  dadkinsCan you do Blu?Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
kudos:18 | So it begins Ya know, instead of trying to filter(and failing miserably) Child Pornography, go after the makers and hosters.
Wiki? Epic Fail! 
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 |  Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child
| |
|
 |  P NessYou'Ve Forgotten 9-11 AlreadyPremium
join:2001-08-29
way way out | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child sigh talk about an over reaction.... | |
|
|  SteimesI make internetsPremium
join:2002-01-08
Belle Vernon, PA
kudos:1 | said by Linklist:Wikipedia should just delete the album cover from the article if indeed it is a naked child portrayed sexually, which would be against all international laws on child pornography. Delete the pic and the problem goes away. I think this one falls under the "art" protection. Even if the art was used to create controversy.
--
Making procrastination an art form since Pluto was still a planet. | |
|
| | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child said by Steimes:said by Linklist:Wikipedia should just delete the album cover from the article if indeed it is a naked child portrayed sexually, which would be against all international laws on child pornography. Delete the pic and the problem goes away. I think this one falls under the "art" protection. Even if the art was used to create controversy. But that is the excuse used by all child pornography purveyors - that it is art and should be ok.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
| | |
1 edit | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child But that is the excuse of all closet fascists, that art which bothers their delicate sensibilities should be banned or thrown in a pile and burned. | |
|
| | | | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5
1 edit | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child said by Karl Bode:But that is the excuse of all closet fascists, that art which bothers their delicate sensibilities should be banned or thrown in a pile and burned. So you defend child pornography - as long as it hides under the cover of being art? | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child Yeah TK. AND the murder of puppies. | |
|
| | | | | |  tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
kudos:1 | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child said by Linklist:So you defend child pornography - as long as it hides under the cover of being art? said by Karl Bode:Yeah TK. AND the murder of puppies. well, in that warped neo-con logic, you are either with him (and the *good* side), or with the terrorists (or whichever group is *not* the good side).
q. | |
|
| | | | | | | said by Linklist:said by Karl Bode:But that is the excuse of all closet fascists, that art which bothers their delicate sensibilities should be banned or thrown in a pile and burned. So you defend child pornography? Yeah. Child pornography is awesome.
Socialism is great too. Free socialist CP for all! | |
|
| | | | | |  ArrayListnetbus developerPremium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child did you say CP?
 | |
|
| | | | |  markwp2001SpreadheadPremium
join:2002-05-25
Long Beach, MS | said by Linklist:said by Karl Bode:But that is the excuse of all closet fascists, that art which bothers their delicate sensibilities should be banned or thrown in a pile and burned. So you defend child pornography - as long as it hides under the cover of being art? Stupid question, even by your standards 
--
Palin is sofa king retarded. | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | markwp2001SpreadheadPremium
join:2002-05-25
Long Beach, MS | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child You're the person who accused someone of defending child pornography, when they clearly weren't, scumbag.
--
Palin is sofa king retarded. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | markwp2001SpreadheadPremium
join:2002-05-25
Long Beach, MS | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child No, just making sure you know what others think of you when you make such ridiculous accusations
--
Palin is sofa king retarded. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | n0ym
join:2004-12-21
Rockville, MD | You really don't get the "ad hominem" thing, do you?
Kinda makes it easy to understand why your ideas about art and pornography are so simplistic, though. | |
|
| | | | |
1 edit | said by Linklist:Wikipedia should just delete the album cover from the article if indeed it is a naked child portrayed sexually, which would be against all international laws on child pornography. Delete the pic and the problem goes away. For someone who hasn't seen the image in question, you sure run your mouth.
Naked - yes.
Sexual? Maybe in your mind. 
--
All trolls are equal, but A troll is more equal than others. | |
|
| | | | | | | said by Linklist:So you defend child pornography - as long as it hides under the cover of being art? Nudity is not always pornography, and not all pornography involves nudity.
By your reasoning, any pictures of you as a child where you happen to be nude should be destroyed, as they are "child pornography" even if there is nothing sexual going on in the picture.
Face it, you conservatives are the ones with "sick" minds. You assign all this sexuality to things that have none. | |
|
| | | | | | | said by Linklist:So you defend child pornography - as long as it hides under the cover of being art? Tell me TK, do you support child pornography? No? Then why do you support the blocking of child porn websites rather than having them shut down/used to catch pedophiles?
