Stories And Rules

[DailyDi]

I just wanted to let everyone know that the mod team is currently reviewing our policies and rules in light of recent complaints. This will take a little time, and input is welcome, but please understand our need to consider things carefully and allow us time to review everything.

[LuvsGurl]

Thank you for taking the time to consider things.

I really believe the rule should be simple.

No postings, fictional or otherwise, involving persons under the age of 18 should be allowed. Period.

[lil_baby_wet_n_squishy]

I personally don't want to see writers chased away with restrictive rules. We have a lively and active story forum that could be lost.

@LuvsGurl WBDaddy just wrote a great story "Jealous Alli" about diapers and tolerance that wouldn't be allowed under your broad rules.

[Youngatheart252]

Thank you for taking the time to consider things.

I really believe the rule should be simple.

No postings, fictional or otherwise, involving persons under the age of 18 should be allowed. Period.

No postings, fictional or otherwise, involving persons under the age of 18 if there is ANYTHING sexual in the post.

Some stories on here are completely w/o sexual content of any kind and have minors in them, and most of us here would find nothing wrong with them. It's when sexual content and minors are in the same story that people took issue.

My .02 cents

[LuvsGurl]

No postings, fictional or otherwise, involving persons under the age of 18 if there is ANYTHING sexual in the post.

Some stories on here are completely w/o sexual content of any kind and have minors in them, and most of us here would find nothing wrong with them. It's when sexual content and minors are in the same story that people took issue.

Let's face the facts.

Whether you want to admit it or not, this is a sexual fetish for the majority of participants. People come here and read these stories to get their jollies.

The very definition of sexual fetish is to achieve gratification from an object or act that is typically not seen as sexual in nature by the outside community.

Just because stories don't have blatantly sexual acts in them doesn't mean that people don't come here to get their jollies off of reading about some child having an accident or being diapered. That may not be a "sexual" act as the outside world sees it but to many members of the community it is sexually stimulating.

Simply banning all content that involves minors is the BEST and SAFEST course of action to take.

[sarah_ab]

Thank you DD, for posting an update, and letting everyone know that you are aware of the situation and working on it...

Obviously I have voiced my opinions but I know you will make the decision you feel is best for you and the site. So thanks for giving us the update!!!!

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

Just because stories don't have blatantly sexual acts in them doesn't mean that people don't come here to get their jollies off of reading about some child having an accident or being diapered. That may not be a "sexual" act as the outside world sees it but to many members of the community it is sexually stimulating.

It could be projective, with the fictional child standing in for the reader whose "play age" that character is, In which case it is auto-erotic if it is sexual

Simply banning all content that involves minors is the BEST and SAFEST course of action to take.

Given the first statement in this quote, then you can take to to any level of remoteness and construe anything as sexual--or anything else. If one is so inclined after this discussion a reader could interpret a stated 22 year old as a 3 year old since we all now know the game. Given that, the SAFEST course is to ban all stories since the first statement makes reasonable estimate and therefore simple solutions impossible

I see a chilling effect here

[Diapered Jason]

Well, I agree with Christine that the stories in question were a fantasy role-playing experience with no minors involved. Though I do not really enjoy those stories as much as the others, that is my position and I have no complaints regarding them, but it may be in the writers best interest to acknowledge this at the beginning of their story.

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

There is also another matter that ought be a guide to law, and since we are dealing in fiction this relates

"Who is harmed?"

If you are using real minors, you can say they are. But then what is the "minor" status of a 15 year old if he or she can be tried as an adult in some cases?

But it seems reasoable to presume that for there to be a legal action, someone must be harmed unless you want to pass laws against being a creep, but then Anthony Weiner ought be the first one imprisoned for that crime.

To be honest, over the last 22 years that I know of, better trained minds than mine and more astute minds than mine have been unable to come to any hard and fast conclusions about this without doing violence to some of our most valued and valuable principles. It iw what they mean by a "slippery slope"

For one thing, you are now going beyond "victimless crime" to a crime with a non-existent "victim" Before anyone says "well we are protecting the reader from himself" How long before the religious fanatic uses the same argument to compel participation in his religion saying "we are protecting the non-participant form the bad decision that will doom his eternal soul to Hell"?

