Re: PornHub BBCode

[1MileCrash]

"You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, adult material, or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law."

from the member agreement. this classifies as 'adult' material.

This is only the default member agreement for your registering members. It's not an agreement for using SMF as a webmaster/administrator.

You have absolutely no case here.

[kat]

Live and let live people.

Trying to push your views onto others, will only make them dig their heels in all the more.

We're all different. Let's celebrate that, instead of getting all this grief, ay?

Same with religion. You're welcome to yours, but don't try and push your beliefs down my throat.

What's immoral to you, might be "Normal" for others.

Deal with it, instead of trying to make everyone the same.

If some people had their way, we'd all be bloody robotic clones of each-other.

I'd rather stiff, myself.

[MrPhil]

IchBin, you're totally off base here. First of all, this SMF forum (simplemachines.org) is not promoted as a "family forum". A "family forum" would be one where children are encouraged to come and hang out, with age-appropriate materials, in a place that their parents know will be safe for them. This forum is meant as a tool for assisting people who want to set up and operate SMF. It does have rules to try to keep its content reasonably tasteful, and offensive to the fewest number of members, which means not posting "adult" material. There is nothing in the mod itself, or the notice of its creation (which started this argument), which could be construed as being pornographic itself. If the mod (or the notice) included salty language or sexually explicit pictures, you would have a point. There will always be members like yourself who are offended by any little thing. It would be difficult to sanitize the place to your standards, without crippling its operation (vetting every single post before it goes in). Can't you settle for a PG rating rather than G? After all, most of the people here are adults (or at least, teens). We certainly don't want an X or NC-17 rating, and even an R rating might be a bit much for many members.

As for the steak knife example, a steak knife is not normally sold for purposes of committing a crime. Indeed, if I sold steak knives "guaranteed to slash your victim's throat in one stroke, or your money back", I would be promoting a crime. Using SMF for an adult site, where PornHub might come in useful, is forbidden neither by law nor by SMF's license. Indeed, SMF is used to run many adult sites. Is that a problem?

I suggest that you and K3T^3 get a life.

[IchBin™]

Thank you for making it personal, it says a lot about your character. You should perhaps review the Core Values where it says you agree to treat others with respect. While you may think I'm forcing my views upon you, it is quite the contrary. Sure I have views that I think pornography is wrong. But I wouldn't sit here defending them if this wasn't a place that has been previously advertised as such. Your assumptions are totally wrong that this isn't a family friendly forum. You should perhaps search a few of the Team members posts where it has been said this place is supposed to be family friendly. I may have left out the word "friendly" but it means the same to me no matter how you say it. If this site was a place that allowed porn to be posted in the first place, I would never have stuck around here.

http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=235967.msg1520473#msg1520473
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=328771.msg2194710#msg2194710
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=318843.msg2118668#msg2118668
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=317007.msg2107818#msg2107818
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=311238.msg2159776#msg2159776
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=303707.msg2009090#msg2009090
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=270251.msg1771394#msg1771394

On the mod suport topic page there is a text link to a porn site. I have no problem with what people do on their own sites. I've never said anyone can't have porn on their own site either. What I have said is that SMF is known as a family site, and has been advertised as such. And now it is holding a double standard by allowing these things to exist, as they previously weren't.

[青山 素子]

First, cut the bickering. If you have issues with each other, please take them up privately.

Second, I have no issue with an adult modification, but linking to an adult site here is certainly not condoned. Please report the post so we have it noted in our system. We probably won't remove the modification, but the link can go.

[Eliana Tamerin]

Thank you, IchBin, you've said what I wanted to say (the impersonal remarks, anyhow).

I just wanted to make one other point. Our registration agreement also denies access to persons under age 13. Yet pornography is not legally viewable in many countries (including the US, where Simple Machines, LLC resides and SM.org is hosted) until age 18.

This I find as a particularly bad double standard. Yes, I'm aware the underage minors view porn on their own. That's not something we can stop here. But when we allow 13-17 year olds access here, give them resources to build their own websites with, should we really be providing mods to allow porn on their sites?

