How can a poster know what will be deemed as pornography?

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by Robittybob1, Oct 19, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    Netiquette

    Now those cover the rules for posting on the Forums. "5. Comments about other forum members that are derogatory, overtly sexual or which constitute harassment are unacceptable."

    So what does overtly mean?

    Trooper said to wegs once words to the effect "everyone wants to get into your pants" so was that overtly sexual, (and I think you were part of that conversation too), but nothing was done about it. I wouldn't have a clue how to find that post using the Search" function, but if we searched Trooper's posts it might come up.

    Rule 7 is interesting for it says "7. Sciforums specifically invites discussion of religion, politics and (to some extent) sex..." So it isn't strictly a science forum as people often say.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    rob,
    if you were my employee and you hit on a married woman the way you hit on bells i would fire you.
    the reason would be sexual harassment.

    the very fact that it is plain this sort of stuff is not really welcome here should say a lot about what your true motives are,
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    Well that could be true. I believe I followed that rule and examination of the PMs will either show it or not.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    Are you implying you have read our PMs.?

    Well I don't work for you so it is a silly example, and if you did do that, I'm sure you'd have to defend a charge of wrongful dismissal.

    How do you know who is married or not? There was a suggestion that we shouldn't even know the gender of the members!

    Now that you think you know my true motives tell the forum.
     
  8. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,112
    I construe a very selective memory.
     
  9. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    At this point, we're only feeding the troll. My suggestion is for the forum to ignore this assclown and wait for James to do the right thing and bounce his creepy ass for good.
     
  10. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    I suggested we should and someone else suggested the opposite.
    Oh there are many more PMs to read if that is what you mean.
     
  11. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    So you have fail to come up with a case. Yet you have the audacity to defame me!

    You can't be let of the requirement to prove your case against me? So are you admitting defeat?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtgJ5-OQiBY
     
  12. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    And do you guys treat me with the same degree of respect? I have yet to see it!
     
  13. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,112


    You've pretty much lost every argument you can make by allowing Bells to post a PM from you that mentions the Life on Mercury thread. It documents your character quite well.

    No Rob. No one wants to see how many lies you can make. You've made so many already you don't know where you've put them.

    Thanks.
     
  14. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    What your clubhouse?
     
  15. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    That is one of the weakest arguments I have ever seen on Sciforums. You wait until you have to argue against Balerion then you'll know you've met a match.
    But he shoots from the hip and didn't have the evidence under his belt. He is defeated this time.
     
  16. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,112
    Keep telling yourself that.

    Your only defense really would be wet brain.
     
  17. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    Sorry I forgot you were on "Ignore"!
     
  18. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,720
    I posted our PM's. You have nowhere to hide. You also can stop lying and trying to infer that I somehow invited it.

    In my response to you, I decidedly told you to stop posting that crap on this site as it was not acceptable. You response was to tell me what turns you on and then ask me whether it turned me on.

    Your country has a very good definition of sexual harassment:

    Sexual harassment is covered by both the Employment Relations Act and the Human Rights Act (section 62). Part 9 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 provides a definition of sexual harassment. The definition and various other provisions relating to sexual harassment are contained in sections 103, 109 and 117.

    Sexual harassment can include:

    personally sexually offensive verbal comments;
    sexual or smutty jokes;
    repeated comments or teasing about someone's alleged sexual activities or private life;
    persistent, unwelcome social invitations, telephone calls or emails from workmates at work or at home;
    following someone home from work;
    offensive hand or body gestures;
    unwelcome physical contact - e.g. patting, pinching, touching or putting an arm around another person's body;
    provocative visual material - e.g. posters of a sexual nature;
    hints or promises of preferential treatment in exchange for sex, or threats of differential treatment if sexual activity is not offered; and
    sexual assault and/or rape.




    Lets see..

    I tell you that you can't post this stuff on this site. I explain to you why. I tell you it is not welcomed and not acceptable.

    You respond by telling me what sexually arouses you and then you ask me if I get turned on by it.

    And even after how many pages of my telling you that it's not acceptable, you still don't get it and you actually respond with:

    You are a perverted troll.

    I posted the PM's you sent me and my response, in this thread. Have you seen anyone agree with you in this thread?

    Anyone at all?

    No. Because everyone here is flabbergasted that you just don't get it and we are all seeing the extent of your perverted nature and your dishonesty.

    Sexual harassment is a very serious charge. You deliberately choose to not understand or get the fact that what you constitute as flirting is sexual harassment. It was unwanted and remains unwanted. I had told you before why your comments were unacceptable. You sexually harassed many people on this site and you have stalked at least one that we know of. It was so bad for her, she had to cancel her PM's and you were banned. And you didn't learn your lesson. Instead of improving, you got worse.

    Do you think we don't talk to each other?

    I am 100% certain that no one here wants to read about your sexual dreams or sexual fantasies.

    I would say the 100% negative response from everyone who has responded here should be a good enough sample of what this moderator thinks of your sexual harassment and your threats to continue sexually harassing "a moderator" with documents explaining your sexual dreams.

    It isn't wanted.

    This has been said to you repeatedly.

    Your persistence and your continued threats to send such material to "a moderator" is sexual harassment.
     
  19. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,720
    Stop right there.

    Trying to infer or slyly imply that I somehow flirted with you or gave any hint to you that this was invited is dishonest and an outright lie. It was the complete opposite.

    God you're pathetic and disgusting.

    As my colleagues can attest. One of my biggest complaints of late is because you kept spamming me with PM's that I was sometimes forced to respond to and how much I thought you were a pervert and a creep.
     
  20. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    There's no "could be" true about it.

    Bells beat me to it (only because I was at work), but according to s62 of the Human Rights Act 1993:

    It shall be unlawful for any person (in the course of that person's involvement in any of the areas to which this subsection is applied by subsection (3)) by the use of language (whether written or spoken) of a sexual nature, or of visual material of a sexual nature, or by physical behaviour of a sexual nature, to subject any other person to behaviour that—

    · (a) is unwelcome or offensive to that person (whether or not that is conveyed to the first-mentioned person); and

    · (b) is either repeated, or of such a significant nature, that it has a detrimental effect on that person in respect of any of the areas

    So it doesn't even have to happen more than once to constitute sexual harrasement.
     
  21. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    Well, there goes that! haha.
     
  22. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,112
    Oh, and Rob, do you really think, rpenner, banned you because your thread was "not scientific," or did it have something to do with the post I made in it?

    If I really wanted to I could PM James, I guess.
     
  23. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    I do not not know why rpenner banned me on Physforums other than the reason he gave. You can talk to whoever you want to.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page