Let me start by reiterating totse's policy on Kiddy porn pics and links to paedo sites.

Its simple:

DON'T! Or you will be banned.

Now I may not agree with that policy but its my job to enforce it and I always have and always will.

But

Just because I do my job and delete and ban for such links and pics , it does NOT follow that I will report such sites to some Wanna-be Sheriff-busybody-self righteous group.

"Uhm jackketch, why do you mention this now?"

Well I got an email today from a regular here, one of the regulars who I'd normally listen to. He thought I might like to report any links I see to this self appointed group of Web-Sheriffs.

Jackketch will not report paedo sites, not this side of Armageddon anway.

And never never ask me to.

*really really pissed off*

Are you really as loathsome as you alude yourself to be, or are you trying to create a persona?

Why don't you just tell him that in an email, or is this another chance to try and shock some of us and continue to pretend to act tough and that you're disturbed?

We got the idea.

Nah, I'm just genuinely very angry and want to make sure no one ever suggests such a thing again.

Of course I'm disturbed, I wouldn't be on totse otherwise.

The thing is, its only one person who has asked why are you over-reacting? And my answer was that you're trying to prove something about yourself to us.

When angry I tend to overact (see thread in M&A).

You need proof that I'm a total fuck up???! I thought that was clear long ago?

Something different, can you email me please?

is your objection to this based on something specific to your beliefs about the rights of child pornographers or is it more general related to your views on internet censorship

I'm backing jackketch on this one.

What people do in their own homes is fine. Post kiddie porn on Totse and you will get Totse-fucked. Analy and hard. But it's not our place to take what you post here to any higher authorities.

Good point, I should have made that clear in my original post.

Kiddy porn merchants have NO rights. They are scum...lower than maggots.

However I truly believe the internet should be free of all censorship. If the police want to track down child abusers and hit them with the full force of the law then I'll hold their coats while they do it.

What I don't agree with is governments and self appointed sheriffs trying to censor the net.

As I said before:

First they shut down the paedo-porn sites,and all right thinking people cheered.

Then they shut down the Muslim 'extremist' sites to keep us all safe.

Then one night they came for my jewish neighbours.

Then they came for me.

I think that's how it ends?

By kiddy porn, does that mean proper kiddy porn, or sexual pictures of anyone under 18?

Thus jailbait is outlawed?

Yes posting nakedness of under 18's counts here as kiddy porn.

Again not my rule but that's how Jeff wants.

What about partial nudity of under 18's? Like them in just their underwear?

would pictures of jailbait girls for example 16 or 17 years old be treated as harshly as pictures of actual child pornography

Basically yes but usually if the person involved has posted them themselves then I'll just delete the pic with a mild rebuke.

Although remember , if you say you're 18 or that the pic is of your 18+ year old girlfriend then I have to believe you, unless its fucking obvious.

Actual child porn pics are likely to cause me to petition Zok to perma ban your arse.

Reject, as far as I understand the rules there is no problem with undies. What is forbidden is breasts, vags and penii.

Reject, as far as I understand the rules there is no problem with undies. What is forbidden is breasts, vags and penii.

Cool.

Kudos and ^5 Jack. Another great modding platform with a logical and rational thought process......backed by nothing but INTEGRITY.

I really wish this emailer had the balls to publicly step forward. They are a piece of fuckin garbage as I'm concerned. A parasite. A maggot dining on the feces of society. Let me guess, you were part of D.A.R.E or some other police state orchestrated program that told to being a narc, a rat, a lowlife is the "right" thing to do with your life?

Sorry bub, but YOU are part of the problem and why humanity is going down the toilet. Get a life and do something with yourself instead of focusing on other people's sins. You are a coward and a pissant. Hiding in the shadows being a whistle blower is NOT an honorable thing.....it just proves your fortitude in life. Go grab a fap rag, tune into "Catch a Predator" for the 53rd time....and get your jollies off watching people's constitutional rights being flushed right down the toilet. But seriously, quit trying to save the world....your an insignificant speck that will never amount to anything....just relish the fleeting moment you have on this planet and leave other people alone. You are sad and profoundly lame.

