Is SciForums a 'front' for paedophiles?

Judge for yourself:

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=62910&page=3

It should be noted that the moderators on this forum have added to the thread but not taken action to remove these images.

Is SciForums a 'front' for paedophiles?

Judge for yourself:

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=62910&page=3

It should be noted that the moderators on this forum have added to the thread but not taken action to remove these images.
i can't find any objectionable images in the mentioned thread.

i can't find any objectionable images in the mentioned thread.

Not the man's hand on the child's thigh?

Well that says enough about your judgement!

Not the man's hand on the child's thigh?

Well that says enough about your judgement!

You don't know Devil, he was making a joke
manboy=man+boy.

I complained to the moderators on the same forum about sexually-comments personally directed towards a poster...
...no action taken.

These are the same mods that are supposedly vetting the forum for paedophile activity and images.

This is disgraceful!

You don't know Devil, he was making a joke
manboy=man+boy.

So you think paedophilia is something that can treated like a joke, Sam?

Obviously you haven't been abused!

So you think paedophilia is something that can treated like a joke, Sam?

Obviously you haven't been abused!

A manboy is not a child.:rolleyes:

Don't be such a douche bag.

You don't know Devil, he was making a joke
manboy=man+boy.

well lordy me!
having been abused myself as a child, i resent your allegations.

an immediate apology would be nice.

edit: not you, sam....the "up in arms" guy that is upset that he is the butt of a long running joke in that same thread.

well lordy me!
having been abused myself as a child, i resent your allegations.

an immediate apology would be nice.

Apparently my obfuscatory abilities are still intact. *sigh*

edit: Praise the Lord!

edit again: audacious to complain about a thread he started, doncha think?

uh oh! better watch out!
mary molested jesus!
http://www.womanthouartgod.com/images/marywithjesus4.jpg
ugh.

screw that clown. there is only one mod on this entire forum that would take disciplinary action against me for posting a picture of a man and a child sitting together, and he isnt the mod in charge of the particular subforum in question.

suck on an egg, stiffneck.

but seriously...to answer the initial question:
yes, we are all pedophiles.
every last one of us.
:rolleyes:

Is SciForums a 'front' for paedophiles?


Huh?

just nod, oniw.
just nod.

Don't be such a douche bag.

So you support the posting of these images then?

I joined this forum to discuss science.

then why did you start a thread asking what a manboy was?
get a clue, snapperhead.

A manboy is not a child.:rolleyes:

Really - then check out this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAMBLA

and the others posted in the thread.

Theres a distiction here - if you think my protest in invalid then consider what your support of these offences entails for children!

what's a snapperhead?

what's a snapperhead?

heeeel slim.
zoals urbanus.

heeeel slim.
zoals urbanus.

you are such a spuriousmonkey.

mischien....

meer een kinderriemer, als je zenbabelfish luisteren.

I complained to the moderators on the same forum about sexually-comments personally directed towards a poster...
...no action taken.

These are the same mods that are supposedly vetting the forum for paedophile activity and images.

This is disgraceful!

screw that clown. there is only one mod on this entire forum that would take disciplinary action against me for posting a picture of a man and a child sitting together, and he isnt the mod in charge of the particular subforum in question.

suck on an egg, stiffneck.

Which mod?

The mans hand on the childs thigh in the context of the thread obviously makes this paedophile content which is illegal.

actually, the photo was selected for the ugly middle aged man...in contrast to the subject of the thread. it was a joke, aimed toward genji.

interestingly, most people that see things like this in innocuous situations are more likely to commit the atrocities you are accusing us of.

go away, troll. we have enough of your kind around here.

shoo!

It had always been my greatest wish to Destroy, Erase, Improve the devil inside because he insulted my mother.

bring it, sucka.
she didnt insult me, thats for sure.
maybe if she were a bit more lively in the sack, i wouldnt have insulted her.
:p

Well, she is not that young anymore!

