baby! yet we wouldn't be able to come on hear!!! we wouldn't be able to get help and support when we needed it and would probably feel very alone...

i know it sounds like im moaning, but i just think back to when i and more importantly lucy were 18(more lucyas she benefited more from this at 18)...we needed sites like dd to get us trough and make us realise were not alone and were not freaks!

[babykeiff]

Rasing the age limit is kindof defeatist - if people are lying about their age stating that they are over 18, it is just as easy to lie about being over 21. Secondly, this will also remove some decent 18 - 21 ab/dls that are here also.

Re SCAT - I don't think the legality of such should be in question. If you prefer it not on this site, DD, simply remove it. For those who are offended / repulsed by scat - the choice is simple - don't watch/participate in it - but ACCEPT it as part of another persons free choice.

[DailyDi]

Deleted the poop vids. They are illegal AND I don't want them here. Posters of poop will be banned.

Don't want to raise the user age requirement.

[Diaper666]

well the reason i say move the age limit up is that unfortunately there are a few cases were people have lied in the past about there age i remember a few cases were this has happened and really if you think about it it would make people wait i mean 18 is the legal age limit of consent for most states but as regards to the scat DailyDi is only one person and i figure at least maybe with my self and a few others we can stop the scat videos on the site ... so this way while DailyDi is busy we can help clean the site as it is .....

[DailyDi]

I would be open to adding a few video mods.

[Diaper666]

Deleted the poop vids. They are illegal AND I don't want them here. Posters of poop will be banned.

Don't want to raise the user age requirement.

check the private message i sent you on this issue

[PampersPete]

It's because of guys like Diaper666 that hazing is still an accepted practice in the service and college.

[sarah_ab]

there are loads of people on this site who can to some seem to cause problems, whether their age be 18 or 28 or 58 is irrelevant. Its not a very well thought out idea, 'raising the age limit will stop people under 18 from getting in' only they will just lie and say they are 21 instead of 18...

raising the age limit will make no one wait longer to join if they want to join. it will not stop inapprorpiate, vulgar, offensive, or otherwise upsetting behavior. However it will force many members of this community to leave, members who make a positive influence on the community.

as for scat.... wewent to this zoo like thing the other day where you take a tram ride and watch the animals just roaming around.. and everytime the driver said "look for animal signs lke scat" i would giggle.

[babykeiff]

Since Diaper666 is so insistent on raising the age limit, why not raise it to 30.

Opps, would that mean that Diaper666 would not be able to post on this site... oh, so sorry about that Diaper666, but rules are rules.

[timmyc]

I don't understand the age thing at all, 18 is a legal adult. People could lie and say they are 21, just as easy. Not sure that age issues have anything to do with who posts what.

I respect DD's right not to have anything on this site he don't want. I love a girl in a nice messy pants video from time to time, not sure if that constitutes scat or not, t me scat is far more graphic than a dirty diaper. I don't like the smearing and eating and all of that, but have nothing against a poopy pamper. It is not my call what is and what isn't allowed here and if no #2 is a hard and fast rule, I'm good with it.

[Guest Mummy's Cute Baby Lucy]

Firstly the issue over scat is a legal one... if the pictures/videos are here then the site can be taken down.. It's the US law and the site is hosted in the US. So even if DailyDi wanted it here (which he clearly doesn't) he couldn't do anything about it apart from move the site out of the US.

The age thing is stupid... why is this spreading over so many topics at the moment? The big thing that gets me is that if the age were raised theres no way to verify someone is over 21... (correct me if i'm wrong) but the most common way used is to verify using a credit card that you can only have once you are 18..

Just my little bit for the "discussion"

[DprDJeff]

Devil's Advocate Mode:

Scat is not illegal in the United States. There are no federal laws banning any such thing. There are community laws prohibiting scat, but nothing federal. The problem is that no matter where in the US you live, you can be held liable in another jurisdiction if your content is distributed there. Since the internet is global, that counts.

That being said, if scat were not removed from the site, DD could be held responsible and charged with any number of obscenity charges. He would be forced to defend himself in whatever state they decided to charge him.

Also, a lot of people don't really know the definition of scat. A dirty diaper is not scat unless it is pulled back and the contents revealed. At one point, Scat was defined as defecation in relation to sexual activities. The definition has since been loosened and expanded.

[Diaper666]

Devil's Advocate Mode:

Scat is not illegal in the United States. There are no federal laws banning any such thing. There are community laws prohibiting scat, but nothing federal. The problem is that no matter where in the US you live, you can be held liable in another jurisdiction if your content is distributed there. Since the internet is global, that counts.