Logically you must be a pedophile because you're protecting them by hiding them from the public but not shutting them down.
Oh no! Ad-hominem attack'd! Hey, don't get mad at me, you started it!  | |
|
| | |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | said by Linklist:]But that is the excuse used by all child pornography purveyors - that it is art and should be ok. No. Porn is porn. If you look at the cover, yes, it's controversial, and yes, some will find it offensive, but it's definitely art, and not porn.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | | | | said by Linklist:But that is the excuse used by all child pornography purveyors - that it is art and should be ok. I don't find the image at all pornographic -- that is, it does not appeal at all to my prurient interest. How come it does to yours, I wonder??? | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child Wow, someone just discovered logical fallacies, and is shoe-horning everything into one. Congrats. | |
|
| | | | | | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child said by Necronomikro:Wow, someone just discovered logical fallacies, and is shoe-horning everything into one. Congrats. It wouldn't be necessary if the default 1st choice of response of many posters wasn't personal attacks.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
| | | | | | | tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
kudos:1
2 edits | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child said by Linklist:So you defend child pornography - as long as it hides under the cover of being art? it wouldn't have been necessary if you hadn't used a logical fallacy to characterize karl and what he was trying to say.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
yes, believe it or not, i passed freshman english too 
q.
edited to add quote clarification
--
those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it... | |
|
| | | | | | | n0ym
join:2004-12-21
Rockville, MD | said by Linklist:It wouldn't be necessary if the default 1st choice of response of many posters wasn't personal attacks. Personal attacks are just that. They're not the same thing as ad hominem arguments.
Ad hominem remarks are attacks that are made in lieu of legitimate arguments. They're a form of distraction from the real issue.
In this case, you're being taken apart both by legitimate, logical responses and being made fun of. | |
|
| | | | | | | | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child said by n0ym:said by Linklist:It wouldn't be necessary if the default 1st choice of response of many posters wasn't personal attacks. Personal attacks are just that. They're not the same thing as ad hominem arguments. Ad hominem remarks are attacks that are made in lieu of legitimate arguments. They're a form of distraction from the real issue. In this case, you're being taken apart both by legitimate, logical responses and being made fun of. »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_a···_abusive
Ad hominem abusive
Ad hominem abusive (also called argumentum ad personam) usually and most notoriously involves insulting or belittling one's opponent, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensibly damning character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child said by Linklist:said by n0ym:said by Linklist:It wouldn't be necessary if the default 1st choice of response of many posters wasn't personal attacks. Personal attacks are just that. They're not the same thing as ad hominem arguments. Ad hominem remarks are attacks that are made in lieu of legitimate arguments. They're a form of distraction from the real issue. In this case, you're being taken apart both by legitimate, logical responses and being made fun of. » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_a···_abusiveAd hominem abusive
Ad hominem abusive (also called argumentum ad personam) usually and most notoriously involves insulting or belittling one's opponent, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensibly damning character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions. Ad hominem as a logical fallacy is when an attack is made in lieu of an argument. However, using an ad-hominem attack after, or in the midst of an argument does not automatically nullify the content within the argument, and does not constitute a logical fallacy, though it may be bad form in a debate. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child Yes, weird how that works. You're a purveyor of child porn for disagreeing with me -- but I'm very, very upset when people engage in personal attacks. | |
|
| | | | | | | I dont find it pornographic either. What did he say that was a personal attack? | |
|
| | | |
|  N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | On a side note, that girl's got to be in her mid 40's by now.......
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
|
| |
See 6 replies to this post |
|
| |
| AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | If? Did you even look at the links referenced in the article before posting? | |
|
| | | There was a huge flame war about this image a few months back. The upshot was that:
1) Wikipedia must comply with local laws to remove illegal content.
2) Wikipedia must not remove content for being legal but in bad taste, or every special interest group on the planet will have a field day.
3) Wikipedia, not being a law firm or a state, has no real way of telling whether something's illegal beyond the blatantly obvious cases.
4) This cover has been around for the last thirty years without being prosecuted, making it a not blatantly obvious case.
If you have any ideas on where to go from here, I'm all ears. | |
|
| | | But the question is the naked child being portrayed sexually?
When I look at the pic I see nothing sexual about it. There is no exposed genitalia. There is no suggestive motions or facial expressions being performed by the child at the time of the shooting of the picture.