Well, she is not that young anymore!

yeah, maybe if she werent 100 years old, i would have enjoyed it more.
still...she can shake her thaaaang!!

someone make a nice thread. I'm bored.

im making dinner soon..so i wont be around till tomorrow.

Yes, it must be a front. A single vaguely suggestive image, which might be the kid and his father or grandfather for all you know, makes it a front for paedophilia. Shut down sciforums immediately.

im making dinner soon..so i wont be around till tomorrow.

I'm going home. Been cutting sections all day and they were mostly shit.

Yes, it must be a front. A single vaguely suggestive image, which might be the kid and his father or grandfather for all you know, makes it a front for paedophilia. Shut down sciforums immediately.

The image is bad enough on its own - the fact that it is still online is testament to the attitudes of the mods in question.

Do you think I was wrong in making it publically known that there a paedophile images being posted?

Do you think it is right that the mods have not removed the image and the poster is still free to post?

If your answer is Yes to the first and no to the second I suggest you go and discuss this with a professional.

did you report the post with the report button?

a man touching a child's leg in an obviously open, genial environment is not pedophilia.

what the fuck is wrong with you? did you not get enough hugs as a kid, or what? jesus christ.

did you report the post with the report button?

As a previous 'reports' of sexually-offensive comments directed to a poster in the same thread weren't acted on - I lacked any faith in the forum mods integrity and reported directly to the forum administrator.

Do you approve of these images?

i approve of them. they are innocent pictures, not portraying anything remotely pornographic.

if you dont like the forum, leave.
im sure we will all miss you.

As a previous 'reports' of sexually-offensive comments directed to a poster in the same thread weren't acted on - I lacked any faith in the forum mods integrity and reported directly to the forum administrator.

Do you approve of these images?

Wow. That picture wasn't the least bit sexual. It looked like that kid was the guy's son.

Give me a freaking break. Context and insinuation doesn't make child porn. It's when children are portrayed in a sexual act.

This is what Bells had to say in another forum regarding moderating:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=62911&page=2
Post #22

“If someone annoys you that much, be they a moderator or a member, just do not read their post. As soon as you see their name in a thread as you are reading through it, scroll past it. Simple really.

Putting anyone on ignore will not stop you from reading what they have said in people's quotes for example.

If a moderator makes a racist, sexist, hateful or illegal comment (considering this forum encompasses members from all over the world, I don't know how exactly we can classify something as being illegal.. in your country or theirs?.. ), PM a member of the admit (eg James R or Plazma Inferno) and report it. Or you can report it to another moderator who can then pass the message onto admin.”


This system obviously doesn’t work – I tried it: this is why I have raised this issue here – so that Sci Forum members who haven’t visited these threads are aware of their involvement in a forum that allows the posting of paedophile images.

Re: “If a moderator makes a racist, sexist, hateful or illegal comment (considering this forum encompasses members from all over the world, I don't know how exactly we can classify something as being illegal.. in your country or theirs?..” Bells #22

Paedophilia is paedophilia – Bells, are you suggesting that if paedophilia is legal in a particular country (and I challenge you to provide a list of countries where it is legal) then its OK to post paedophile images on the Sci Forum? This is what you appear to be saying…

I await your reply with interest – as I’m sure all decent people will.

Paedophilia is paedophilia –
Except you've shown no example of paedophilia.

Except you've shown no example of paedophilia.

Why show an image from the Sierra Adoption Agency (http://www.sierraadoption.org/) in a thread where paedophilia is being criticised, particularly as the mans hand is on the childs knee?

Except you've shown no example of paedophilia.

...so you approve of the image then Oniw17?

Why show an image from the Sierra Adoption Agency (http://www.sierraadoption.org/) in a thread where paedophilia is being criticised, particularly as the mans hand is on the childs knee?
I thought the topic of that thread was what a manboy is, which according to Genji has nothing to do with paedophilia?

...so you approve of the image then Oniw17?

...so you approve of the image then Oniw17?

