Op/Ed: Limits of Freedom of Speech: Reddit’s Child Pornography Problem

by PaleFire on 06/03/12 at 2:56 am

adult reddit

Several weeks ago, the popular message board Reddit announced that it was making a policy change to ban all "suggestive or sexual content featuring minors.” Owned by Advanced Publications, Reddit has made a name for itself in part by its hands-off, pro-free-speech, let-the-users-decide, and self-police approach. In fact, before the policy change, the only rules of the site were no spamming, no cheating, no personal info, nothing illegal, and no interfering with the site's functionality . Small wonder, then, that this decision brought about a dramatic reaction from the Reddit community, although one could argue that child-porn is illegal, so technically there has been no rule change. Be that as it may, some saw that this decision went against the very nature of Reddit, while others were completely on board with it. One user claimed passionately: "For better or for worse, Reddit has moved from a non-interventionist to a policing organization."

No doubt, Reddit’s hands-off policy towards the content posted on its site is markedly different than that of Facebook which is promoting a sanitized alternative to the darker corners of the Internet within its gated community. As exposed in ad nauseam in a recently leaked document called the Abuse Standard’s Violation, Facebook has banned a lot of content ranging from camel toes to women breastfeeding. Tarleton Gillespie rightfully contends that, through the arbitrary rules delineated in this document, Facebook is able to play the custodian and is ultimately the arbiter of public discourse. The fact that private corporations are able to assume the important role of determining, or helping to determine, what is acceptable as public speech is frightening, for sure. Mostly because, as Gillespie notes, sites like Facebook are relatively obscure about how they manage their custodial duties and they rather not draw attention to the presence of so much obscene content on their sites, so they regularly engage in censorship to expunge it.

This post, with the Reddit case, sets out to explore the other end of the spectrum.

To be sure, this difference lies in the fact that the two sites provide very different types of services and thus have very different user base, but what brings them together is our concern for freedom of speech on the Internet. This is a valid concern, but unfortunately, the concept itself has degenerated into a gimmick, a tagline of some sorts, used by the sincere and the criminal alike, used for different purposes, for sure, but used nonetheless.

In a manner of speaking, Reddit presents a test case for the possibilities of what freedom of speech could bring about. Users are able to open subreddits on the topics of their choice and they are able to vote a particular post up or down which, ultimately, earns the owner of a particular post “karma” points. It is an organized chaos, if you will, a veritable democracy, not unlike the boards of 4chan or Something Awful, and it turns out, it harbors a very dark side of the participatory web.

A cursory glance at the darker Reddits posted on the site, however, clarifies what appeared to be a dramatic change in policy that took effect several weeks ago. For the last couple of years, several scandals brought attention to some of the questionable content housed by the site. As diligently documented by various sites, in particular Gawker, Reddit users kept creating subsections that promote pedophilia and other content such as raping and battering of women, pictures of dead kids, killing black people (replace this euphemism with the "n" word) and/or women, “choking a bitch,” and other equally jaw dropping topics that make you feel like you are staring point blank at the heart of darkness as depicted by Joseph Conrad. The only thing that keeps the general public from accessing this juicy content is a cute little Reddit mascot that asks you if you are 18 and are willing to see adult content.

The pedophilia sections of Reddit were first brought to attention of the mainstream media back in October 2011 following Anderson Cooper’s detailed coverage of the darker side of these message boards. The Jailbait reddit was the home of more than 20,000 users who posted pictures of scantily-clad—but clothed nonetheless—teens—many of which were stolen from people's Facebook profiles.

In response to Cooper's prime time coverage, Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian defended Reddit's content claiming that Reddit doesn't host the material, but rather, that the website is merely a repository of links that go to other sites on the Internet, and as such, it functions like Twitter which also has links to such contents. Ohanian argued that, instead of making allegations against the site accusing it of peddling pedophilia, Cooper could have served the public better if he had encouraged parents to explain to their kids that every time they post a picture somewhere, it is public by default and thus will run the risk of being misused by ill-intended folk out there. There is some validity in this argument. We must teach our kids the necessary media literacy required to navigate the cyberspace with all its glory and pitfalls.

Alexis Ohanian claims Reddit is just a repository of links

What is striking about the Reddit case, however, is that it demonstrates that public discourse is rigorously negotiated both within the Reddit platform and beyond it. In this sense, treating these sites as isolated pockets of communities residing in different locations on the Internet would be taking a reductionist approach to the problem. Unlike Facebook’s invisible hand sanitizing its corporately owned public space, Reddit resembles an early Greek democracy where the Gods are mostly indifferent, or worse yet, abusive as it allegedly has been in the case of the r/lgbt reddit. Perhaps elaborating on the incidents that led to the policy change a bit further will clarify this point.