[LuvsGurl]

Considering people in the US can be charged with child abuse for just looking at a picture of a minor (just ask Brian Cobb) I say it's always "better safe that sorry" when persons under the age of 18 are concerned.

[Leilin]

Considering people in the US can be charged with child abuse for just looking at a picture of a minor (just ask Brian Cobb) I say it's always "better safe that sorry" when persons under the age of 18 are concerned.

Brian Cobb wasn't charged with child porn for "looking at a picture of a minor." He was charged with child porn for purchasing staged pictures in explicitly sexually gratifying situations from children's parents for adults to view for sexual purposes. Your summary of that situation is completely incorrect and drawing a parallel between that and this is disengenuous both in a legal sense and in a factual one.

That being said, fiction that places people under the age of 18 in sexual situations, drawn and written, is quite illegal in several states of the Union and several nations.

I don't think that fiction which places them in safely non-sexual situations should be a concern, EVEN if people fap to them. People also fap to pictures of bare feet but that doesn't mean pictures of bare feet should be illegal. Since neither stories that include minors in nonsexual situations nor pictures of bare feet are in any way illegal (they aren't even a grey area) then I don't see why they should be excluded.

[FretaBWet]

If the issue is whether there is some legal liability either for Mike or for those of us reading material in the stories section doesn't it make sense to just get good legal advise from a professional like a lawyer. When I have a toothache I don't go to a chiropractor, I go to a dentist. My opinion and probably anyone else here with the exception of Angela is next to worthless. If this is more about where Mike wants to draw the line then nobody's opinion really matters except the owner of the site.

Hugs,

Freta

[sarah_ab]

the guy who wrote that book that was put up on amazon, about being a pediophile.... he got arrested and extradited to florida.. he was put in jail.

he was eventually released and sent home as they had no grounds to charge him.

his name, his picture, his address, his whole life was out there for the world to see and associate him with pedophilia.

there are worse things than going to jail......

[Leilin]

the guy who wrote that book that was put up on amazon, about being a pediophile.... he got arrested and extradited to florida.. he was put in jail.

he was eventually released and sent home as they had no grounds to charge him.

his name, his picture, his address, his whole life was out there for the world to see and associate him with pedophilia.

there are worse things than going to jail......

In fairness, wasn't that information already out there when he published the book in the first place?

[Bettypooh]

In fairness, wasn't that information already out there when he published the book in the first place?

That doesn't seem to matter anymore Paladin Press was pressured to stop selling certain books or face a massive federal prosecution they could not afford to deal with when there was nothing in those books which couldn't be found in any big-city sized public library Whether you realize it or not, we're already dealing with government imposed 'book bans' on subjects not related to politics in any way. When I was younger I spent a huge amount of time in my local library reading mostly technical stuff, but now many books that were there are gone even though their content was still current and timely- and no other books they have now mention the things which were in the ones that are gone because those old books gave you information that could be misused in the wrong hands. Some dealt with non-drug chemical mixtures and some were basically a how-to on legal professions that could be improperly applied and some gave you ways to make substitutes for not-readily-available items. I digress, but I wanted you to see what I see so you can understand my feelings on the topic at hand

In this day and age the government no longer seeks justice through fair hearings- they seek to pressure you into submission and to harm you any way they can if you resist As with Cobb they know they don't have to be right to win. They play dirty and win because they're bigger than you Locally it seems that never a month goes by that someone gets in the news being arrested for having 'child porn' on their computer. Rarely do they explain what they thought was pornographic about it, mostly they say something like "pictures of children in a state of undress" or "sexually suggestive photos of children". Their names, pictures, and often their home addresses get splattered all over the headlines and about half of the cases eventually get dropped, but the no-longer-accused has been destroyed anyway and that was their intent from the start People have been arrested for sending pics of their naked babies to friends and family when there was nothing sexual about it- it was just what they thought was a "cute pic" that might bring a healthy non-perverted smile to those who knew them I am not pedo at all- my sisters were molested and I'd kill anyone harming a child in that way- yet I've seen tons of family pics of naked babies. That used to be commonplace and nobody wrote sexuality into it when none was actually there Knowing all this is why I said I'd disallow all under 18 stuff (and got bashed for that ) When it comes to 'child porn' you're not dealing with sane people on either side anymore There is no "fine line of the law" anymore, just a broad inconsistent morass of quicksand where one wrong step, even near the 'safe side', can sink you forever. This is Amerika today