Are you some kind of idiot? Yes, I approve of that image, there's nothing wrong with it. Oniw17 and sponsors approve this message

Are you some kind of idiot? Yes, I approve of that image, there's nothing wrong with it. Oniw17 and sponsors approve this message
You make think I'm an idiot...I'm reporting what is im opinion a paedophile image in the context of the thread.

Who are the sponsors? Have you asked them if they think these images (and sexually-offensive directed at posters) is OK?

List the sponsors here and let them and the public decide if this has been correctly moderated...I've only seen the comments of a very small representation of membership.

If you are confident to approve these images and you criticise my viewpoint then start a public poll...
...in the meantime who are the sponsors?

The picture is from an adoption site!

http://www.sierraadoption.org/images/man_boy_4.jpg

http://www.sierraadoption.org/

This is in no way pedophilia.

Oops. I should read threads before I respond. :(

To clarify matters I started a thread entitled: What does the term ''manboy' mean? - as Athelwulf the moderator would not explain the term when he used it in this thread:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=62830&page=2

As a previous 'reports' of sexually-offensive comments directed to a poster in the same thread weren't acted on - I lacked any faith in the forum mods integrity and reported directly to the forum administrator.

Do you approve of these images?

Doesn't really matter if I approve or not. I am not a mod of that forum.

Best course of action is indeed then to contact the admin.

The picture is from an adoption site!

http://www.sierraadoption.org/images/man_boy_4.jpg

http://www.sierraadoption.org/

This is in no way pedophilia.

It could be considered as such in the context of the thread; also, in my opinion, the man has his hand on a particularly sensitive area of the childs body for the photograph to be used in the context of the thread.

What I object to is the posting - I'm not suggesting anything about the Sierra Adoption Agency - on face value they appear to be a bona fide organisation and I'm sure this is so -although in my opinion any photograph of an adult man with his hand near a boys crotch could be misinterpreted by paedophiles or adults wishing to protect children.

What I object to is the fact the 'Devil' has used it in the context of a thread about the term 'manboy' which specifically discusses paedophilia.

'Devils' actions have not only given the impression that SciForums tolerate this but it could be interpreted as some as devaluing adoption.


Why not put it to a public poll if you approve of these images in the context of the thread, Athenwulf?

Also, who are the sponsors and what is their opinion?

NOTE: In order for it to OP to be consistent, in that SciForums is being used as a 'front' for paedophiles, it would have to be shown that the one incident I have objected to is not unique. I can't be bothered with filtering through all lot of trash that is the antithesis of sciencific morality.
Is anyone aware of other similar circumstances? If not then the OP is false, and SciForums is not being used as a 'front' by paedophiles.

However my original complaint still stands and the images are still online in the context of the thread at this time (as are the sexually-offensive comments made to me and also complained about).

NOTE: In order for it to OP to be consistent, in that SciForums is being used as a 'front' for paedophiles, it would have to be shown that the one incident I have objected to is not unique. I can't be bothered with filtering through all lot of trash that is the antithesis of sciencific morality.
Is anyone aware of other similar circumstances? If not then the OP is false, and SciForums is not being used as a 'front' by paedophiles.

However my original complaint still stands and the images are still online in the context of the thread at this time (as are the sexually-offensive comments made to me and also complained about).

are you being antagonistic for the sake of it or are you really being serious? come on, i you knew devil you would no that posting child porn would be his last intention. my advice is to stop creating a shit storm and post in science forums, seing as that is what you came here to do, and stop meddling

are you being antagonistic for the sake of it or are you really being serious? come on, i you knew devil you would no that posting child porn would be his last intention. my advice is to stop creating a shit storm and post in science forums, seing as that is what you came here to do, and stop meddling

There are 20,328 members of Sci Forums...we've heard from just 10 in this thread (including 2 of the people I complained about)

Why not put it to a public vote as to whether the images are suitable for SciForums?

do so, no-one stopping you

do so, no-one stopping you
You may think I am being antagonistic but consider the circumstances from my perspective: The forums are archived and publically-accessible...as there is no visible record of my complaint - it might appear that I approve of the picture in the context of the thread. I don't...and neither, I think, will people who want to be teachers, doctors, public officals, or any occupation where security checks are made. However my primary instinct is that this is wrong -full stop.
I'm already convinced - if you object to my viewpoint then you start the public poll...