I don't doubt there are many ways for this same age group to reach and view porn on their own. But we're providing resources here at this site, and so long as we allow membership to those under the age of majority, we should not provide resources for those minors to access illegal content. Just as we don't promote warez sites and mods that would directly help warez sites, we should likewise deny these porn mods from SMF's official mod site.

[Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen]

This I find as a particularly bad double standard. Yes, I'm aware the underage minors view porn on their own. That's not something we can stop here. But when we allow 13-17 year olds access here, give them resources to build their own websites with, should we really be providing mods to allow porn on their sites?

The mods are not needed to show porn on any site. The mod is simply a tool that can be used on a site that allows adult material.

Just a side note, has anyone realised that the most downloaded mod of SMF also has a similar side to it. No one's said anything about that - since it is up to the forum admin to allow / disallow the use of the "adult functions".

[Eliana Tamerin]

The mods are not needed to show porn on any site. The mod is simply a tool that can be used on a site that allows adult material.

It's like the argument for safe sex education. You don't provide the condom, or the knowledge to use it, and kids won't use it. Probably not exactly the same here, but if no tools are provided, there's less incentive to use them and show porn on their own forums.

Just a side note, has anyone realised that the most downloaded mod of SMF also has a similar side to it. No one's said anything about that - since it is up to the forum admin to allow / disallow the use of the "adult functions".

I've mentioned it many times in the AEVA topic and I've tried hard to get Nao to reverse course on that. He's stubborn about it. And I don't condone it either. I always manually edit my version of AEVA to remove that part.

[Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen]

We seem to be on a completely different wavelength here - and that's ok, since this is all about opinions one way or the other.

I personally see nothing bad about allowing this sort of mods,
as there should be tools like these for those who wish to use them,
and it should be allowed to code tools like these for those who want to do so -
since SMF does not in any way limit the usage of the SMF software, and any admin
of any SMF installation is allowed to alter and / or completely change the registration agreement
to suit their own purpose.

So, the basic question is should we really be limiting our support and modifications etc. to be provided to only family friendly sites? I don't think so.

So while this forum is basically kept family friendly, it does not mean that everything even slightly related with adult material should be banned. If kids want porn, they will most likely not do it the hard way and make a site of their own - but simply use a search engine to get what they want.

[1MileCrash]

linking to an adult site here is certainly not condoned. Please report the post so we have it noted in our system. We probably won't remove the modification, but the link can go.

Pretty sure they were simply talking about the title of this thread.

But when we allow 13-17 year olds access here, give them resources to build their own websites with, should we really be providing mods to allow porn on their sites?

What happened to personal responsibility? We aren't their parents. You're already giving them the resources to allow porn on their sites.

If this site was a place that allowed porn to be posted in the first place, I would never have stuck around here.

this forum doesn't allow porn to be posted.

What you guys are missing is that, this is a BBC mod. It is literally about 10 characters different from any of the other BBC mods. There is nothing immoral, indecent, or questionable about the mod itself. It's possible uses? Certainly, but last time I checked there is some questionable content on youtube too, and anything can be posted within image tags.

Personal responsibility. SMF is not a babysitting service. I also disagree with Ichbin on just about everything, it seems outright assinine to limit SMF to being used only purposes that we/he agrees with. You can't control what people THINK, you just can't.

[IchBin™]

Ok, go to these pages.

http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=1966
http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=1990

I'm not saying people can't have porn on their own sites. What I'm saying is that SMF has ALWAYS advertised itself as a family friendly forum. Both of the links above HAVE PORN LINKS on the page of the mod and the support topic. How is this not questionable?  Since when has SMF started allowing porn links to be posted on this site? Personal responsibility has nothing to do with this. The only responsibility that is in question here is to keep SMF a family friendly site, and for SMF to show that it is a professional community. You can definitely control what people think about your site by what kind of content you allow to be posted. I'm not trying to control what people think or do with Porn, I'm trying to keep people from associating SMF with a less than professional opinion because they have porn mods and links posted on their site. Not even phpBB or IPB allows these types of mods on their own site to my knowledge.

[Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen]

Well, you are right - both of those have the sitenames as domainnames. Perhaps it would be better to list the sites without actual addresses, as then still who uses those - will know the addresses....

[Reflection]

Why don't you just get rid of the mods and be done with it?

[Arantor]

The ultimate question is: does SMF have the right to decide what its software is used for?

If it cannot, should not, and does not police what users use it for, are they free to decide what mods get written? It is clear there are users who will use those mods, as evidenced by the fact they have been downloaded more than once.

Perhaps have a separate section for restricted/adult-only mods?

[Eliana Tamerin]

SMF has done it before. There was a question a while back about a mod that allowed admins to read their user's PMs. SMF refused to allow it on the mod site, because it violated a user's privacy. Ultimately, the mod was hosted on the author's website and was available via donation, but SMF stayed its distance and refused to promote this method to violate their user's privacy.

Why, then, is this any different? It's even more legitimate, not even simply an ethical issue but a legal one as well. As Ichbin points out, SMF is sacrificing their public image in this respect. If people want these mods so much, I'm sure somebody would be willing to host them outside of SM.org and people will go there. But so long as they're not on SM.org, SMF and Simple Machines, LLC, cannot be found responsible for them, and are not seen as promoting them. It's not a question of making them available, it's a question of who's doing that. And for all the work that SMF has done to preserve it's image, this move is quite silly.

[Arantor]

Ah, yes, I'd forgotten about such mods to allow admins to review PMs, which does indeed raise the question.

Either there should be a restricted area - registered members only? - or they should go.

[1MileCrash]

SMF has done it before. There was a question a while back about a mod that allowed admins to read their user's PMs. SMF refused to allow it on the mod site, because it violated a user's privacy. Ultimately, the mod was hosted on the author's website and was available via donation, but SMF stayed its distance and refused to promote this method to violate their user's privacy.

Why, then, is this any different? It's even more legitimate, not even simply an ethical issue but a legal one as well. As Ichbin points out, SMF is sacrificing their public image in this respect. If people want these mods so much, I'm sure somebody would be willing to host them outside of SM.org and people will go there. But so long as they're not on SM.org, SMF and Simple Machines, LLC, cannot be found responsible for them, and are not seen as promoting them. It's not a question of making them available, it's a question of who's doing that. And for all the work that SMF has done to preserve it's image, this move is quite silly.

Apples and oranges.

Violation of privacy is a problem for others; you're harming others.
Voluntary viewing of pornography is not harming anyone.

You bring up the age/legal issue, you must be 18 (or 21) to view porn. So what? That's the responsibility of the site owner and/or viewers, not SMF. Last I checked, you also had to be 13 to join a forum (though I may be incorrect on this) so why don't we just stop offering a forum package? The answer is, because we are not responsible for underage users using SMF.

Still not seeing any reasons for disallowing this other than the "I don't like porn" or "it makes us look bad" - I say, picking and choosing which mods we deem "acceptable" based on irrelevant "values" makes us look bad. Though I do agree that text links to "PornHub" are completely out of the question on the Simple Machines website. What other people do with the software is absolutely none of your business, however.

[ademarre]

Why not take it a step further and have MS stop developing Internet Explorer. It can be used to view pornography after all!

We should also ban any tool that can execute SQL statements, after all, any admin also has access to the database where user PMs are stored, and thus has access to the PMs.

All sarcasm aside, I don't think any community driven project can force the morals of the few onto its community without losing the respect of said community.

My forums are 18+ and as such users are allowed to post adult content, I will fight tooth and nail to ensure my users are not only allowed, but enabled to express themselves however they see fit, within the limits of the law.

[TheDisturbedOne]

Why get rid of it? I won't use it, and if you don't want to use it, don't.  AEVA does the same thing along with IMG tags (as one said before).  If people want it on their website, an everything about it is legal, it should be fine.

[aldo]

Well said my friend, well said.