Cooper’s coverage of the Jailbait subreddit was undoubtedly shocking, but what led to the r/Jailbait’s closure was a different incident. A redditer, who went by the moniker TheContortionist, posted an image of his then underage ex-girlfriend technically in the nude. Unsurprisingly, the image was voted up with the clamors of "request-for-more" until the user gave in and posted another one in which the teen was clearly engaging in oral sex. Shocked Reddit users exposed TheContortionist's post by voting it up to the front page of the site until finally, after a good six hours, the admins were forced to take it down. These images weren't just posted on the forums, but were allegedly distributed through private messages. Faced with public outrage, Reddit reluctantly closed down the entire Jailbait section claiming that it was "threatening the structural integrity of the greater Reddit community."

Although Jailbait was banned, Jailbait alternatives quickly sprung up under various other names. It was only a matter of time that another incident, this time in the "preteen_girls" subreddit, were to cause yet another public outcry. r/preteen_girls mostly featured images of 11 year-old girls in bikinis with sexually explicit captions. It was here that one of the users posted a screenshot of a naked underage girl from a banned film which quickly evoked the outrage of yet another message board residents. That message board was Something Awful (SA). The SA Goons (members of the SA forum) launched a campaign to label Reddit as a vibrant pedophile scene, urging users to contact churches, schools, local news, and law enforcement to put an end to this. And they won the battle. Reddit responded with an explicit ban of "suggestive or sexual content featuring minors.”

Does this decision mean that Reddit has transformed from a non-interventionist organization into a policing one as claimed by one of the disappointed redditers? This is an important point to consider.

According to Reddit, the content it houses is self-policed, and as with similar sites, they really can’t regulate the quality of the content, nor should they need to under most circumstances. In essence, this is not very different than how Wikipedia and many other sites that rely on user-generated content operate. Except, the "self-police" part seems to be markedly dysfunctional in Reddit partially because users have little power over the content of the site except to notify a moderator and, predictably, moderators sometimes can be capricious, random, and inconsistent. Thus far, the site has been evaluating child porn content on a case-to-case basis, but the word on the street is that the admins don't take much action when its users report these images or perhaps they are not swift enough when taking action. The jury is still out on that…

Democratic, for sure… But a laissez-faire approach to public discourse could have frightening outcomes in terms of freedom of speech if the “self-police” part does not work efficiently or the policing faction is abusing its powers. Abuse report, after all, is a click away and most sites give the right of way to the person who is reporting the abuse rather than examining the content in question. To be clear, when I am referring to frightening outcomes, I am not referring to the tasteless, offensive content that is being generated by our fellow kindred all over the planet. I mean the possibility that allowing illegal content being posted, or at least not taking swift action against it, could lead to inviting more government intervention in a space that we, the Internet denizens, hold sacred. The Reddit case, in this respect, presents a case study through which we could examine some of these issues.

When making this statement, I have the following in mind.

A month has passed since the Internet won its battle against the highly controversial bills, SOPA and PIPA, which were supported primarily by the media industry in its pursuit to crush the illegal transmission of copyrighted content. Advocating an Internet Blacklist Legislation and eliminating the safe harbor clause of DMCA, these bills threatened the very integrity of the Internet. The protest day was glorious and made unlikely bedfellows of various groups on the Internet. Reddit was one of them, so was Facebook. The day after this momentous victory, FBI raided the offices of the cyberlocker Megaupload and incarcerated its founder Kim Dotcom on racketeering, copyright infringement and money laundering charges. Two weeks after, Reddit child porn scandal erupted. Unrelated? Perhaps superficially, but the outcomes of such cases may lead to the same door. They bear the potential to invite excessive government regulation into a space we netizens hold so dear.

Similar discussions have taken place on virtual worlds whose destiny is closely tied to that of the Internet at large. The well-known law scholar Jack Balkin, for example, argues that design and play in virtual worlds should themselves be considered exercises of the right to speak and, thus, have constitutional significance. Accordingly, he posits that much of what goes on in virtual worlds should be protected against state regulation by the First Amendment rights of freedom of expression and association. But the increasing amount of criminal activities and various communication torts that take place in these spaces, specifically copyright infringements, theft, and fraud, make the First Amendment doctrine less likely to be sufficient in fully protecting freedom in virtual worlds. Injured parties end up resorting to real-world courts to resolve their differences which ultimately ends up inviting government regulation into these spaces. In a similar fashion, Greg Lastowka and Dan Hunter state that virtual crimes will be of increasing concern for the communities engaging in the design and experience of virtual worlds as they resist external attempts at legal regulation (pg. 124).

