The Last Hurrah

You want a more current "no"?

Yes.

So you DO agree that those who want the Sports Forum should reapply every three months or so?

 

I don't see a need for a sports forum. It's not like it's verboten to talk about sports in the JCC.

 

"No, I wouldn't--because pot is against the law and I could be arrested for allowing it to be grown on my property (and pot isn't against my personal beliefs, but I wouldn't allow it for this reason). No one is going to arrest Josh if he allows slash here."

Not the point of the question. What if the boarder did something personally offensive to you in this room? To what extent would you allow it? Is it "devil may care", or would you draw the line somewhere, which is exactly what Josh did, right or wrong.

Besides, it's been made clear that Lucasfilm does not allow for this type of material, so rather than Josh being "arrested", the boards could be shut down, so your analogy does apply. Is Freedom of Speech to post a story of two same-gendered SW characters worth losing the boards as a whole? Would it make more sense to post them at a board that Lucasfilm would be more likely to overlook?

"Not really, because it's about freedom. The rights of those who write homosexual fan fiction to post here are being violated in favor of those who don't want to read it."

Such is life, a-g. Not all rights can co-exist. Besides, this is just like a restaurant posting a sign saying "no shoes, no shirt, no service". Private establishments can impose such rules to maintain a desired level of decorum. The choice you have is to abide by those rules when doing service there, or find a place that caters to your needs. Are you going to start rallying against establishments that require certain articles of clothing because they infringe on your rights?

"However, should I violate the rights (privileges, whatever you want to call it) to post here of those who do like it? No."

And let me borrow your statement for a moment...

However, should I violate the rights (privileges, whatever you want to call it) to post here of those who don't like it? No.

Agreed. You should not violate the rights of Josh, the owner of this board, to post here. He has them as well, you know.

"If there were no way to change policy, however, this Coms forum wouldn't exist."

The fact that this forum exists for this very purpose doesn't mean it will always succeed.

"My question is, how often would you be falling back on the "It's Josh's site" argument if his beliefs didn't appear to mesh with your own personal ones?"

If it weren't for the fact that 1) Josh doesn't want it on his boards, and 2) Lucasfilm could shut the boards down, there really is no reason not to have slasher fic other than personal morality. Nonetheless, those two reasons are pretty significant in and of themselves, so our personal opinions for or against this issue have little bearing.

"Curious as of yet Josh hasn't joined this debate. If he wants to state the reason he won't allow same sex fiction is his own religious convictions, I will support him on this 100%"

Probably because he hasn't changed his mind, as is his right. I wonder if Liz or a-g would be as inclined to change their mind as they apparently expect Josh to be? My guess would be "no".

"You're calling 18 year olds children? yes, but, honestly, a raise of hands. Who here was a child when they were a teenager?"

No. I'm asking why, if we are not protecting children, do we not allow them to operate motor vehicles, or buy/consume alcohol, or have sex. You're ignoring the question. Do you not draw an arbitrary line somewhere, or should children be allowed to do whatever they want, regardless of the danger?

Please don't take this as a personal attack, but you mentioned your parents and the manner in which they raised you. Was this somewhere along the lines of what you complained about? If not, don't answer. Unless it's relevant, I don't expect an answer (as is your right as much as Josh's)

" ...as he lies with a woman, yes. Which, technically, is impossible, and does not exclude masterbation and blowjobs.

 

"...as he lies with a woman, yes. Which, technically, is impossible, and does not exclude masterbation and blowjobs."

CHILDREN'S FILM. CHILDREN'S FILM. CHILDREN'S FILM. CHILDREN'S FILM. CHILDREN'S FILM. CHILDREN'S FILM. CHILDREN'S FILM. CHILDREN'S FILM. CHILDREN'S FILM. CHILDREN'S FILM. CHILDREN'S FILM. CHILDREN'S FILM.

UKS

 

So you DO agree that those who want the Sports Forum should reapply every three months or so?

If they really care about the Sports forum all that much...*shrugs* why not?

Aunecah

 

Another thing I will point out. Liz has apparently exhausted all avenues (more than once), and chose to create this thread in an attempt to minimalize Josh's stance and embarrass him into changing his mind in her favor. While I understand her frustration, I fail to see how your efforts will accomplish anything more than make Josh dig his heels in even more, assuming he's even bothering to read this thread.

Actually, I'm trying to ask that he not ignore me again. It's honestly not my fault this thread is 375 posts. I want an answer from Josh with his reasons.

 

On that small side issue, the sports forum has been shot down repeatedly and no admin or site owner has left even a glimpse of hope for its existence. "Slash" (and I really do hate that word, using it will only hurt the cause) has been given a ray of hope in the form of the petition, which is the reason this debate still exists.

 

I want Pamela Anderson. "Want" doesn't "Get".

