Ban links to violent content?

John

stevenmu wrote:

I'd disagree tbh, as long as it's on-topic and suitably marked then I think it's fine. I'd actually feel the same way about porn too, but because of the Irish religious history and the gender issues involved there's always going to be a much stronger outcry against porn.

I think the problem with porn on this site (and the violence) is nothing to do with an Irish stigma against sex or protecting adults from violent images but with the fact that you only have to be 13 to join the site. I know by not allowing links to porn on this site isn't going to stop underagers googling it and same with the violence but it's covering the admins asses from angry parents holding them liable for making obscene material available to underage kids.

I'm not against censorship but let's face it, some 13 year olds may be mature enough to not be affected by pictures of naked ladies but some will be adversely affected. Once you're old enough to cop on, you're old enough to seek out whatever you want yourself. However I don't think boards.ie should be taken to court because some kid sees something he shouldn't have because of one of the posts.

Karoma

John2, That is a fair point. However, the content is not hosted on Boards servers, nor is it embedded in the thread. Also part of the T&C for signing up I'm sure states that user posts do not represent the opinion or belief or are in any way,shape or form an endorsement of Boards.ie or management.
Is Boards management expected to be liable for any offensive remark or post also?

chern0byl

DaveMcG wrote:

What did you expect?

Violence, not murder.

Karoma

What have you got against crows?!
Ahem.

So... torture footage is OK, state executions NOK?
... just.....

Goodshape

Karoma wrote:

Also part of the T&C for signing up I'm sure states that user posts do not represent the opinion or belief or are in any way,shape or form an endorsement of Boards.ie or management.
Is Boards management expected to be liable for any offensive remark or post also?

Actually, I think the law in this country states that Boards.ie managment IS liable for the content posted by it's members. Unfortunitly.

Speaking as someone who participated in the thread, I think if I were a mod I would have sniped the video link and left the rest. As I said above, the video itself isn't really necessary when you have the writen description.

John R

Karoma wrote:

John2, That is a fair point. However, the content is not hosted on Boards servers, nor is it embedded in the thread. Also part of the T&C for signing up I'm sure states that user posts do not represent the opinion or belief or are in any way,shape or form an endorsement of Boards.ie or management.

None of which would necessarily stop a lawsuit being filed and won.

Karoma wrote:

Is Boards management expected to be liable for any offensive remark or post also?

Legally they are classed as publishers, the same as a newspaper owner so yes they could be held liable.

Having said that the likelihood of that happening is very small but as boards gets bigger and more well known it could be targetted by anti-{whatever} groups looking to make a well publicised point by going after an easy target.

My own personal opinion is that the porn ban is OTT, a private forum could easily be set up to limit the casual surfer from happening upon it. It is kind of sad that just about the only thing that is completely out of bounds on boards is porn. A parallel with prudish old Ireland is hard to avoid.

But if that is what the Admins want then so be it, there is no shortage of other places so it is hardly the end of the world.



As for the people who watched the video in question and are now complaining, what exactly is the problem? Either;
A. you are too stupid to understand the meaning of "violent video" so you just clicked the link because it was there and were caught out by the content of the violent video.

B. You understood the warning "violent video", you knew that you were going to watch a violent video, you wanted to watch a violent video but then when you saw the video it turned out to be the wrong kind of violence for your sensibilities. The video upset you, even more so because you had wanted to see it in the first place so now you want the site to ban such things so you won't have to face up to your conflicted desires again.

C. You clicked and watched the link with the full knowledge that you weren't going to like it just so you would have something to complain about, now you are using your moral indignation to force your values on to everyone else. Congratulations, the spirit of Mary whitehouse is alive within you, my dearest hope is that you end up looking like the miserable old hag too.

Whatever your reasons for watching the link the problem you have lies with yourselves.


I don't think these links should be banned as long as they have a warning attached, although I have little interest in watching them myself. I think I'll just stick with the porn, much more enjoyable than watching people getting killed.

RuggieBear

thing is you can get porn anywhere.....why does boards have to have it as well?

Karoma

That's pretty much where I was going with my post John R - but yours was far more coherent. Perhaps I should start sleeping again..

Anyhow.. the point about the T&C (Which was raised previously: pointing out that Boards expects 13 years+ to browse without a guardian present) is that it doesn't hold water, nor is it any sort of judge of character..(I'll come back to this point another time when I can state a more coherent resoning)
This thread drags me into the further deeper issue : how stupid are some users? How about an IQ and personality test rather than a button attched to T&C?

seamus

WhiteWashMan wrote:

recheck your mail....

Ah, they only arrived *after* I made that post.

With AH, the general ethos is: If 13-year-old Billy shouldn't be looking at it (from a "His mum will sue boards" POV), then I remove it. This stayed up for the reasons I outlined above.