Clearly, my goal is not to equate camel toes, breastfeeding, nudity, or offensive content with virtual crime because while the former is a valuable part of public discourse and, therefore, should be considered as protected speech either on Facebook or elsewhere, the latter, which in the aforementioned cases amount to copyright infringement, child pornography, money laundering, are indeed crimes. Make no mistake, governments would be swift to take action against them and the lobbyists would be there to coax them in the right direction. In fact, these considerations were (and still are) the driving forces behind SOPA, PIPA or ACTA. On the outset, these bills aim to quash copyright infringement but are threatening our freedom of speech in the process.

It is concerns such as these that dictate some of the hard lines that social media sites draw when regulating users' freedom of speech. That hard line is being negotiated among the netizens, activist groups, scholars, companies, lobbyists, politicians, and what have you. It is also being negotiated on a national and international scale. Reddit’s approach could be just as detrimental for the future of freedom of speech as Facebook’s. After all, how many times can you push against a door until it finally busts open and leads you to a path from which there is no return?

PaleFire (the author) has graciously granted the Alphaville Herald permission to reprint this piece from Pandora's Box

56 Responses to “Op/Ed: Limits of Freedom of Speech: Reddit’s Child Pornography Problem”

  1. Glenn Beck

    Mar 6th, 2012

    You know who else likes Reddit?

    … Hitler.

  2. hobo_kelly

    Mar 6th, 2012

    There hasn’t been anywhere near as much Anon or Lulzsec activity over on 4chan as there used to be before they started assigning everybody daily post-tracking prime number ID’s last month. What is this Reddit? Is that like 9-gag? Why I don’t even…

  3. SR

    Mar 6th, 2012

    Except it’s a non-problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=480365544#Sexually_explicit_material_is_not_harmful_at_all

    The rape and battering advocacy is far worse I suspect, because it doesn’t divert so much as encourage.

  4. PaleFire

    Mar 6th, 2012

    @SR I wasn’t talking about sexually explicit content or pornography per se. Those are protected under the First Amendment. I was referring to “child” pornography, which is illegal almost anywhere…

  5. Mesa

    Mar 6th, 2012

    when it comes to minors, posting links ang gathering em under a certain topic when it’s a matter of forming a photo album should be excluded of reddit. Hypocrits or free speach advocates ?

  6. James Freud

    Mar 6th, 2012

    LL are making third party viewer policy additions which will drastically affect people using said viewers.

    It’s been big news for at least a few weeks now.

    Are you covering that story or is it too Second Life-related?

  7. Hal Jordan

    Mar 7th, 2012

    Excellent article, well written, well researched. Would like to see more like this on the Herald.

  8. hobo_kelly

    Mar 7th, 2012

    Wow, Green Lantern Excelsior turning up in a pedophile thread, imagine that.

    Is this article really saying: “I like forum regulation because it means less forum regulation” ?

  9. Paul

    Mar 7th, 2012

    Good article. Quite a mess eh? The internet offers worlds of unlimited possibility, but given the lack of personal accountability, people just can’t seem to regulate their own behavior, causing the SL, Fb, Reddit and the other service providers to ponder regulations to protect themselves legally. And then, the people that cause the trouble in the first place cloak themselves in ridiculous self righteous rationalizations for child p0rn, griefing, vigilantism, intellectual property theft, etc. and then wag their finger at their hosts crying “censorship.”

  10. Reader

    Mar 7th, 2012


    shut up Mies!

  11. Tux

    Mar 7th, 2012

    People can’t regulate their own behaviour? While some attempt to over regulate others behaviour. The problem is not regulation, the problem is regionalism.

    Everyone is entitled to their space, to say and do as they believe. The problem lays where beliefs/ideals/morals conflict. It is exactly the same reason there is no global central government.

    I for one abhor anything child related, even so much as a stranger logging them in a wiki explaining how sweet they are (GLE!). Although this seems acceptable by some Americans. However, there are still places in this world where it is Ok for 60yo men to wed 8yo girls. Not my thing but if thats what they do what right have I to comment? Well here is the thing, I do have the right to comment if that information is in my region. And as the internet is global then it most certainly does appear to be in my (and everybody elses) regions.