Now with that said, I do think the original album cover was done in poor taste. But you can blame the record company for that one. It was their idea, not the band. The record company even said they will go to jail over it. According to the band, the album cover had nothing to do with the song.
--
The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility, and out of self interest -- for himself, his family, and the future of his country -- to resist government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience to the state. | |
|
| |  PiggieI Actually use WindstreamPremium
join:2005-11-23
Orange Springs, FL
 ·Windstream
 ·HughesNet Satell..
| Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child Hey, lets ban AllMusic.com while we are at it.
»allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sq···xqq5ld6e
Guess Clapton, Windwood and Baker are just too old school to matter.
That is the reason we have a judicial system as least in the US to keep extremists from seeing everything as porn.
Yes it is Art. No it's not sexual.
Like I always said, if you like strict rules, there are still countries where you can immigrate to that will be glad to ban your problems.
--
| Speedstream 4200 Modem - 3m/384 plan | W98-W2KSP4-XPSP2 - All AMD | Buffalo WHR G54S with Tomato 1.18 | 3 downstream switches feeding 6 total clients (no wireless) | Including the Data port on the side of my neck | | |
|
| | |
2 edits | Re: Action justified if naked person on album cover is a child I actually have that album. I am a big Eric Clapton fan, especially with his days with Cream.
I consider it a piece of artwork, hardly pornographic at all. Mostly because I do not consider breasts in any stage of development part of female genitalia.
said by Piggie:Like I always said, if you like strict rules, there are still countries where you can immigrate to that will be glad to ban your problems. Amen to that, at least in this country I can choose what art is in bad taste or not, not the government.
Edit: Well not yet.
--
The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility, and out of self interest -- for himself, his family, and the future of his country -- to resist government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience to the state. | |
|
| d25m03pPremium
join:2007-12-26
Abbotsford, BC | Just because puritan English speaking prudes think that a tastefully naked teenager girl is child porn doesn't mean that it is child porn in any other non-English speaking country or culture.
Why is it that English speaking countries call themselves enlightened, but are actually the biggest bigots (most of the time) throughout the known human universe? | |
|
 jjoshuaPremium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ
kudos:3 | That album is now the most popular page on wikipedia. | |
|
|  milnoc
join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:1 | Re: That album said by jjoshua:is now the most popular page on wikipedia. So in an attempt to prevent access to a an image classified as child porn, the UK child porn filters have had the opposite effect. Where have I seen this before?
I didn't find the image to be that sexually suggestive, no worse than what we see in the mainstream media today, with or without the nudity. But in its context, I did find the album cover to be highly questionable. When I first saw it, I yelled out "Yikes! What were they thinking?"
To be honest, I'm much more concerned with today's portrayal of young women, both pre- and post-pubescent, in the mainstream media. The "Beauty" industry has created a morally and physically toxic society where being sexually suggestive has now become a high priority for most little girls. It hammers down the belief that if you're not sexually attractive long before you're sexually developing, you're a complete failure at life.
And you don't have to look very far to see this twisted perception in real life. Just look at all those American "beauty contests" which feature hyper-sexualized little girls so young that some of them aren't even out of diapers yet!
In another twist of irony, the Canadian branch of the Dove beauty soap company has embarked on a public relations campaign (i.e. propaganda) by launching a "self-esteem" fund to help rebuild the self-esteem of young women across Canada, the same self-esteem they've been very busy demolishing for decades.
I do agree with Rudolf Schenker who now finds the cover to be in very bad taste. What's worse, the album cover was conceived by the record company! Considering the use of the image in context with the title of the album ("Virgin Killer"), someone wasn't thinking straight back then.
What was the popular drug back in the Seventies again? | |
|
| | jjoshuaPremium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ
kudos:3 Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Re: That album said by milnoc:I didn't find the image to be that sexually suggestive, no worse than what we see in the mainstream media today, with or without the nudity. Or that we all saw in record stores 30 years ago. | |
|
| | | Welcome to the Streisand Effect
The Streisand effect is a phenomenon on the Internet where an attempt to censor or remove a piece of information backfires, causing the information to be widely publicized.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect | |
|
|
| LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: Amazon And the IWF now has them in its sights as well:
»www.guardian.co.uk/technology/20···ship-iwf
The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) ... might yet add Amazon US to its list of "blocked" sites for hosting the picture.
That could be disastrous for Amazon if it prevents people in the UK accessing its pages on the week that is expected to be the busiest online before Christmas.