WhiteWashMan

i'd wonder why we went to all the hassle to put up a sex and sexuality forum so people could discuss sexual issues in a private confim and yet violent footage is allowed.

now, far from being prudish or squimish, i do think there are limits that need to be set.
advertising is not allowed, but footage of death are.
spam is not allowed, but terror is ok.

as regi says, i am also not the moral compass of boards.ie, nor do i stand on a soapbox and shout to the public, but i think its bad taste. dead baby jokes are not tolerated on boards.ie, but dead people are?

it may have promoted discussion, but why do you need a video to do that?

magpie

i'd wonder why we went to all the hassle to put up a sex and sexuality forum so people could discuss sexual issues in a private confim and yet violent footage is allowed.

now, far from being prudish or squimish, i do think there are limits that need to be set.
advertising is not allowed, but footage of death are.
spam is not allowed, but terror is ok.

Precisely

bounty

I am against banning violent content.

stevenmu

John2 wrote:

I think the problem with porn on this site (and the violence) is nothing to do with an Irish stigma against sex or protecting adults from violent images but with the fact that you only have to be 13 to join the site. I know by not allowing links to porn on this site isn't going to stop underagers googling it and same with the violence but it's covering the admins asses from angry parents holding them liable for making obscene material available to underage kids.

I'm not against censorship but let's face it, some 13 year olds may be mature enough to not be affected by pictures of naked ladies but some will be adversely affected. Once you're old enough to cop on, you're old enough to seek out whatever you want yourself. However I don't think boards.ie should be taken to court because some kid sees something he shouldn't have because of one of the posts.

Good points, I don't think boards should have porn, but I wouldn't be strongly against it if it were to happen.

seamus

After further consideration, link removed. The thread stays - the news description I think is adequate for anyone to join in if they wish.

GoneShootin

And finally the weather

A storm in a teacup was spotted today, starting off at a strong category "Lyons Blend", but finally withering to a rather bland "mostly milk".

Graphic Videos - either Sexual or Violent in nature, should be banned. Everything else is fair game. If you really want to offer the ability of such links but protect the "innocent" young teens, setup another paid forum.

Mmm, paying for sexual and violent movies. The last time I did that was when I was last at the cinema!

magpie

Do us a podcast about it.

HelterSkelter

breadmonkey wrote:

There was a pretty graphic written account of the incident in question contained int he thread. After reading that, I don't know why anyone would watch it.

As Giblet said, I just don't watch it. Why did you?

I watched it, I was curious.

LegacyUser

Am I wrong by thinking that they're are two sets of reasonings behind the movement to ban 'inappropriate' content.

1. Person clicks on like out of curiousity, and is so shocked/horrified/apalled by link that wants a complete banning of related content, even though in reality they clicked on link out of curiousity and free choice.

2. Person clicks on like out of curiousity, and is so shocked/horrified/apalled by link that wants a complete banning of related content, because they are conscious of the fact that it could be viewed by minors etc...

Person #1, IMO is a sensationalist, and want something to rant about. Its the old cliché of Adam in the Garden of Eden, he knows its bad for him, yet as a human he is fallible, and he does what he shouldnt do. In other words, he cant keep his paws off it, even though he doesnt want to see it, the draw of the unknown is too much.

Person #2, makes a lot of valid points. I work all day long on the 'net, and I've seen a lot of what there is to see. The internet is a commodity that we as a society are expecting just like our other utilities, e.g. water, power, heat, sewerage. In a few years out homes will come with internet as standard, more so than standard phone lines and tv cable, more like electricity. Sometime in the near future there will be a huge legal case involving what the legal eagles call ones "duty of care".

If as a parent you let your child online unsupervised and unregulated, then its easy to say you're a fool. The issue is a little deeper than that. Most parents at the moment are not tech-savvy, and little Johnny is a whiz on the computer. Mom & Pop dont understand all this technology, so they just leave him to it. Now if little Johnny stumbles/is mailed something he shouldnt be seeing, are the parent liable, or is the content provider liable?

The quicker people realise that the WWW is like having Wal-Mart/Amsterdam/Las Vegas/Basra/...(*insert anywhere or anything you feel appropriate), in you own living room, the better people will be able to freely express themselves without the fear or censorship.

Just my 2¢

bru

chern0byl

WhiteWashMan wrote:

i'd wonder why we went to all the hassle to put up a sex and sexuality forum so people could discuss sexual issues in a private confim and yet violent footage is allowed.

Economics. People quite readily paid for access to one, but your typical board user is not going to pay for violent video footage that is available elsewhere.
Sexuality, is sexuality discussed by Irish people which doesnt exist anywhere else.

GoneShootin

magpie wrote:

Do us a podcast about it.