Myself, I have a whole host of ideas about kiddy porn, pedophilia, age laws and the like. But I won't touch it with a 20 foot pole....at least with the written word. (For the record, no I'm not into kids, never touched kids, nor do I own any kiddie porn). But in my mind the other thread that is currently stickied is a foolhardy idea. The problem is the courts, the police, and the USA government is totally throwing out the rulebook in regard to this nonsense......and making criminals out of people that are just making lifestyle choices. It's Orwellian Thought Police 101. Someone just THINKS about doing a 12 year old, or TALKS about doing a 12 year old, or PLANS to do a 12 year old......bye bye, see ya in another 10 years.

For those thinking...."But Totse/Jeff Hunter PROMISED to us to never assist the police in an investigation, its the very essence of this website"......I say to you that you are quite naive. Do you really believe in the grand scheme of things Totse is even a grain of sand to the monster the federal government is? And for all of you techie nerds believing its impossible to search/obtain people IP's without a court order or some legal consent....think again. Remember long before microwaves, cell phones, PC's and all of our other technological gadgets are on the open market for consumers.....its the government that has acces or developed these things in the first place. The point is you do NOT know what kind of mad scientist things are currently out there....good or bad. For all we know the feds could have their eye on anyone posting on any forum.....along with your home address, work schedule, whatever.

I don't want to come off as a psycho alarmist, but just be careful folks. They have proven time and again (even pre 9/11) that they can skirt, change, and completely trample the rules any time they see fit. Don't put anything down to the written word that you wouldn't be willing to testify in a court of law.......or talk about in some roach infested jail cail under the bright lights. That includes mailing a letter, texting your spouse, or posting on Totse. Big Brother is here folks, and its too late to do anything about it. And yes you do have to worry about your neighbor (or fellow Totse poster) in assisting Big Brother in creating a sterile and conformist society.

For the whistleblowing emailer to Jack.....just go HUFF RAID AND DIE.....you miserable piece of shit.

Once again you manage to encapuslate and express my thoughts far more eloquently than I ever could.

Web censorship is ghey.

I'll be honest: I was thinking a WHOLE different thing when I saw the title of this thread.
On a separate, but more related note, I agree with Jack.

As I said before:

First they shut down the paedo-porn sites,and all right thinking people cheered.

Then they shut down the Muslim 'extremist' sites to keep us all safe.

Then one night they came for my jewish neighbours.

Win.

Win.

Win.

Haha. Everyone busted his balls when he started the thread and now everyone is agreeing with him. Jacketch is good. Anyway I'm going to go look for some of these questionable threads...

I dont think the person who suggested forwarding kid diep ron sites to the authorities should get such heavy anger about a simple suggestion though.

People turning a blind eye to kiddie porn sites so their precious internet stays censor free has me coloured surprised.

Not turning in links to the various web groups I can understand as they're all about as effective as a quadriplegic sprinter but not submitting them to a legitimate authority is surely what anyone with a social conscience should be doing?

I don't know what sparked this thread as I rarely visit S&A these days, I'm just surprised to see people almost condoning child porn sites (or at least, washing their hands of any need to do right) in an effort to hide behind the skirt of anti-censorship.

Put your tin foil hats away people.

You seem to need a lesson in the phrase...."tin foil hat". Because if you are coming on here endorsing that people start running to the authorities every time they discover someone not living to their morality choices.....then it is YOU that is donning that hat. Your words above are a perfect example of the danger behind that mindset. "Washing their hands of any need to do right".....BULLSHIT! Just who the hell are you to make a judgement to what is right or wrong for the next person? Because your government says so? Because the majority says so?

Keep in mind, I'm not discussing the morality issue about kiddie porn.....instead the mindset of running to the cops or government any time you are uncomfortable with someone's lifestyle choices. If you have your head that far up the government's ass my condolences to you.....good luck to some day learning about why a Big Brother government (as its citizens turning on one another in such a way) is such a dangerous and oppresive society to be living in. But spare me your colorful analysis of "doing the right thing".....sorry, but a ratfink narc is on the lowest rung of the food chain. And there is nothing "good" about those actions in the least.