The Scorpions image was deemed to be "1 on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is the least offensive", said Robertson. The image was judged to be "erotic posing with no sexual activity". It depicts a young naked girl with her genitals obscured by a crack in the camera lens.
Robertson declined to say whether Amazon would be the next to be blocked. She confirmed that the Amazon page containing the offending cover was referred to the IWF today, but that no decision would be taken while the review of the original decision was in progress.
She could not say how long the review of the original decision will take. Typically it takes about 24 hours for a URL to go from initial referral to being added to the blacklist.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
| | | | Re: Amazon I actually hope they do block it. This would help shine a light on these asinine actions by the UK Government and the "watch dogs". It might create a worldwide media frenzy when Amazon and Wikipedia get blocked for a few weeks.
If you want to minimize the problem (it will never go away completely) then you have to go after the people who create real CP. They are the ones who actually harm the children and deserve to be punished. Going after Art and photos that are clearly not meant to be pornographic does nothing but harm this "crusade". | |
|
|  A1Premium
join:2005-08-28
PA | The pic has been removed from Amazon. | |
|
| | Hideously inaccurate summary The summary is wrong.
The six ISPs are directing all traffic to Wikipedia to pass through their special proxy servers and apply a secret blacklist.
The effect of this is that vandals and non-vandals appear to be editing Wikipedia from the same IP address. Everyone gets blocked from editing. There is no restriction on viewing except that applied by the proxies. They block the virgin killer article, and the album artwork image page. No other blocked pages have been discovered yet.
Around 60 ISPs are publicly listed on the IWF site as being involved with them. | |
|
| | Six UK ISPs Block Access To Wikipedia sighhhhhhh.......I am truly starting to believe that the Earth really is the "Insane Asylem of the Universe." | |
|
| PiggieI Actually use WindstreamPremium
join:2005-11-23
Orange Springs, FL Reviews:
·Windstream
·HughesNet Satell..
1 edit | Re: Six UK ISPs Block Access To Wikipedia said by AncientAnon :sighhhhhhh.......I am truly starting to believe that the Earth really is the "Insane Asylem of the Universe." I believed that for a long long time. Look at list of all the examples. No that would waste blogging space of others.
--
| Speedstream 4200 Modem - 3m/384 plan | W98-W2KSP4-XPSP2 - All AMD | Buffalo WHR G54S with Tomato 1.18 | 3 downstream switches feeding 6 total clients (no wireless) | Including the Data port on the side of my neck | | |
|
| | Is that what you call child-porn? Someone needs to have eye glasses or someone needs a new brain.
--
Study hard. Play harder. Girls hardest! | |
|
 heat84Bit Torrent Apologist
join:2004-03-11
Fort Lauderdale, FL | ------------------------------------------------------------ What about the cover of Nirvana's "Nevermind"? | |
|
| | | Re: ------------------------------------------------------------ I was thinking the same thing and was wondering why it hadn't been brought up before. | |
|
| milnoc
join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:1 | said by heat84:What about the cover of Nirvana's "Nevermind"? Or Van Halen's Balance. That one is downright creepy! | |
|
| | Everyone is missing the big issue Is NO ONE CONERNCED THE GOVERMENT IS MONITORING YOUR BROWSING HABITS?
There would be serious privacy issues with this in the US. I guess people in the UK and elsewhere don't mind their goverment and private entities deciding what they are allowed to see.
I wonder how this is any different than what China does with their great firewall. | |
|
|
| | | Re: Check out the pageview numbers! More like epic fail. | |
|
 ctceoPremium
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN
 ·magicjack.com
·AT&T U-Verse
| Posession I had that album. The controversial one at that. My friend took it and vanished, never heard from him after that. I tried to get it back cause I knew it was going to have rarity value when they re-released it with the "replacement cover".
--
Does it frustrate you that you have to view ad's when you don't want to? Well guess what those ads could count against your monthly cap, EVERY time they're displayed & not cached. SEE PETITION: »www.ipetitions.com/petition/PMDBI/ | |
|
| | not *all* access... only ANONYMOUS edits to wikipedia are being blocked. viewing wikipedia and making edits using a user account are still possible for users on those ISPs. RTFA
should the image be blocked. maybe. maybe not. but your headline and lede are incorrect and inflammatory. i'd accuse you of trolling for pageviews if i didnt know bette.r | |
|
|
|