Like DD said, we're reviewing and discussing all this. Rest assured that my standard isn't going to be applied here- that has already been decided. Being that age-play is an integral part of being AB my standard cannot work here- there must be an allowance for under-18 scenarios and thoughts; it's just that we must somehow remove any sexuality from it, real or perceived, that might cause the less-than-sane government to jump on us. You all know that DD is fair and more than lenient with rules so please bear with us and don't get into a snit over any of this. If you wish, state your thoughts but keep it civil, and soon things will be well taken care of- I promise

Bettypooh

[Leilin]

Like DD said, we're reviewing and discussing all this. Rest assured that my standard isn't going to be applied here- that has already been decided. Being that age-play is an integral part of being AB my standard cannot work here- there must be an allowance for under-18 scenarios and thoughts; it's just that we must somehow remove any sexuality from it, real or perceived, that might cause the less-than-sane government to jump on us. You all know that DD is fair and more than lenient with rules so please bear with us and don't get into a snit over any of this. If you wish, state your thoughts but keep it civil, and soon things will be well taken care of- I promise

Bingo!

I'm a bit surprised that people are flinging neg-rep left and right in this thread. I'm pretty sure it isn't intended for people that others just disagree with, but for when a person is being rude, uncivil, etc. I don't personally agree with a full scrub, but I do see the merit and backing for that opinion. Just because I don't think that what LuvsGurl said is based in fact does not mean that I think she deserves a hit to her reputation. Instead, I provide counter-fact and try to dissipate the misinformation and, since LuvsGurl was civil in that post and nice, let the debate continue. People are too-often making this personal when the point of this thread is discussion, not of vicious argument.

And it seems to be happening all over now. Sad...

[AutieAB]

My 2¢ is that there's no need for many restrictive rules or specifics. There need only be two:

(1) Think carefully before including minors in your stories. Make sure it's appropriate and doesn't infringe on (2).

(2) No depictions of sexual scenarios involving minor characters in any way.

When it comes to posting about our real lives and childhoods on this forum, we all know the difference between reminiscing about memories past and straying into the kind of stuff that cannot be discussed. I suspect the vast majority of story authors here follow the same self-censoring but there will always be a few whose idea of where 'the line' is differs from the majority. Having some simple rules in place simply codifies it for the mods to take action when they think it's needed...

I'm a bit surprised that people are flinging neg-rep left and right in this thread.

O/T but yes. IMO it's cowardly to register your disagreement with a post by clicking -1. Disagree using words explaining why, not anonymous reputation points :roll:

[DailyDi]

AutieAB is pretty close to where the rule is going to fall. We are actually drafting a new set of overall rules from joining the board, to behavior while here and photo and story rules. Nothing crazy, just putting down what most of us know anyway.

[Diapered Jason]

That doesn't seem to matter anymore Paladin Press was pressured to stop selling certain books or face a massive federal prosecution they could not afford to deal with when there was nothing in those books which couldn't be found in any big-city sized public library Whether you realize it or not, we're already dealing with government imposed 'book bans' on subjects not related to politics in any way. When I was younger I spent a huge amount of time in my local library reading mostly technical stuff, but now many books that were there are gone even though their content was still current and timely- and no other books they have now mention the things which were in the ones that are gone because those old books gave you information that could be misused in the wrong hands. Some dealt with non-drug chemical mixtures and some were basically a how-to on legal professions that could be improperly applied and some gave you ways to make substitutes for not-readily-available items. I digress, but I wanted you to see what I see so you can understand my feelings on the topic at hand

Public libraries are useless as there is not really any books of interest in them anymore, but the level of book banning varies from state to state. You can pretty much forget about finding any math, scientific, or engineering related information that goes beyond the very basic.