No, it's not suggestive at all. Here's a couple more.


http://img01.picoodle.com/img/img01/7/2/8/f_dadson5m_b37645e.jpg (http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?srv=img01&img=/7/2/8/f_dadson5m_b37645e.jpg)

http://img01.picoodle.com/img/img01/7/2/8/f_dadson3m_ad66ee2.jpg (http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?srv=img01&img=/7/2/8/f_dadson3m_ad66ee2.jpg)

and it must also make most fathers PEDOPHILES (note the spelling) for holding their children

Someone should start a thread on 'Is sciforums a 'front' for gay people?'

Someone should start a thread on 'Is sciforums a 'front' for gay people?'

Tada.

NOTE: In order for it to OP to be consistent, in that SciForums is being used as a 'front' for paedophiles, it would have to be shown that the one incident I have objected to is not unique. I can't be bothered with filtering through all lot of trash that is the antithesis of sciencific morality.
Is anyone aware of other similar circumstances? If not then the OP is false, and SciForums is not being used as a 'front' by paedophiles.
Hell no. You make an allegation, you have to find proof. Find a single image of paedophilia on SciForums posted before this day 8th of February 2007, and I will adopt a child after I've fathered a son.

This forum has freedom of speech at levels some people can't stand. I haven't seen any sanction for saying something. I don't visit here so often but, from what I see in my short visits I didn't see any cencorship which I see often on other forums.

Hello everyone!

Geez what a mess! This is all manboy's fault! I say let's shoot him!

Put a joke aside.

zenbabelfish:

Man, what's wrong? Why you're so furious?
You constantly seek reasons for confrontation with other members and persistently point your finger on something which is obviously far from the truth you strive to show to us.

What's wrong with that picture?
I don't see anything wrong there. I see only love among father and his son, real or adopted, I can't tell. But nothing that could be linked with pedophilia.

I'm sorry if I'm indiscrete, but do you have parents? Did they ever hug you to show you their love?

Or, how do you show your kids that you love them? If you have kids of course.
With brief hair pat wearing rubber gloves or you are waving from the distance?

Also, Devil found this picture when he typed 'manboy' in browser. That led him to this picture, which name is actually 'man_boy' which means man and boy.

If you better look at the picture, you'll notice that little boy also hugs that man (his father I presume).

I think that nothing's wrong with that picture.
So, stop with silly accusations please!

Please post your little avatar pic. it looks interesting but is way to small to even appreciate.:bugeye:

I complained to the moderators on the same forum about sexually-comments personally directed towards a poster...
...no action taken.

i read the post in question and found it to be no worse than anything else in that thread. if you are easily offended by topics of a sexual nature then dont read such threads.

The image is bad enough on its own - the fact that it is still online is testament to the attitudes of the mods in question.
How is the image bad?

So if the man is the child's father (and judging by the resemblance in the photo, I would imagine a relation of some sort) and he places his hand on the child's thigh, he is a paedophile? So if I posted an image of my butt naked 16 month old standing up on my husband's shoulder, my husband will be branded a paedophile? Don't you think a father should ever show affection to their son at all?

Do you think I was wrong in making it publically known that there a paedophile images being posted?
How do YOU know the image is that of a paedophile?

Do you have proof of this?

Do you think it is right that the mods have not removed the image and the poster is still free to post?
Why should the image be removed and the poster stopped from posting? You have given no proof that the image is that of a paedophile and a victim. Do so and action shall be taken immediately.


If your answer is Yes to the first and no to the second I suggest you go and discuss this with a professional.
Maybe YOU need to see a professional if every image you see of a man and child automatically makes you scream "paedophile".

