Jump to content
LL Medico Diapers and More Bambino Diapers - ABDL Diaper Store

Banned members


Recommended Posts

On 8/26/2014 at 7:51 AM, Bettypooh said:

After their brush with legal problems, ADISC is running scared. Considering the potential rebukes they could face I'm not sure I wouldn't be just as jumpy, though I would be handling everything differently anyway. Nothing said here is going to change ADISC so there's not much point in discussing them- we all know what's going on there <_<

 

What's going on there?  I must have missed something.

Link to comment
On 8/25/2014 at 1:10 AM, rosalie.bent said:

Is there anyone here who HASNT been banned from ADISC?

me

Link to comment

I am assuming it must have had something due to allowing children in the forums. I was mysteriously banned a year or year and a half or so after the kids were banned. I was there during that time and it was well managed, and a lot of youngsters got support. Obviously it limited allowed discussions that we have here with nothing  sexual. My guess is some parent found out there little darling wore diapers, went through the computer and found out they were hanging out with a bunch of sickos online and stirred up trouble. Leading to dropping minors. Can't imagine they had much legal trouble or they would have simply shut the site down rather then hassle with it.

To be clear, the WORST thing a parent can do is over react over there childs sexuality. Wears diapers, Gay, has an older but appropriate young partner..what ever. I bet you money that is what happened.

  • Like 1
Link to comment

Minors got banned because of the Peachy incident. Though the age of consent in the UK is 16, Peachy and the 17 year old were both in the UK and legal to consent together so they did something together sexually and Moo found out and banned him for it. Then months later he decided to make the forum 18 plus and banned all the minors. It was a tough thing for him to do and I understand his decision to ban Peachy even though he didn't really do anything wrong. I know it was to keep a good reputation of the website and to avoid any liability. It's 16 here in some states too and some other states it's 17. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, diapersalways said:

adisc was sued by some parents, part of a settlement agreement was that their site become 18 and over only.

you can ask moo about it sometime if you want to know more, he is usually in the adisc discord server.

So no money was involved then, only a settlement. 

Link to comment
On 11/8/2017 at 6:31 AM, Spokane Girl said:

So no money was involved then, only a settlement. 

settlements can and usually do have multiple demands, a monetary payout could have been part of it, exact details havnt been shared publicly, all i know is one day in discord when it was brought up and moo was present he said the change to 18+ only was a direct result of that legal battle, further details he wouldnt elaborate.

 

so no idea if there was a money payout, id bet there was but who knows.

Link to comment

Making it 18+ was the kind of decision that anyone with a brain would have made. It was astonishing that it took legal action to force him. Like it or not, ABDL has a notable sexual element and that simple excludes minors, period.

 

ADISC has been in other legal trouble before and multiple investigations and obviously didnt learn from it.

Link to comment

I think that abdl or not, teens are likely going to think about and do sexual stuff.  Do I think that for them to be posting about it on a forum with adults is ok?  Hell no.  But do I think they should be shut out from any forum due to their age?  No, because that would be unfair as well. Just think about how the minimum age for facebook and twitter is 13, yet adults post very adult content on there all the time.  I'm sure they have screening methods to protect children from such content, but people are always going to find a way around the rules.  So why is it that abdl sites like DD and adisc have to have age restrictions to stay out of trouble, yet adults and teens can join facebook and twitter legitimately?  

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, Firefly 35 said:

I think that abdl or not, teens are likely going to think about and do sexual stuff.  Do I think that for them to be posting about it on a forum with adults is ok?  Hell no.  But do I think they should be shut out from any forum due to their age?  No, because that would be unfair as well. Just think about how the minimum age for facebook and twitter is 13, yet adults post very adult content on there all the time.  I'm sure they have screening methods to protect children from such content, but people are always going to find a way around the rules.  So why is it that abdl sites like DD and adisc have to have age restrictions to stay out of trouble, yet adults and teens can join facebook and twitter legitimately?  

Because those sites have the staff and resources to actually monitor and deal with potential problems while DD and ADISC do not. I understand the concern, but frankly, in the current environment where even the slightest whiff of underage sexual content, dealing etc will bring down the full force of the law. Except in Alabama of course. 