    So herein lies the problem. Until there are clearly defined global laws (as opposed to regional ones) clarifying what is and is not acceptable no one has the right to say there is no place for it. They can of course express their opinion, because at present there is no global law dictating that.

    So people will still do what they want when they want, because there is no one who can stop it. Sure the service providers will create methods to protect themselves out of regional laws. But this is just a safe get out clause for them. Not for the users, who may actually be completely within the law in their own region.

    Who gets to decide? Is the regional law to be applied to the op or the host? If it is the host, then why should the op stop? The internet and its users are not able to be packaged into one persons conformist box. It is beyond anyones (or their regions) control in its present form.

    Anyway bored now.

  12. Paul

    Mar 8th, 2012

    @ Tux
    “So people will still do what they want when they want, because there is no one who can stop it.”
    Speaking for yourself, Tux? Some of us go years in a place like SL without being banned or ejected. Some folks think that even without rules or a police force, the ethical thing to do is to do your best to get along with other people and to create a positive experience for a larger community.

    ” no one has the right to say there is no place for it.”
    Well, maybe the person paying the bills, like an estate owner or Linden Lab.

    ” The problem lays where beliefs/ideals/morals conflict.” I don’t agree agree. The problem is actually a failure to accept and be generous to the fact that others have DIFFERENT beliefs/ideals/morals. So, when people assume that their agenda trumps those of others, that legitimates them in their behaviour when they, say, grief the quiet enjoyment of someone else in SL for “lolz”. The problem was not that the griefer and the resident have a conflict of morals, the problem is the griefer thinks he or she has a right to be rude jackass because there is noone to stop him/her, and he/she gets sophomoric thrills out of it.

    “People can’t regulate their own behaviour?” No doubt. Why exactly are you banned from SL, Tux?

  13. Reader

    Mar 8th, 2012

    The Tux GLE reference opportunity is beyond funny and yet another example of “can’t….stop….this….fixation….as….much…as…I…try,…must….contain…my….my….rage….”

    Go polish your dress shoes Tux. Or does your butler do that for you?

  14. Sinead McMillan

    Mar 8th, 2012

    sorry, but i second freud’s post:

    “LL are making third party viewer policy additions which will drastically affect people using said viewers.

    It’s been big news for at least a few weeks now.

    Are you covering that story or is it too Second Life-related?”

    what’s going on? the herald went speechless on an effectively relevant issue which matters?

  15. Paul

    Mar 8th, 2012

    This story is completely relevant to SL.

    A point is that you have service providers: craigslist, second life, Facebook, Reddit etc, that provide a relatively open forum for people to express themselves, and some people who have a hard time regulating their own emotions and behaviors chose to take that opportunity to do antisocial things like post naked pictures of children or to, for ‘lulz’, rain X-rated or nazi themed prims on a virtual neighbor who is just minding their own business, thus forcing the service provider into deciding how much of a policeman they need to be to protect them selves legally.

  16. Tux

    Mar 8th, 2012

    So Paul in your opinion anybody is free to do as they wish – provided they conform to a clearly defined emotional and behavioural type? Yet who makes this definition? Who has a right to make this definition?

    The SP’s TOS is only to cover their arse locally. Which means users are completely free to cause harm and upset to people in other regions.

    Either you accept this fact and understand it leaving your internet experience stress free and possibly happier, or you keep your bigoted beliefs that you have the right to dictate to the world how they should be, their emotions, their behaviour, their morals, their everything.

  17. Paul

    Mar 8th, 2012

    Hi Tux,
    Is it “bigoted” to expect you to, on your own volition, do your best to avoid behaviors that you know will cause upset, inconvenience, or annoyance, or worse to a fellow traveller?

    This is what child p0rnographers and the viewers of it do, because they give in to their impulses despite knowing that their actions harm innocent people.

    This is what griefers do in Second Life when they rain obscene prims or whatever onto some other resident who is quietly enjoying their own version of second life, despite knowing that they have ruined the role play, conversation, fantasy, creative work or whatever of that other resident.

    Of course, child p0rn is much worse then griefing, but in both cases, neither perpetrator has the ability to regulate their emotions and behaviors. They are emotionally stunted and basically immature, because they lack the ability to empathize with the feelings and perspectives of others. It is their needs for satisfaction that take priority.