Paedophilia is paedophilia – Bells, are you suggesting that if paedophilia is legal in a particular country (and I challenge you to provide a list of countries where it is legal) then its OK to post paedophile images on the Sci Forum? This is what you appear to be saying…
Are you for real?

There is NOTHING to indicate the man in the image is a paedophile and the child his sexual victim. It looks like a father and son taking a photo.

Do you have proof that the man in the photo is a paedophile? Do you have proof that this image was taken from a website frequented or run by paedophiles?

The image was taken from an adoption site. Do you have proof that this site is one frequented by paedophiles and supports paedophilia? After all, if the image is taken from there and you are accusing US of supporting paedophilia, you are also accusing this adoption agency of supporting or aiding paedophiles by association. I would be very careful here Zen. The legal implications of what you are saying about this adoption agency could get YOU into a lot of trouble.

What I object to is the posting - I'm not suggesting anything about the Sierra Adoption Agency - on face value they appear to be a bona fide organisation and I'm sure this is so -although in my opinion any photograph of an adult man with his hand near a boys crotch could be misinterpreted by paedophiles or adults wishing to protect children.

What I object to is the fact the 'Devil' has used it in the context of a thread about the term 'manboy' which specifically discusses paedophilia.
No? You have been saying we support paedophilia by allowing an image of a man with his hand on the thigh of a boy, saying it is paedophilic in nature, when said image comes from the site of an adoption agency. The man's hand is on the child's knee. Seriously, if you think a father touching his child's knee makes him a paedophile or that the image of a father doing such is paedophilic in nature, you have some serious issues. Hell, imagine if the image had been of a father giving his kid a bath. What would you have done then?

Does the term 'manboy' discuss paedophilia? From what I could see, it basically means a man who looks like a teen. Same as the term 'womanchild' would denote a woman who looks like a young girl. Nothing paedophilic about it. And if I recall correctly, YOU have been the one obsessed with the definition of the therm 'manboy', so much so that you appear to have taken to stalking a member and moderator to get them define it for you. YOU started the thread in question.

The context in which Devil posted it was in 'manboy'.. as in here is a picture of a 'man' and a 'boy'. That you failed to recognise that astounds me. What astounds me more is how you see a photo of a father and son, taken from an adoption site, and accuse the man of being a paedophile and this forum of accepting and supporting paedophilic behaviour.

LOL!! Manboy is a slang term used by heteros AND homos. Pervert zenbabelfish thinks about sex with kids!! What a sicko.

I think you've drastically over-reacted, zenbabelfish.

It certainly seems the moderators and administrators are in agreement that the particular image you are complaining about is harmless.

Don't be such a douche bag.

Amen, bro.
I'd give him an infraction for being such a douche bag, if someone hadn't took away my powers to mete out infractions. :bugeye:

Definetely reeks of vinegar and water in here. And from just one person. The force is powerful in this one.

So you support the posting of these images then?

Yes.
Now, shut up.

It is insulting.:mad:

I like how he makes the accusation and then disappears. Typical.:mad:

I mean who in the hell looks at an image of a father and child, from an adoption site no less, and says it reeks of paedophilia because the guy has his hand on his child's knee and then accuses this site and the adoption agency (by mere association) of being a front for paedophilia?

It is insulting.:mad:

I like how he makes the accusation and then disappears. Typical.:mad:

I mean who in the hell looks at an image of a father and child, from an adoption site no less, and says it reeks of paedophilia because the guy has his hand on his child's knee and then accuses this site and the adoption agency (by mere association) of being a front for paedophilia?I think he was turned on by the innocent picture and needed to vent at others. He's probably humping a teddy bear right now.

OK, I'll defend him. A bit.

First of all (and this is my strongest argument)... he doesn't seem like a bad lad.

Second, this is easy for a new member to misinterpret, in the context of the 'offending' thread:
Can we please have more manboy pictures?
here ya go, bud.

http://www.sierraadoption.org/images/man_boy_4.jpg

damnit...im just not good at anything!!
I mean, he shouldn't have gone and got his knickers all tangled up like that but we all make mistakes, don't we? He wasn't to know that TheDevilInside has got a keeerrrrrrrr-rrrrrazy sense of humour and was just being his devilish self, now, was he? I mean, come on now.

