censorship

[TheCalliton]

Hey gang, in another topic censorship was mentioned

i figured i would give my opinion and ask yours

if it gets out of hand, im gonna pm the closed staff member, even blackbaron if i have to

 

 

I myself see censorship as wrong. If some guy wants to stare at... lady parts... let him! it may not be morally right, but it is the right of the person. Let the gore be there! let people swear! if they dont want it, they will avoid it!

[Quetzlsacatanango]

Censorship by the government is wrong, mainly because you don't get to choose which country and government you are born into.

Censorship by a private individual, such as the owner of the Nexus, of content on his own property, such as servers and domains and whatnot, is part of the deal that you agree to when you sign up.

[TheCalliton]

i just think censorship is wrong when done by others

i understand censoring a little bit for being nice and polite

[WastelandAssassin]

well, i would say that this is depending on your point of view

i mean, if you believe that all people are good at heart, than censorship is just a violation of the freedom of speech, because it blocks you from sharing your opinion (it could be just because others don't think the same way, not that your opinion is something horrible or against the law or something)

but if you believe that people are bad at heart, censorship has it's uses, as it prevents flaming, insulting, and advertising of racism, or other such ideals (ideals that may offend others)

than again, no matter what you may say, there is a chance that someone will be offended

so it's really hard to create limits that really make sense

 

i do agree with Quetzl, about the fact that if the censorship is done by someone for his personal property (like his website or something like this) than it is perfectly acceptable

 

i think that this term is another idea that could have been brilliant, but the implementation is very lacking (probably a big understatement)

Edited December 23, 2010 by WastelandAssassin

[Dark0ne]

Take the old house analogy.

 

You have a house. That house and the contents within are your own that you pay a mortgage for each month. If a guest comes in to your house and moves all your belongings, maybe steals them, writes on your walls, takes a dump in the toilet and doesn't flush (or doesn't even get it in the basin), screams out expletives, talks about subjects you have no interest in and plays music you dislike despite being asked not to would you protest and act off of these wrong-doings or would you say the person has free-will and should be allowed to act on it?

 

There is a right answer in that hypothetical question.

[Balagor]

Take the old house analogy.

 

You have a house. That house and the contents within are your own that you pay a mortgage for each month. If a guest comes in to your house and moves all your belongings, maybe steals them, writes on your walls, takes a dump in the toilet and doesn't flush (or doesn't even get it in the basin), screams out expletives, talks about subjects you have no interest in and plays music you dislike despite being asked not to would you protest and act off of these wrong-doings or would you say the person has free-will and should be allowed to act on it?

 

There is a right answer in that hypothetical question.

 

Isn´t there a difference between action and f. examp. reading and watching and speaking?

In the incident you speak about @DO I would kick them all out. But were they only to have a different opinion than mine, they could stay............for a debate :tongue::)

[Quetzlsacatanango]

I don't think anyone is getting banned for disagreeing as long as it is done in a civilized way.

 

I have disagreed with D0 a couple times and let him know it via the proper channels (mostly :whistling: ) and I am still here.

[Keanumoreira]

Censorship is both right and wrong, but IMAO, only to be used for defending the rights of children.

 

I certainly wouldn't want my child to be exposed to those things they protray on the internet, but for those who otherwise wouldn't find it disturbing, say an adult, then why hide it? Like TheCalliton said, it is the right of an individual to explore what entertains them, and if nudity, cursing, and gore is what they seek, then it is what they seek.

Edited December 23, 2010 by Keanumoreira

[marharth]

I don't know, I think the term "children" is a bit over used.

 

In California you pretty much turn 18 and the government magically makes you a adult, that's not how it is.

 

Maturity is different for a lot of people at a lot of different ages. At the age of around 13-17 you should know everything that's being censored already. Censoring some stuff is OK for young kids, but for teenagers they already know everything anyways.

 

I don't think the FCC should event exist, and I think that censorship is the job of the parent, not the job of the government.

 

If you don't want your kid watching someone getting gutted out by a serial killer, block the channel or tell them to not watch it. If they get around the block and watch it anyways and keep doing it, I would say trying to censor them would be useless

 

Censorship by the government should never be done. Its not the job of the government, its the job of a parent.

[BlackBaron2]

I don't know, I think the term "children" is a bit over used.

 

In California you pretty much turn 18 and the government magically makes you a adult, that's not how it is.

 

Maturity is different for a lot of people at a lot of different ages. At the age of around 13-17 you should know everything that's being censored already. Censoring some stuff is OK for young kids, but for teenagers they already know everything anyways.

 

I don't think the FCC should event exist, and I think that censorship is the job of the parent, not the job of the government.

 

If you don't want your kid watching someone getting gutted out by a serial killer, block the channel or tell them to not watch it. If they get around the block and watch it anyways and keep doing it, I would say trying to censor them would be useless

 

Censorship by the government should never be done. Its not the job of the government, its the job of a parent.

 

I agree. It's not up to the government, or people's ISPs, to block porn and other types of adult-only content. Parents can (and should) be educated on how to use filter software if they're worried about their children accessing inappropriate sites.

 

On the topic of privately-owned websites: it's up to the site owner to decide what content they will and won't allow, because it's their private property for them to use as they want to.