In the current environment you avoid kids because it is unsafe not to. This is of course why male primary school teachers are as rare as a Trump truthful statement. It is unfair, stupid and dangerous for kids. But to do otherwise is to risk serious legal consequences.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Firefly 35 said:

But it is ok for them to play Call of Duty and shoot people's heads off in the game?  I don't understand the logic there.

I didnt say there was any logic in it. I was saying that you allow kids on your sex-themed website at your legal jeopardy. We all know there are underage kids on sites like this since we cant actually stop them, but to encourage it openly, will case the website owners serious trouble.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Firefly 35 said:

But it is ok for them to play Call of Duty and shoot people's heads off in the game?  I don't understand the logic there.

You asked a pertinent question here.  Why can kids get these games like Call Of Duty and shoot people's heads off in the first place?  Because they are available to them!  Lets look at some other possibilities.  A 13 year old goes into a liquor store and tried to buy a Penthouse or Hustler magazine.  The store refuses to sell it to him and kicks him out because he shouldn't be in the liquor store in the first place.  Is that going to stop him from swiping a copy of those magazines from a relative or somewhere else?  Most likely not because when they want something that bad they will find a way.  Back to Call OF Duty.  You seem of the opinion a game like that is not appropriate for kids and teens under age 18, and I agree.  Back when I was a kid and there were no video games like this, kids did other stupid things because they were influenced by what they saw on TV.  It's true that several kids over the years in the late 1950's and early 1960's were big fans of Superman, same as kids like super hero's today.  The thing is, when they begged their parents for a Superman costume and were given one, some ran out in front of cars to try and stop them like Superman did in the TV show and got hurt or killed because they thought it was the Superman costume that protected them.  Now days most cable and sattalite TV providers have parental controls that allow a parent to block a specific channel or TV show so their kids can't watch it.  Now you have kids that are playing violent video games starting at a young age.  Some know that play differs from reality, but some don't.  Every week it seems we are seeing on TV how a person takes a gun and shoots innocent people.  Guy shot up a church a week ago, some creep shot up a kindergarden class at a school yesterday!  When you are exposed to that kind of gun violence at an early age, some people think shooting others is a normal OK thing to do.  People may disagree with me, but I truly believe violent movies, TV shows and video games have a big influence on kids from an early age.  Being exposed to all that violence can't be good for some younger people.  And everyone wonders why 14 year old girls get pregnant, 15 year olds take a gun and shoot someone, etc.  DUH! 

Back to the topic.  We know if someone wants something bad enough they will find a way to get it.  If you think it's bad for young teens to play violent video games like Call Of Duty (and I'm agreeing with you), wouldn't you suggest better ways to keep these games out of their hands or make it harder for them to get?  Lets say instead of a teen being able to go into a video game store or order these types of games online, they can only get them at a store in person and have to show their ID.  No on-line sales.  Not far fetched when you remember how cigarette machines used to be everywhere and then were banned because of kids and teens being able to use them to buy their ciggies!  When you have a law that people below a specific age are not allowed to purchase a particular item, you don't place vending machines with that item everywhere so kids can just help themselves!  You make it hard by only selling to them in person and being able to verify they are legally old enough to purchase them.  Do the same with violent video games and it makes it harder for kids to buy them.  Will it stop them?  No, they will probably go to a friends house and play it on their game console instead, but they have to find a friend who isn't in the same position they themselves are, one who somehow has obtained a copy of the game.  It' all about how easy or how hard we make it for kids to obtain things they shouldn't have due to their age.

This also applies to underage kids and teens who may be AB or DL.  They will get their diapers no matter what, but being under legal age, we need to make it as hard as possible to expose them to adult content as we possibly can.  That means not allowing them to buy a Penthouse magazine, get cigarettes from vending machines or over the counter, restricting sales of violent video games and most important, not allowing or encouraging them to join adults only sites with adult contents

Link to comment
19 hours ago, Firefly 35 said:

But it is ok for them to play Call of Duty and shoot people's heads off in the game?  I don't understand the logic there.