Thirdly:
and then accuses this site and the adoption agency (by mere association) of being a front for paedophilia?
Well, yes - he has cast aspersions on our previously unsullied reputation, and I'm sure he's very, very sorry. But he didn't quite say the same about the adoption agency, did he? I mean, come on now..
What I object to is the posting - I'm not suggesting anything about the Sierra Adoption Agency - on face value they appear to be a bona fide organisation and I'm sure this is so -although in my opinion any photograph of an adult man with his hand near a boys crotch could be misinterpreted by paedophiles or adults wishing to protect children.
And now he's gone and got all huffy because everyone is shouting at him and picking on him just because he doesn't like little boys and we all do. I'm sure he'll come back and apologise now, having realised the enormous error of his ways, and then that'll be the end of that.

zenbabelfish: you've got it horribly wrong. Come out of the corner, throw in the towel and say you're very, very sorry.

Everyone else: shut up.

That is all.

no way.
you shut up.
ha! you got served!

http://www.norelpref.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/therifleman.jpg

Aw, look at that cute little kid holding that big... erm, big... now, wait a cotton-pickin' minute!!!

Always worth reposting, that one.

have any of you ever noticed that americans have their own selective breeding based on appearance? that cowboy and little boy above reminded me of this....

they look uber american, regardless of their outfits. we just dont look like europeans anymore.

we just dont look like europeans anymore.

I think I might vaguely look German. I have fairly recent German blood in my family. A grandma, some great-grandparents I think... And my last name is Dutch.

And my last name is Dutch.

Athelwulf Dutch...cool name. You sound like a gangster.

I miss Athelwulfs old avatar.

I think I might vaguely look German. I have fairly recent German blood in my family. A grandma, some great-grandparents I think... And my last name is Dutch.

i dunno about the dutch, but the belgians HATE germans.

i dunno about the dutch, but the belgians HATE germans.


The Dutch hate germans and pity belgians.

appropriately.

Retarded Dutch love the US. Smart Dutch people leave the country.

Zen: if you see "child porn" in that picture, I really think you should have a closer look at the way you think... its a little disturbing to know people who think such things..

Retarded Dutch love the US. Smart Dutch people leave the country.

and go to america?

and go to america?

Or the USA even!

Athelwulf Dutch...cool name. You sound like a gangster.

That's nice. :D

I miss Athelwulfs old avatar.

Haha. Thanks. But I kinda got tired of that eagle. I needed a change.

i dunno about the dutch, but the belgians HATE germans.

Why?

Retarded Dutch love the US. Smart Dutch people leave the country.

What's wrong with the Netherlands? It's such a deliciously liberal place. I would feel at home there, I think.

What's wrong with the Netherlands? It's such a deliciously liberal place. I would feel at home there, I think.

TDI knows why.

See the video in post 70
http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=62943

Broadcast on national TV. One of the most popular comedy shows in recent years. Sinterklaas (santaclaus) played by one of the most popular 'cabaretiers' (some sort of stand-up comedians). That's what the Netherlands is really about.

Why?





belgium exists because of the germans, the dutch, the french, and the spanish....for a thousand years, they couldnt live harmoniously with eachother, and the flemish were sitting in the middle.

"schild of vriend?" for example, is a saying here in belgium. it means "shield or friend?". this is a result of the flemish tongue being extremely hard for outsiders to speak correctly..frenchmen arent able to make the "sch" sound easily, and it gave flemish militia a way to identify foreigners and murder them. basically the same with germans, dutch, spanish, etc......

the flemish have been fucked by the germans so many times, its hard to count....thats why they hate them. i have a german friend that has a master's degree in economics, and her degree isnt valid here...because she is german. nobody will hire her....because she is german.

the flemish are dicks. i cant wait to get the hell out of here.

TDI knows why.


its a thousand times better than belgium. you know thats true.