    Hey, call me a bigot, but that is what i believe: we should try to be polite to each other. I do believe that we should ‘conform to the behavioral type” of basic manners and generosity to our fellow travelers, don’t you? Or do you have some other ‘higher’ ethical imperative that allows you to treat others in a cruel fashion with impunity?

  18. Paul

    Mar 9th, 2012

    Also Tux, you say that “people will still do what they want when they want, because there is no one who can stop it.” and that “users are completely free to cause harm and upset to people in other region” where laws don’t apply.

    Are you seriously arguing that any behavior is fine so long as there is no law against it or no means to enforce a law that exists? Do you teach your children that they can do whatever they want so long as there is not an explicit rule or law against it, or so long as no one can hold them accountable?

  19. Tux

    Mar 9th, 2012

    Wow again with the children, what is with that?

    Anyway, I am countering with any behaviour is acceptable in some regions despite it being unethical and non conformist in your region. As the internet is global and therefore potentially in every region, I believe people will always have differences in ethics, morals and laws. What is right in one region may not be so in another.

    SP’s only create their TOS’s to protect themselves locally. It has nothing to do with empathy or morals or ethics.

  20. Paul

    Mar 9th, 2012

    “What’s with that?” well, every time you explain to us that it is o.k to behave in such a way that you categorically disregard the interests of other people, so long as there is no specific rule against it, for some reason the first thing I think of is “wow, how does he explain that to his kids?”

    So, in your “region” is socially acceptable to post sexualized pictures of children? In your ‘region’ is it socially acceptable to rain X-rated or nazi themed prims down on a random neighbor just for a laugh? Is it ok to destroy the creative efforts of a neighbor, disrupt their business, or interrupt their gameplay just to prove that you have the ability to do it? In what “regions” of human society, specifically, are these regarded as socially acceptable behaviors?

    Child p0rnographers can’t help themselves in their criminal and psychologically sick behaviors, and they take advantage of every weakness in law enforcement on the internet and in RL to feed their sick needs, precisely because they CAN. Pale Fire’s article outlines the dilemma that services like Reddit face in attempting to cope with this kind of behavior while at the same time honoring the ‘open forum’ nature of the internet. Likewise, SL has to cope with griefers and vigilantes who also, like child p0rnographers, can’t control their baser instincts, while attempting to maintain a relatively free environment for SL residents. Fortunately, at least sometimes, child p0rnographers get caught and put in jail, and sometimes griefers get kicked out of SL.

  21. IntLibber Brautigan

    Mar 9th, 2012

    I see Paul, Reader, and the rest of the bawwwfest have brought the discussion around to equating rudeness in SL with child rape, one upping Prokofy in the process.

  22. Tux

    Mar 10th, 2012

    Oh Paul, you really to stop these thoughts of other peoples children. They are not healthy. But to answer you: I don’t think it is a parents position (or anyone elses for that matter) to tell their child what they can or cannot do, better to equip them with ability to decide for themselves. You see children will try to break rules, but if they are given enough information they will make the right decision. This is how it works in my family, and has done for generations.

    Now we have got children off your mind for a second, your second paragraph is wonderful. You paint an elaborate picture of griefing in a game, then ask a question about real life. Do you not see a difference? You do realise my use of the word ‘region’ relates to real life, not a simulator in a game? My opinion on child abuse has been already been stated. As for prims, well, when ever I see ‘raining prims’ or any other griefing I see it for what it is: someone is entertaining themselves. And I laugh a little. I don’t get upset and angry, nor do I think they are trying to ruin anyones life. I certainly don’t feel the need to get revenge. It is just a game!

    Reddit, like any SP, is NOT attempting to cope. They are covering their backsides because of law in their region. If there was no risk of them being prosecuted they would not have reinforced this existing policy. It is that simple. Yet I fail to see your relationship between Second Life and Reddit. Second Life is a game in which people are encouraged to become a fantasy character in a virtual world. But I do like the way you you believe RL freaks and griefers are similar, after all you are the one asking about my children often.

    Finally I would like to let you into a little secret: Linden Lab likes griefers. That is why they allow the accounts to reach a level of reputation (for the notorious ones at least) before they close them. And why they can instantly return. It is all publicity. Griefers get to talk with the Lindens far more than normal resi’s, and on friendly terms too. I have regular contact with them, more so than my pre Tux account. Do you know why? Because we don’t bitch and whine like over emotional school children (stuck in adult bodies). Thats right, the normal resi’s are simply an income source.

    Although I personally don’t see the relationship between SP’s and a game provider. Only those, like yourself, who fail to see a defining line between RL and SL.