I was hoping to see some CP with jack in it :(

I don't know what sparked this thread as I rarely visit S&A these days,.

Which is a real shame (I mean that). You were a good poster...despite some rather whacked political views.

Jesus christ.

You guys take totse WAY too seriously.

You should go to SG and check out my addicted to Totse thread.

It was a bit more than a simple suggestion rather it was implied that all mods might like to take advantage of this wonderful opportunity to report such sites.

I found it highly offensive.

But thats me.

I'm sure the guy didn't mean to piss me off.

snip

I WONT ALLOW IT.

The American Economy is dying, the system is fucked up, the dollar is going down and the AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE DOING JACK SHIT.

time to install peerguardiannigz. Fight the powers that be! Protest! Work for ROn PAul or someone else!

Prepare for the Revolution

DaGuru was right on the money.

This might surprise some of you (especially the Americans who should get on their knees every morning and kiss a copy of their Constituition for the freedoms they enjoy) but visting &totse is theorectically already illegal here in the UK.

Certainly making a hard copy of some of the text files IS an offence and people have been jailed for similar.

The present fascist government have just about managed to abolish habeus corpus and the right to a jury trial. They have also publically stated their intent to ban/censor/make illegal any website which they consider in anyway unwholesome and a site such as totse which revels in its bombmaking/hacking/sexual pervertedness will be on their list for sure.

Can't be arsed to search now but here's one from Euroland.

London, July 4 (ANI): Using the Internet to give information about how to make a bomb will become a criminal offence across Europe.

Plans outlined by senior EU officials in Brussels suggest that the ban will be part of a range of anti-terrorist proposals to be published in the autumn.

According to The Times, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) would face charges if they failed to block websites containing bomb-making instructions generated anywhere in the world, EU officials said.

Five men who hoped to kill thousands with a fertiliser bomb were described as ruthless misfits who betrayed their country

An internet search yesterday instantly turned up a site that gave instructions on making a rudimentary bomb.

EU officials denied that it would be impossible to track down websites based in remote places, insisting that the local provider based in the EU could be held to account.

But the Internet Services Providers' Association (Ispa) said that it would fight any attempt to make ISPs criminally liable for content.

According to the paper, the EU can bring in basic criminal penalties in two ways - either with the unanimous approval of all 27 member states or in some policy areas where Britain has an opt-out. In either case, the basic proposal would then be put into effect by individual countries in their own legal systems.

The EU package will also include preparations for bio-terrorism attacks and a European rapid-alert system for lost or stolen explosives. (ANI)

You think just cos a lot of whats on totse about bombmaking is wrong or fake that that will save it ?

Remember the Constitution was written by a bunch of hipocritical slave-owning rich white men. And they found plenty of ways to get around the Bill of Rights. (See Alien and Sedition Acts). The Man can fuck us over anyway if they wish, esepcially given the PAtriot Act and Military Commissions Act.

[quote]

The present fascist government

yes the UK is fucked. Surveillance State, Anti-Social Law Bullshit, etc.

Heh...was the guy who wrote "V for Vendetta" right.

I have but one question.

Weren't you the one who keeps giving your teenage sons dirty looks when they bring hone 14 year olds?

I'm all against censorship and I agree with you, but I think you need to give your kids some slack too. Don't censor what they can and can't do with [consenting] 14 year olds on their own time.

whoa, i haven't seen you in a long time!

where have you been?

Very interesting read Jack. In essence they realize the logistical nightmare it would be to try to enforce house by house legislation....so lets go after the bigger boys actually responsible for distributing that info. For all of you thinking we are just a bunch of prattling conspiracy theorists.....when exactly does it stop? Where is YOUR line in the sand?

You gotta remember we are still very much in the infancy stage of the internet, and things will continually change. Maybe bombs and kiddie porn don't sound like much, but which lifestyle choices do they leave alone? Gambling? Normal porno? What about filtering/banning any avenue to purchase a toy from China......since we've had all these lead scares? Would it bother you to have access blocked so you could no longer read Al-Jazeera....the Arabic press?