I love your point.  In my opinion, we (society) have created a strange obsession as sex being naughty and evil while blowing the heads off of people, or slicing them up is fine.  Some of the PG-13 movies are extremely violent, meanwhile, the mere exposure of a nipple will end up getting an R-rating.   My understanding is that the mere utterance of a word that rhymes with Firetruck will get an R rating as well.   I don't understand why we completely disregard violence but treat sex as though it's the ultimate taboo.

Unfortunately, I don't know if it coincides with letting minors on to an adult site like this..   Part of it there is the possibility for an adult to exploit a minor, and that's not right.  There is also the possibility of a minor exploiting an adult because they understand that they are not fully culpable for their actions.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, spark said:

I love your point.  In my opinion, we (society) have created a strange obsession as sex being naughty and evil while blowing the heads off of people, or slicing them up is fine.  Some of the PG-13 movies are extremely violent, meanwhile, the mere exposure of a nipple will end up getting an R-rating.   My understanding is that the mere utterance of a word that rhymes with Firetruck will get an R rating as well.   I don't understand why we completely disregard violence but treat sex as though it's the ultimate taboo.

That's one of the biggest problems with american society.  People think that a perfectly normal, natural and necessary interest (sexuality) is a big problem, but one which causes nothing but death destruction, and hatred (and perhaps some short lived bragging rights) is perfectly ok (violence).  Most cultures are just the opposite from what I've heard.  

 

2 hours ago, spark said:

Unfortunately, I don't know if it coincides with letting minors on to an adult site like this..   Part of it there is the possibility for an adult to exploit a minor, and that's not right.  There is also the possibility of a minor exploiting an adult because they understand that they are not fully culpable for their actions.

I think that it is definitely wise to do our best to protect children from adult content that would cause them harm and/or problems.  However, if the teens already know what they're getting themselves into (they're abdls as well), it would not be wise to shut them out because of a stupid law passed by overprotective people.  I'm not saying we should just ignore the law and do whatever we want, but that we should petition for it to be changed.  As Ghandi said "Be the change you want to see in the world".

Link to comment
9 hours ago, spark said:

I love your point.  In my opinion, we (society) have created a strange obsession as sex being naughty and evil

I have to disagree with this part of your post.  TV shows that seem to be popular highlight sex all the time in what the shows writers and producers think is funny.  Sexual inuendos, the men making sexual remarks to women (Cheers was one for that years ago, the bartender lusting after everything in a skirt), Two And A Half Men (Charlie Sheen was terrible about having sex with all kinds of women, cracking wise about it and they had a young teenager in the house), Two Broke Girls (just about every word out of the one girl's mouth is a filthy sexual comment - Guy:  Looks like Santa came."  Kat:  From just one kiss?")  Even Howard on The Big Bang Show made a mechanical hand so he could jack himself off.   IN PRIME TIME WHERE KIDS OF ALL AGES CAN WATCH!  Kids and teens are influenced by what they see on TV and rather than creating the obsession sex is evil, I believe the message being sent to people watching these shows is that it's OK, perfectly normal to have sex with everyone you meet and joke about it.  People are shocked when a president talks about grouping women or someone running for office is in trouble for dating and making sexual advances on the underage girls.  Then you have the Hollywood stars exposing themselves to others or fondling them.  That's terrible (I agree), but sexual deviancy is OK on your average comedy TV show.  And people wonder why teens rape women or their 13 year old daughter is pregnant.  Geez.  You think maybe what they watch on TV is an influence?  Of course, some will say they pick it up from their friends (who most likely are influenced by those same TV shows!)

7 hours ago, Firefly 35 said:

I think that it is definitely wise to do our best to protect children from adult content that would cause them harm and/or problems.  However, if the teens already know what they're getting themselves into (they're abdls as well), it would not be wise to shut them out because of a stupid law passed by overprotective people.  I'm not saying we should just ignore the law and do whatever we want, but that we should petition for it to be changed.  As Ghandi said "Be the change you want to see in the world".