  23. GG3

    Mar 11th, 2012

    LOL GLE showing up in a pedo topic thread

    Taking notes, Green Latern?

    Improving the stalking mechanisms of JLU?

  24. GG3

    Mar 11th, 2012

    Oh no, those poor second-lifers that think they are their avatars! NOT THE BOX PRIM, NOT THE BOX PRIM!!! AARGH!

    The griefers are about the only thing that pumps life into your dump of a game. Sad, but true story

  25. Paul

    Mar 12th, 2012

    @ Tux

    “Oh Paul, you really to stop these thoughts of other peoples children. They are not healthy.” That’s right, I forgot… the first thing you do on an internet forum is accuse people you don’t agree with of being pedophiles. Boy you really got me with that one Tux! Next time don’t forget to call me mentally ill or in need of medications, or a crazy cat lady, or something equally intelligent. /me rolls eyes

    I am glad you have a generations-old tradition of not explaining to children that they should be mindful of the feelings and perspectives of other people. I guess it worked out well for you! Why did you get banned from SL again?

    Yes, I realized by ‘region’ you mean the rl place that you live. You seemed to be saying that laws differ from place to place, and that is the problem, and I was simply asking if it is socially acceptable to be rude to people for you own lolz where you live, regardless of any ‘law’.

    re: reddit: And why DO they have to cover their backside? Because some people can’t regulate their behaviors in a reasonable way. This is the connection to SL: a vast majority of the people in SL more or less get along with each other, and then you have a few people who like to get attention by being rude to others. Like the pedophiles in reddit, they can not regulate their own behaviors or see past their own interests.

    SP and game providers are similar in that they provide an internet forum for people to interact in, and, thanks to the bad behavior of a few jackasses (like griefers, vigilantes, pedophiles), the SP’s have to in turn give up their idealism and impose regulations to protect themselves.

    Why can’t people just behave themselves? Some have crippling criminal behaviors like pedophiles. Others probably enjoy the anonymity to shadow box at the world and feel some control that they crave in real life, and I imagine that includes the socially stunted and basically immature griefers of second life who lack much empathy for their victims. Maybe their parents never taught them any manners, I don’t know.

    “grievers get to talk to Lindens more often…” lmao you griefers always talk about how awful it is to be a ‘fanboi’ but here you are bragging about how you get all this attention from the ‘gamegods’ for negative behavior. Those lindens are sitting in a cubicle somewhere down in the Bay Area laughing their asses off at all of you. oOOooo I get to talk to Lindens!!! that made my morning, Tux. Next thing you know, maybe you can buy Steve Job’s autograph on a dirty napkin on Ebay.

  26. Tux

    Mar 13th, 2012

    ‘ /me rolls eyes’
    Rolling eyes is Ok as long as you have stopped thinking about my children.

    ‘Why did you get banned from SL again?’
    It was my time again. You see I am like a nine in Benford’s law. Most griefers are a one and get banned quite often. Only a handful are nines and they last quite some time in each account.

    ‘I was simply asking if it is socially acceptable to be rude to people for you own lolz where you live, regardless of any ‘law’’
    Last I heard social acceptability, or lack thereof, is not prosecutable by law. Therefore irrelevant! It is impossible to have the whole internet userbase sharing the same social beliefs. You seem to think your social beliefs are right and everyone else should bow down to them. You are, of course, wrong. People like you who say these things always make me laugh. It is in part why I like to play with your type.

    ‘And why DO they have to cover their backside?’
    Because, instead of the regions coming together and compiling a concise set of laws, they victimise the SP’s. In the real world this is like prosecuting the owner of a park where a rapist attacked an innocent woman. Or prosecuting a car manufacturer because a drunk driver killed someone. The system is flawed.

    ‘they can not regulate their own behaviors or see past their own interests’
    You know what I hear? YOU HAVE TWENTY SECONDS TO COMPLY! Why should people not be free to do as they wish? Because you don’t like it? Maybe someone likes the fact you don’t like it, so who’s like has priority? People use the internet for their own interests, are you saying they should not? That they should overlook their own interests for the sake of others? If that is the case, what is the point of the internet?

    ‘here you are bragging about how you get all this attention from the ‘gamegods’ for negative behavior’
    I said no such thing. From personal experience they talk to me either because they wish for a normal conversation, not the bitchy whiny emo BS of the average resi. Or because they want to know what just happened. Tiggs is a common Linden for this, and will often want something repeated to see how it was done. It is not about bragging, more about understanding and long term relationships. Most resi’s come and go frequently, they barely even register, but some of us who have been around for a long time make friends. Friendship is the strangest thing on the internet.