If you are still saying...."who gives a fuck", think this through a little further. Suppose your country declares war on country Z. And part of the war time efforts is restricting access to any websites orginating or having a foundation based in Z. At that point you could very well be fed whatever your country and other allied countries want to feed you about that country. With very little recourse or ability to hear their side of things. It's then like a "Wag the Dog" puppet show. Your government/country can feed you whatever soundbytes with their spin and take on things......while other more insidious and less honorable things are REALLY happening.

Tellin ya....everyone should go reread "1984". The only aspect of that novel that we haven't truly witnessed yet is the "rewriting of history". One day you are friends with Z, then fighting with them the next....and eventually you are told/indoctrinated that you've ALWAYS been fighting with Z. On a certain level the media does put its own cozy spin while writing history as it plays out....but still not to that gross level. Other than that, its all here folks......Big Brother is breathing down your neck.

Orwell was a fuckin genius. If you look at the year that 1984 was written and examine the technology that existed back then.....it baffles me to think how accurate his "fictional" piece is. As if he were a prophet or had a vision.

These are some scary times my friends....scary times.

Tellin ya....everyone should go reread "1984". The only aspect of that novel that we haven't truly witnessed yet is the "rewriting of history". One day you are friends with Z, then fighting with them the next....and eventually you are told/indoctrinated that you've ALWAYS been fighting with Z. On a certain level the media does put its own cozy spin while writing history as it plays out....but still not to that gross level. Other than that, its all here folks......Big Brother is breathing down your neck.

cozy spin? Look at how they were able to switch China and Japan's roles as 'enemy' and 'friend' in World War 2 then the Korean War. Yes there were different regimes and shit but still.

Not to mention the BLATANT bullshit behind every way the US fought, including the revolutionary war


As if he were a prophet or had a vision.

many sci--fi people can determine the truth. I remember some saying they had a connection to the future or could see the future, hence their predictions.

These are some scary times my friends....scary times.Oil Peak, WW3, etc. yes.

ere is YOUR line in the sand?

You gotta remember we are still very much in the infancy stage of the internet, and things will continually change.

The System will NEVER control the internet. It's too big. They would have to nationalize all the companies and shit, take down most connections to home, leaving monitored public terminals, etc. The people could easily put new wiring in place. And evenif this is all done even then there'll be hackers and people making their own networks and internets. People will use old wiring networks, etc.

The people would literally REVOLT if that shit happens.

I have a question for some of the people here...

If we have come to the personal moral conclusion that child pornography is an abusive and exploitive practice, why would you think it is wrong for us to report it to government authorities? You seem to be against the idea of simply conforming to the masses, but not everyone that makes a moral stand is doing so because of the masses.

For example, I see child pornography as wrong for the same reasons that I see rape as wrong, that it is undue harm to a person against their will. If I saw a rape taking place, I would personally intervene with violence to stop that rape. By the same reasoning, I would use violence to stop child pornography.

As the situation is, however, I have not the time nor technical means at hand to actively stop child pornography, so I would instead turn what evidence I have over to those who are charged with enforcing these laws, i.e. police. By doing this I am still following my own personal moral code, and still refusing to obey those laws which I have come to the personal conclusion of being unjust, despite that the government and the majority of my countrymen believe in those laws.

Many of you seem to think that the government using evidence gathered on the Internet is just a first step towards censorship and totalitarianism. Indeed, you are correct in assuming that it is a necessary prerequisite and is a slippery slope but incorrect in assuming that this means the government will always go further just because we let them monitor the Internet.

Yes, the government will want to go further, but that is why it is our job(as citizens) to assure that they do not go further, and instead have reasonable limits placed upon them to insure a proper balance of government power and individual liberty.

I reckon very few people here would say that the government catching pedophiles through tracking Internet child pornography is a bad thing except for the precedent of monitoring and censorship it gives.