UKS

 

Liz...
"Having to accept that the Solo kids got kidnapped every second day does."

Well, because the Solo kids don't get kidnapped every second day this isn't something that hurts you, then.

"I want an answer from Josh with his reasons."

Homophobia in the JC:

"I'm definitely not a relgious fundamentalist. Wow, anyone who actually knows me would know that is quite far from the truth.

Obviously, you do not.

A member wrote this once and I love whey they said:
'It's a highly controversial topic and there are a large number of parents out there who do not want their children to be exposed to anything that depicts homosexual lifestyles...

Yet it still angers some parents and powerful political groups. So instead of opening themselves up to hate mail, criticism, and boycotts of their own, the TF.N staff/owners has decided to make a call that avoids all that. They have no obligation to break down any walls of prejudice against slash fiction OR help reduce bias against homosexuals. SW doesn't depict any homosexual relationships, but no one is accusing GL of declaring homosexuality wrong by that omission. They have every right to dictate what they will allow on their site and message boards. They aren't stating their opinion about gays and lesbians with this policy, they are avoiding conflict.
Josh"

 

If they're trying to avoid conflict, they're not doing a very good job, considering the periodic arguements on the subject.

 

"Actually, I'm trying to ask that he not ignore me again. It's honestly not my fault this thread is 375 posts. I want an answer from Josh with his reasons."

You've had multiple answers, all the same. You keep hoping for the crack in the dam, and pray in your heart of hearts that the next answer will be yes. While it's certainly within your rights to hope for this, doing so makes as much sense as adding such forums to these boards.

"If they're trying to avoid conflict, they're not doing a very good job, considering the periodic arguements on the subject."

Ah, someone apparently has the answer to solve all conflicts. Wonderful.

Unnecessary.

 

"If they're trying to avoid conflict, they're not doing a very good job, considering the periodic arguements on the subject."

From the same three members.

Hardly a groundswell of opinion.

UKS

 

Go back to the SC, trolly.

 

Is that one of your examples of how to solve this conflict? ?

I remain unimpressed.

 

I don't see a need for a sports forum. It's not like it's verboten to talk about sports in the JCC.

It's clearly not verboten to talk about slash either. Since... wait for it... that's what we're doing right now!

Nor is it forbidden to talk about being gay yourself (that I am aware of).

Currently the only thing that is disallowed is writing fictional GLBT characters in Fan Fiction on this site.

And, more to the point, your first sentence is what dooms this movement. Josh doesn't see the need for slash.

 

Just a question.
Could the way they have 3NS now set up be something that might work for this situation?

 

Could the way they have 3NS now set up be something that might work for this situation

Except that such a setup is beside the point.

If TFN doesn't want Slash on the site, it doesn't matter what kind of setup is proposed for it.

If it does allow it, then we could think about setting stuff up for it.

 

Bane...
Certainly. But, then that involves an issue that 3NS does not have. Namely, that Josh now has to host "protected" or "alternative content" which may not be what his model user is interested in. Being a site devoted to Star Wars, a forum protected solely for the reason as an anti-troll measure devoted to the next and final Star Wars movie is presumably reasonable content.

A protected/private slash forum would not protected for the same reason. And it's that reason which is central to his even allowing it to begin with.

But, of course anyone should feel free to go set up a site do it, as it probably is at least "a solution," regardless of whether it's a good one or not.

 

It's clearly not verboten to talk about slash either.

You're allowed to link to the NCAA website. You aren't allowed to link to the Very Secret Diaries.

 

You're allowed to link to the NCAA website. You aren't allowed to link to the Very Secret Diaries.

You aren't allowed to link to SomethingAwful either. Nor FARK (I think that's still on the verboten list).

What's the difference?

EDIT: On second thought, the question isn't "what's the difference" but "what's the point?" Do you want to LINK to slash or POST slash? If the former, we should lock this thread and start a new one. If the latter, why do you care about linking?

 

Because the Secret Diaries are PG?





Do you want to LINK to slash or POST slash? If the former, we should lock this thread and start a new one. If the latter, why do you care about linking?

The. Point. Of. This. Thread. Is. To. Get. Josh's. Reasons. For. Not. Allowing. Slash. Period.

 

Don't play dumb, Purple. The VSD's aren't riddled with profanity ala SA.

And linking to slash and posting slash are related.

 

Don't play dumb, Purple. The VSD's aren't riddled with profanity ala SA.

As far as I know, you can't link to Victoria's Secret either, which is neither profane nor nude and PG-rated to boot.

Better example?

EDIT: And linking to slash and posting slash are related.

So, linking to articles on murder and committing murder are the same thing? (No, slash != murder, but that's the same type of insane troll logic that your example would consider)

 

Don't play dumb, SoK. Profanity isn't the only problem, since slash apparently doesn't require it.

 

Victoria's Secret is PG? ?



Still not king.