I think you know my position on this.  The law is there for a reason.  Should it be changed?  I don't think so even though the world is more sexually promiscuous these days.  See my above post.  We all know people can browse these sites anyway.  Like you said, they are already AB/DL so they know about and partake themselves.  It won't stop them if they can't join an adults only site, so I see no harm in them continuing to do what they are going to keep doing and waiting until they are of legal age to become a member.  We are not encouraging underage people to join and I think that is the correct position to take.  I think it is wise to shut them out until they reach the legal age, both morally and leagaly.  When the law changes, then we can comply if that is what the majority rules.  Until then, comply with the law and no one under the age of 18.

Link to comment

 

16 minutes ago, rusty pins said:

I have to disagree with this part of your post.  TV shows that seem to be popular highlight sex all the time in what the shows writers and producers think is funny.  Sexual inuendos, the men making sexual remarks to women (Cheers was one for that years ago, the bartender lusting after everything in a skirt), Two And A Half Men (Charlie Sheen was terrible about having sex with all kinds of women, cracking wise about it and they had a young teenager in the house), Two Broke Girls (just about every word out of the one girl's mouth is a filthy sexual comment - Guy:  Looks like Santa came."  Kat:  From just one kiss?")  Even Howard on The Big Bang Show made a mechanical hand so he could jack himself off.   IN PRIME TIME WHERE KIDS OF ALL AGES CAN WATCH!  Kids and teens are influenced by what they see on TV and rather than creating the obsession sex is evil, I believe the message being sent to people watching these shows is that it's OK, perfectly normal to have sex with everyone you meet and joke about it.  People are shocked when a president talks about grouping women or someone running for office is in trouble for dating and making sexual advances on the underage girls.  Then you have the Hollywood stars exposing themselves to others or fondling them.  That's terrible (I agree), but sexual deviancy is OK on your average comedy TV show.  And people wonder why teens rape women or their 13 year old daughter is pregnant.  Geez.  You think maybe what they watch on TV is an influence?  Of course, some will say they pick it up from their friends (who most likely are influenced by those same TV shows!)

I think that it really depends on the person.  My roommate last year was an avid consumer of those type of tv shows, yet was always very kind and very ethical with everyone, including women.  Plus, my campus has about 17,000 students and in the past year and a half, there have been no cases of sexual problems/crimes at all, except for a minor case of inappropriate touching which was quickly resloved.  So, I agree that what you're saying is a valid issue, but I think we have the media to thank for hyping it up.

 

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, rusty pins said:

think you know my position on this.  The law is there for a reason.  Should it be changed?  I don't think so even though the world is more sexually promiscuous these days.  See my above post.  We all know people can browse these sites anyway.  Like you said, they are already AB/DL so they know about and partake themselves.  It won't stop them if they can't join an adults only site, so I see no harm in them continuing to do what they are going to keep doing and waiting until they are of legal age to become a member.  We are not encouraging underage people to join and I think that is the correct position to take.  I think it is wise to shut them out until they reach the legal age, both morally and leagaly.  When the law changes, then we can comply if that is what the majority rules.  Until then, comply with the law and no one under the age of 18.

I guess not trying to push the envelope until the public has a better understanding of us would be a good idea.  That being said, we should keep in mind the interests of the whole community, not just a few members in this particular thread.  I have nothing against keeping this site 18+ if that's what most people want.  However, if the laws change, and people want to let teens join, I would be fine with that as well, as long as it could be done without harming anyone.  

5 minutes ago, rusty pins said:

It only takes a few out of the lot to cause problems!  .

Just like how there's a large muslim population where I live, and all of them seem very peaceful.  Everyone else around here knows that as well, so there's really not much fear of terrorism.  Plus, from what I understand, in Islam, it is a major sin to kill anyone without a very, very valid reason (terrorism doesn't count).  So, anything like what ISIS or Al Quada is doing very much goes against the morals of their own religion.