  27. Paul

    Mar 13th, 2012

    Tux, you say the concept of “social acceptability” is “irrelevant.” lol says it all doesn’t it? A child p0rnographer would say the same.

    I guess we shouldn’t be surprised, then, that you have been banned from a place where things as extreme as bestiality and slav3ry is permissible. I think the rest of the known world regards being inconsiderate to the feelings of your neighbors as “social unacceptable” and not ‘irrelevant’.

    Oh well, you learned it from your folks, I guess. Maybe warn your kids that, despite the long standing Penquin Family tradition, being a jackass can lead to being shunned.

  28. Tux

    Mar 13th, 2012


    ‘Tux, you say the concept of “social acceptability” is “irrelevant.” lol says it all doesn’t it? A child p0rnographer would say the same.’
    Your attempt to twist my words is poor. What I said was:
    ‘Last I heard social acceptability, or lack thereof, is not prosecutable by law. Therefore irrelevant!’
    Which in the case of SP’s implementing TOS’s and policies to protect themselves is completely true. Or, instead of reading my post, you replied to what you wanted me to say?

    ‘I guess we shouldn’t be surprised, then, that you have been banned from a place where things as extreme as bestiality and slav3ry is permissible.’
    What we? Only you and I remain! Also the Tux account has been removed from SL for sure. But I, the real life me, has been allowed back once again. The cycle continues.

    ‘I think the rest of the known world regards being inconsiderate to the feelings of your neighbors as “social unacceptable” and not ‘irrelevant’.’
    See above, lol! And yet being inconsiderate to peoples feelings does not prevent ‘socially unacceptable’ things from happening daily. From neighbours disputing noise, through crime, to world wars.

    ‘Oh well, you learned it from your folks, I guess.’
    Quick in case twisting up his words fail, try insulting his parents. If that fails mention his kids again!

    ‘Maybe warn your kids’
    Lol, see above!

    ‘being a jackass can lead to being shunned.’
    Ahahaha, brilliant. Surely a jackass is someone who badly fails at twisting a post and calling on a non-existent audience to believe you. Surely a jackass is one that, in the same post, insults a posters parents. Surely a jackass is someone repeatedly fakes concern for a posters children. You, dear Paul, are all three. Does that make you a triple failure? A trio of jackasses?

    Seriously, I expected better. I know trolls who would do better with less.

  29. Tux

    Mar 13th, 2012


    ‘Tux, you say the concept of “social acceptability” is “irrelevant.” lol says it all doesn’t it? A child p0rnographer would say the same.’
    As we already corrected this statement and proved I didn’t say it. That means you did, therefore does your pedo comment still apply?
    I guess so as you then couldn’t prevent yourself mentioning my children!

    Paul, get yourself some help! I find your repeated voicing of your thoughts of my children socially unacceptable. Does this mean you will regulate your own behaviour or see past your own interests? (somehow I doubt it)

  30. GreenLantern Excelsior

    Mar 15th, 2012


    “I guess we shouldn’t be surprised, then, that you have been banned from a place where things as extreme as bestiality and slav3ry is permissible.”

    Best comment in this thread. You win!

  31. Tux

    Mar 15th, 2012

    Wow, affirmation from GLE! Yet another freak who has an obsession with other peoples children. No surprises here.

  32. IntLibber Brautigan

    Mar 16th, 2012

    The problem, Paul, is that in SL, it is criticizing things as extreme as bestiality and slavery that gets you banned…. things that most of us consider ‘broadly offensive’ are protected behaviors in SL, and speaking up against them gets you persecuted.

  33. Reader

    Mar 16th, 2012

    The bickering has boiled down a small, handful of commentators now;
    effing pathetic.

  34. Anonymous

    Mar 17th, 2012

    Ugandan Girl Exposes KONY 2012 Film!

  35. LOL

    Mar 17th, 2012

    Thinks the author of this article should look to SL for a Child Exploitation Witch hunt. Ever searched the term “LOLITA” on SL….

  36. elizabeth (16)

    Mar 18th, 2012

    O.M.G !!! a forreals actual article. in the Herald !!!. we iz d00m’d jeje (:

    is a good article and well-written. more please (:

  37. hobo_kelly

    Mar 18th, 2012

    OK MISCHIEF MAKERS – there is a new popular pastime arising on the SL grid called “RETURN IT ALL”

    Recently Linden Lab has enabled the ability to DELETE YOUR NEIGHBORS CRAP on the Mainland if it is encroaching on your parcel by even the teensie tiniest little bit.