That being said, if scat were not removed from the site, DD could be held responsible and charged with any number of obscenity charges. He would be forced to defend himself in whatever state they decided to charge him.

Also, a lot of people don't really know the definition of scat. A dirty diaper is not scat unless it is pulled back and the contents revealed. At one point, Scat was defined as defecation in relation to sexual activities. The definition has since been loosened and expanded.

thats not true they keep it very hush hush and its mainly for the video and the site is hosted in the USA so it makes it susceptible to the US Laws and you find me some link saying that is not illegal than by all means ill have this thread locked till then it stays open this is why we remove scat videos here since IT IS ILLEGAL IN THE USA IVE NEVER HEARD A THING ABOUT WHAT YOUR SAYING AND TILL YOU COME UP WITH SOME GOVERNMENT LINK SAYING OTHER WISE THAT IS USA RELATED ILL APOLOGIZE BUT TILL THEN NO CAN DO .......

[Bettypooh]

Online age limits are unenforcable since you can't prove who is any certain age, and thus they are silly but the law says that having a 'age of majority' requirement legally protects you then that's what you have to do- or you suffer the consequenses. Someone who will lie about their age to get onto a website will still lie if you raise that threshold age so there's no point in suggesting raising the age limit when it obviously can't really work anyway. Parents all the time find themselves registered on websites that required age verification through credit card numbers which their children obtained then used to go there.

Adding good moderators can only improve a site, but what is defined as "good"? I've had posts moderated in other places by people who simply didn't like me even though I stayed within the site rules. Only once did my complaint to the site owner bring me vindication- several times nobody seemed to care that innocent people were being harmed wrongfully. My solution is to leave such people alone to their own problems and go elsewhere. DD seems to be level-headed enough to keep that from becoming a problem here so I say go for it. Still, there will be posts of improper content until they are moderated just as happens now so the moment you become offended about something you see or hear go away from it then let the moderators know what you saw. If they agree with your assesment they will delete it- if they don't then don't complain because it's their site- not yours- and it's their decision as to what to allow. If you don't like their decisions tell them why then leave the site so that you have no more negative experiences.

I an a member of an obscure group where to join you have to convince the site owner that you are "one of them". They don't want publicity and they don't want people who are not like them posting there because much of what is spoken of is personal. You know from the start that while difference and dissention is allowed, arguments and/or personal attacks will get you banned permanantly, as will posting anything dishonest or disparaging of toher users in any way will. The group owner is happy to 'proofread' your post if you aren't sure it's allowable and tell you that before you actually post it so that you don't get banned- that's a lot of effort on their part but it maintains their goals on the group. Because of all this it is a small group (actually hundreds of people but a small percentage of this kind of person worldwide) but it is a peaceful place where like-minded people can discuss personal things about themselves in a secure enviriment with no worry about being exposed or misunderstood or getting flamed because someone doesn't like what you've said. While I like that attitude for that group I prefer the openness of sites like this one for most things. I know I'm going to see things I may not like but I don't have to keep looking or respond- I am free to choose to leave if I wish and really, that's all you can expect from the real world at large, not just online. I was a member of another more public group where the moderation was so lax that nothing was disallowed except posts using the "ten words you can't say on TV". In the beginning it was wonderful being among people mature enough to control themselves without modration but as will happen others who wouldn't control themselves crept in and made it am awful place so I left.

Perhaps the best moderation lies in between these extremes and so far I'm happy with what goes on here. Good Job DD, keep it up!

Bettypooh

[Diaper666]

I'm not talking about modding the forums just the videos that come into the site so we can get rid of scat and poop videos ....

[timmyc]

Obscenity - United States obscenity law

The United States has constitutional protection for freedom of speech, which is not interpreted to protect every utterance. The Supreme Court has found that, when used in the context of the First Amendment, the word "obscenity" means material that deals with sex. In U.S. legal texts, the term "obscenity" now always refers to this "Miller test obscenity". The Supreme Court has ruled that it is constitutional to regulate the sale or transmission of obscenity, but that it is unconstitutional to pass laws concerning the personal possession of obscenity. Federal obscenity laws at present apply to inter-state obscenity issues such as distribution; intra-state issues are for the most part still governed by State law.