I would- but it would be too violent for you

whiskeyman

Here's an interesting news report I just heard that it kind of linked to this thread:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4289892.stm

miju

I cant remember what particular charter on Boards I saw it on but it did give guidelines for posting violent material along the lines off

WARNING VIOLENT / POSSIBLY DISTURBING FOOTAGE

your link here


WARNING VIOLENT / POSSIBLY DISTURBING FOOTAGE

i know i removed a link for a site from one of my posts because i thought to myself the footage i came across on that site was not only incredibly graphic it actually affected me for about a month afterwards and i couldnt get the images out of my head (particularly ken bigleys beheading) i watched it because i curious and after seeing the various footage one particular site has to offer and haven gotten over it and now understood im glad i watched the footage as i can now appreciate human life all the more and can now understand situations around the world A MILLION times better than before

basically what im saying is DONT ban violent links but MAKE SURE they carry a very obvious after all sometimes you cant actually understand something being described to your (no matter how much detail) until you see the images/footage

for example the asian tsunami was just a load of numbers to be then came the pictures and i understood the utter devastation it caused

bounty

seamus wrote:

After further consideration, link removed. The thread stays - the news description I think is adequate for anyone to join in if they wish.

:rolleyes: typical...

Hagar

chern0byl wrote:

Sexuality, is sexuality discussed by Irish people which doesnt exist anywhere else.

Sexuality in Ireland*

A few years ago there was no such thing in Ireland.
Then we had it.
Now we have to pay for it. :eek:

What next?

* It's actually very hard to get 4 different smileys into one post

ecksor

chern0byl wrote:

Economics. People quite readily paid for access to one, but your typical board user is not going to pay for violent video footage that is available elsewhere.

This sort of "it occured to me while I was picking my nose, therefore it must be true and I'm going to post it as fact" logic is really irritating.

Doctor J

While on the topic, am I alone in thinking a picture of someone's suicide is a bit much for a thread on album covers?

WARNING - this is a genuine picture of a corpse with it's brains blown out. I didn't particularily want to see it either.

CrimE

I think that links to footage of that calibre of grotesque murder should be banned. Discussion i am fully open to, but a description about what happened would have been sufficient to start a discussion about the crime and the repercussions etc.

I am by no means sensitive to what I see on the net but the terrified screams of a man before he dies are not sometihng I need to haunt me. That kind of footage can easily be found on the net without it being put on boards and being clicked upon by kids expecting to see a fight not murder in its most brutal form.

And btw when I saw violence in the name of the thread I wasnt expecting what I saw, thread should have been called "warning link to bloody murder".

So its a yes to banning links to that kind of content from me.

chern0byl

ecksor wrote:

This sort of "it occured to me while I was picking my nose, therefore it must be true and I'm going to post it as fact" logic is really irritating.

Stopped picking my own nose years ago mate. There are better flavoured ones about. Im right though...so so right.

rsynnott

I see no problem with linking to (legal) porn as long as it's properly marked (some sort of standard form might be appropriate. Linking to pictures of horrific violence though? No, not a good idea. No possible good can come of it.

I mean, what sort of strange, sick person ENJOYS viewing that sort of thing?

WhiteWashMan

_raptor_ wrote:

basically what im saying is DONT ban violent links but MAKE SURE they carry a very obvious after all sometimes you cant actually understand something being described to your (no matter how much detail) until you see the images/footage

there are any number of websites out there with voilent footage.
why does boards have to be one of them, just becasue a few people feel the need to have freedom of speech?
perhaps we should show a few peadophile home movies?
how about a good ol' rape scene. plenty of violence there!

or is that too much?

where is that you would like to draw a line?

snuff movies?

or is it a case of, that one wasnt too bad, so let it stand, but if i object to the content, like some girl who could be your sister getting anally raped, then that may just be a little too much for you to stomach?

which is it now? you want it or you dont?

becuase if you want it, go somewhere else. i dont feel that boards.ie needs to allow content like porn or violence, or any other practice outside of appropriate normal social behaviour, on its web site.

Chernobyl wrote:

Economics. People quite readily paid for access to one, but your typical board user is not going to pay for violent video footage that is available elsewhere.
Sexuality, is sexuality discussed by Irish people which doesnt exist anywhere else.

Absolute rubbish. if you knew anything, you would know that access to the sex and sexuality forum was based on the subscription base in order to control access and age restriction.
the forum was not set up as a vehicle to drive subscriptions. personally if someone was thinking of paying money to subscribe to boards.ie with only the sex and sexuality forum as the reason, i think they will be disappointed.

as for the sexuality forum itself, its overhyped and underused, currently has a whole 8 live threads on it and is pretty much voyourism without the pictures. in otherwords, its nothing other than you would discuss down the pub with your mates.