Link to comment

Our vision of sexually pure kids is definitely nuts in modern society. Puberty occurs between 9 and 12 for girls and 10-13 for boys typically. Until not long ago this was not such and issue, even less then 100 yrs. To ignore that makes no sense. We have to understand that for sure 12-16yr olds are going to have astounding sex drive and little knowledge or safe options for relief. That is why so many get into trouble. Society says you pure little children should not be sexually active so don't be! TV shows don't encourage sex, they add to the confusion. They are already horny folks! We teach them the dangers of getting pregnant young and such, which is good of course. But Pubescent kids need to know there sexuality is ok and normal as well, and need to be tought not only about things like pregnancy but the dangers of an insane society and LE consequences. To be honest I think masturbation is a subject that cannot be taboo for them, nor safe sex discussions by parents at the appropriate age. Pubescent kids WILL mess around. You did! Does not mean all are going to have intercourse of course, but we need to except that and guide them. Being 13-15 and unable to focus and stressed out because your body needs natural relief that you are told not to deal with, is that healthy? I maintain its not. Would a community guiding these kids that are ready be wrong? Absolutely not. Would modern society except it? Not a chance. And thats the conflict. Diapers are a sexual out let and ADISC walked a tight rope trying to keep discussions about diapers only when the sexual aspect was driving those youngsters. Eventually even with keeping the driving factors at bay they had to change.

 

Link to comment

That's why we need to do something about it.  Sign a petition, send a letter to a state/federal official, or something, because if the people in charge see that ABDLs are more common than one would think, and that we clearly share the same values as far as not harming children, they will most likely be willing to change the laws to be more understanding of our community.

Link to comment
17 hours ago, rusty pins said:

I have to disagree with this part of your post.  TV shows that seem to be popular highlight sex all the time in what the shows writers and producers think is funny.  Sexual inuendos, the men making sexual remarks to women (Cheers was one for that years ago, the bartender lusting after everything in a skirt), Two And A Half Men (Charlie Sheen was terrible about having sex with all kinds of women, cracking wise about it and they had a young teenager in the house), Two Broke Girls (just about every word out of the one girl's mouth is a filthy sexual comment - Guy:  Looks like Santa came."  Kat:  From just one kiss?")  Even Howard on The Big Bang Show made a mechanical hand so he could jack himself off.   IN PRIME TIME WHERE KIDS OF ALL AGES CAN WATCH! 

3

I think the sexual innuendo in television shows just how pre-occupied we are with the idea that sex is naughty, and therefore referring to it in an obscure way is funny.   Truthfully, if done well it is.  It's not really fair to place blame for society's ills on any of it.  Maybe there is a relationship, but it's likely not the cause of terrible acts whether violence-related, or sexual harassment.  The simple fact remains that the exposure of a nipple or use of 7 words will almost certainly get a movie an 'R' rating, while PG and PG-13 movies can be extremely violent.    As a society, we don't have a healthy on sex in general, and maybe if we did- we could avoid some of the issues we have with respect, objectifying a woman, and treating sex as a conquest.

In reality, that conversation takes us down a rabbit hole which doesn't pertain to a site like this being open to minors.   It doesn't matter what the subject is, there are adults discussing adult subjects.  Creating a place where adults and children could interact and not face a serious risk for either group is a nightmare, and there isn't a lot to be gained from that risk.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, spark said:

I think the sexual innuendo in television shows just how pre-occupied we are with the idea that sex is naughty, and therefore referring to it in an obscure way is funny.   Truthfully, if done well it is.  It's not really fair to place blame for society's ills on any of it.  Maybe there is a relationship, but it's likely not the cause of terrible acts whether violence-related, or sexual harassment.  The simple fact remains that the exposure of a nipple or use of 7 words will almost certainly get a movie an 'R' rating, while PG and PG-13 movies can be extremely violent.    As a society, we don't have a healthy on sex in general, and maybe if we did- we could avoid some of the issues we have with respect, objectifying a woman, and treating sex as a conquest.

In reality, that conversation takes us down a rabbit hole which doesn't pertain to a site like this being open to minors.   It doesn't matter what the subject is, there are adults discussing adult subjects.  Creating a place where adults and children could interact and not face a serious risk for either group is a nightmare, and there isn't a lot to be gained from that risk.

So would an abdl group that meets in real life be better?

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...