    You must use the new official SL browser to delete their crap, but I can tell you it works because I have been out on a bunch of RETURN IT parties in the last few days, and my God the Lulz, you would not even believe the lulz when you click on your neighbors crap and click delete and like 200 prims of stupid linked sculpty crap goes flying right into the bit bucket. AWESOME.

    The way it works is, using the new LL SL browser, you just click on someone elses prims and hit delete, which will be lit up now even you don’t own the vile crap, and if you dont own the crap the LL server will rez extra prims and do a physics text against the parcel lines, and BLAMMO it will delete all your neighbors crap that is hanging over even one little pixel…

    I have been blowing builds out of SL left and right. Its amazingly awesome to send some 200 linked prims back to Jesus that some dumb jerk spent weeks flushing their life down the SL toliet building.

    God, this one resident returned home to find all their shit returned and they started going crazy yelling and screaming and plastering up plywood shit all over the place.

    Get on it Mischief Makers. Help clean up SL and make those servers hummmm hahahaaa

  38. IntLibber Brautigan

    Mar 19th, 2012

    Ah, thanks for this heads up, Hobo, this reminds me of the Committee to Beautify the Green Before Winter Carnival at Dartmouth College back in the day:

    I was there…..

  39. Reader

    Mar 19th, 2012

    Hobo admits to major griefing.
    It’s a miracle.

    Get a life Mies!

  40. Charity Stohr

    Mar 20th, 2012

    Paul GLE samefag

  41. Reader

    Mar 21st, 2012

    Paul =/= GLE

    Brain cells much?

  42. Imnotgoing Sideways

    Mar 22nd, 2012

    Just posting here because I’m sure someone’s anus will pucker at the sight of my name within such a topic. =^-^=

  43. Emperor Norton

    Mar 23rd, 2012

    Bored, Cold day in San Fransisco, not many tourists so came in and used the Public Library to post here.

  44. Reader

    Mar 23rd, 2012

    ‘Nope’ is no more.
    What the…I don’t even…

  45. Paul

    Mar 25th, 2012

    “Also the Tux account has been removed from SL for sure. But I, the real life me, has been allowed back once again. The cycle continues.”

    You mean the “cycle” of you going into a social arena and consciously and deliberately behaving in a way that annoys other people, and behaving that way for “lolz,” until the social arena you are a part of gets so fed up that they kick you out again? This is what you do for ‘lulz”, to give your life some meaning and have somesatisfaction? You know Tux, the only difference between you and a child prn0ographer is the degree of annoyance. The child pr0rnographer is a criminal who profoundly hurts people, but refuses or is psychologically unable to relent in their behaviors, despite the consequences to themselves (jail) and to the ones they hurt, probably because of childhood trauma and a sense that they have no control in their lives, whereas the griefer is a pest who annoys people, but refuses or is pyschologically unable to relent in their behaviors, despite the consequences to themselves (banning) and to the ones they annoy, probably because of childhood trauma and a sense that they have no control in their lives.

    I just watched some ‘griefer’ videos on you tube, where your buddies seem to get their ‘lulz’ saying things like “Look! that person is annoyed with me!” “Look, that person was taking their gameplay seriously, and I caused him to get emotional by being a jackass!” “Look that girl sounds fat!!”

    Go ahead Tux (the ‘real’ you, that is) explain to your kids that this is how a responsible adult behaves and gains satisfaction in life. Maybe when they get to be adults, they too will be such reasonable people that they manage to be social outcasts in a game of social outcasts.

  46. IntLibber Brautigan

    Mar 26th, 2012

    I hope I teach my kids to mock and heckle over serious self important arrogant wannabes like you no matter whether they are in a game or in real life.

  47. Tux

    Mar 26th, 2012


    Again with the children? With this in mind ask your who has more in common with a pedo!

  48. Reader

    Mar 26th, 2012

    If you have been allowed to spawn IntBlubber, the world is most certainly in a sad state of affairs. Drool much?

  49. Reader

    Mar 26th, 2012

    Someone update us on the ‘Nope’ sim please.

  50. hobo_kelly

    Mar 28th, 2012

    Yeah you hope he is drooling Reader you sick fuck, because you are down on your hands and knees licking it up like the little bitch you are. Go do the world a solid and kill yourself immediately.

Leave a Reply