Obscenity - Political history of obscenity in the US

In 2005, the United States Justice Department, under Bush-appointed Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, promised to start a "war" on adult entertainment following the re-election of the Conservative Christian George W. Bush as President some months earlier. An early blow to sexually explicit websites was the expansion of 18 USC 2257 requirements regarding record keeping, model consent, evidence and public accessibility; the regulations are now interpreted such that records be kept for any and all imagery - including such which had not previously had such requirements - which caused many sexual sites to shut down citing the difficulties of obtaining consent in the requisite forms from previous years, or the regulatory burden imposed. In September of that year a further attack on sexual material came as an FBI "Anti-Porn Squad" was formed, which has initially targeted for prosecution websites such as Red Rose Stories, one of many sites providing text-only fantasy stories. Other sites such as BeautyBound, run by Midori, a prominent BDSM teacher and author on Japanese bondage, have closed down despite not being targeted, due to these risks and legislative burdens.

Obscenity - Past standards

These standards were once used to determine exactly what was obscene. All have been invalidated, overturned, or superceded by the Miller Test.

* Hicklin test: the effect of isolated passages upon the most susceptible persons. (British common law, cited in Regina v. Hicklin, 1868. LR 3 QB 360 - overturned when Michigan tried to outlaw all printed matter that would 'corrupt the morals of youth' in Butler v. State of Michigan 352 U.S. 380 (1957))

* Wepplo: If material has a substantial tendency to deprave or corrupt its readers by inciting lascivious thoughts or arousing lustful desires. (People v. Wepplo, 78 Cal.App.2d Supp. 959, 178 P.2d 853).

* Roth Standard: "Whether to the average person applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest". Roth v. United States 354 U.S. 476 (1957) - overturned by Miller

* Roth-Jacobellis: "community standards" applicable to an obscenity are national, not local standards. Material is "utterly without redeeming social importance". Jacobellis v. Ohio 378 US 184 (1964) - famous quote: "I shall not today attempt further to define [hardcore pornography] ...But I know it when I see it".

* Roth-Jacobellis-Memoirs Test: Adds that the material possesses "not a modicum of social value". (A Book Named John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure v. Attorney General of Massachusetts, 383 U.S. 413 (1966))

Under FCC rules and federal law, radio stations and over-the-air television channels cannot air obscene material at any time and cannot air indecent material between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m.: language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities (indecency is not as bad as obscenity).

Many historically important works have been described as obscene, or prosecuted under obscenity laws. For example, the works of Charles-Pierre Baudelaire, Lenny Bruce, William S. Burroughs, James Joyce, D. H. Lawrence, Henry Miller, and the Marquis de Sade.

Obscenity - U.S. activity and court cases dealing with obscenity

* In Miller v. California, the Supreme Court ruled that materials were obscene if they appealed,

[Diaper666]

At best it a murky issue. I don't think it is clearly defined. More so than any possible legal ramifications, DD has the right to monitor, police and delete any content they see fit on their site, and nothing wrong with being cautious. I do think views will change without that right wing nut job in the oval office. If DD or his agents delete any content they see unfit fine their board. What we don't need is non moderators playing Jerry Falwell and trying to manipulate the board to cater to their own agenda, stuff like that has killed many a boards in the past.

yes that maybe so but we really have never had some one go in and delete those videos its been that way since he started the video host .this has been brought up before but with people still posting them its hard for one person to get this done so i was just trying to help and maybe see if others would be willing thats why i stated this topic mainly for DailyDi so he could see this and watch what happens with it and i know every time i watch the videos i report the scat ones i see as abusive content ..... its crap like that when people post scat that gives this and other AB/DL sites a bad name scat may be a sub culture of this fetish but it is NOT WELCOME AT LEAST ON HERE and DailyDi will agree with me on that issue alone.....

[BoTox]

THE best moderation is self moderation but there are those that don't obey the rules and that is why there is enforcement, be it the web or real life.

Anyone that wishes to test the law is perfectly able to bring up a site and post their questionable content on their own site. This site, however, is owned by a person not wishing to push the envelope and that is the way it has to be.

Everyone should know the internet is far from lawless and far from anonymous. Yes, it is behind the enforcement curve but do YOU want to be the first test case?

[freswith]

Somerset College of Arts and Technology. What a fuss.......

[Missy Q]

but it is NOT WELCOME AT LEAST ON HERE

DaliyDi has his opinions just like everyone else. However, please do not assume your opinion is that of everyone else, speak for yourself only.

There are many people who welcome it greatly and just wish to sit back and discuss it with others who share alike.