The threat of government encroachment upon personal liberty is a very real one, and one that must be guarded against with the utmost of vigilance from it's citizens.

However, even the proper functioning of government will always include structures that can be abused if we let the structure fall into the hands of evil. For example, courts are absolutely required for the rule of law, yet courts can also be corrupted and abused, and can lead to Scottsboro and Sacco and Vanzetti.

This doesn't mean that all courts must be done away with, only that courts must be watched and monitored for injustices.

By the same reasoning, this doesn't mean that the government should in no way look at the Internet as a means for criminals to plan and organize. There are very real threats that could be planning on the Internet this very moment. Are they found at Totse? Not likely. Are they found at every site some 60 year old holy roller would deem "unwholesome"? Absolutely not. But could they possibly be found somewhere, in some dark corner, where very real racial supremacists, rapists, terrorists, etc. could be planning an attack, and who would be doing so without fear of reprisal if the government was in no way allowed to monitor the Internet? Yes, they could, and it is for this reason why the government has a vested and just interest in the Internet.

But once again, just as with the courts, they must be watched and monitored for injustices, and prevented from overstepping their bounds and creating a carrion shell of what the Internet was and ought to be.

. Indeed, you are correct in assuming that it is a necessary prerequisite and is a slippery slope but incorrect in assuming that this means the government will always go further just because we let them monitor the Internet.
.

Our assumption has been shown to be correct time and time again.

Anyways you seem to be confusing the issues somewhat. If the Brit police discover a thai kiddy porn site and inform the thai authorites who then track down and arrest,trial and hang the scumbags involved then that's fine in my book.

What isn't fine is for the Brit government to ban/block the site.

And now we have the ridiculous situation in the Uk where the government forces ISP's to block certain sites inorder to protect us, the citizens, from oursleves. Then here in th UK even clicking on a kiddy porn site by accident is an offence. So our caring sharing Masters have to make sure we can't.

For our own good of course.



Good post (I disagree but still well thought out).

But a website devoted to things that are criminal in and of themselves(child porn) is different than a website simply dedicated to theoretical discussion of what possibly could be criminal(Totse). This is something the government needs to fully realize, as right now they are going insane.

Really, the problem isn't with the government doing a slight regulation and watching of the Internet, which would entail raiding kiddie porn servers and shutting them down, finding actual terrorists, etc., but rather that the British government in it's typical nanny state fashion has gone hog wild with it's morality watch over the Internet, to the point where even knowledge for knowledge's sake is no longer an acceptable adage, and "innocent until proven guilty" is a distant memory.

Can't disagree with you there. Everytime I post here I breach (theorectically at least) the Anti-Terrorism Act. I forsee a time very soon when accessing totse will require me to use a proxy.

Even S&A falls under a new act the brit government wants to bring in about 'condoning abusive sexual practices'

I can so see my being arrested for posting on totse...

"We are arresting you under suspicion of posting on an internet forum. You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence"

To which the correct reply would be 'LoL Y U ArR3st me?!'

totse is still the top website hit for 'how to make a bomb' on google

this worries me

i may attempt to back up all theoretical text files detailing illegal activities on totse

I'll admit my first post in here was more than a little heavy handed in towing the political party line (not that I voted for the current bunch of clowns), but it's hard to shake off some of my bias as I come into contact with paedophiles on an almost weekly basis some months and having to hear about their sites, methods and just general fuckwittery is more than a little grinding.

The current trend of the Government stomping out any and all 'wrong' websites is worrying (not so worrying as the current remand/custody laws but that's a different thread entirely), but on the flipside I agree that some sites - like child porn - should be stomped out with extreme prejudice. Which creates the problem of just who decides what's wrong hence this thread I suppose. As a general population I like to think people have a decent moral compass for the most part and we could all agree that the exploitation of children should be universally condemned.

I don't agree with just liberally blanket banning things though as the one thing I can't get behind is the shoot first ask later (or never) policy of our current beloved Labour government. There's far too much reliance on reports and theories that simply can't be backed up, yet because they're from a sanctioned commission down in the Westminster dungeons it's accepted at face value and pushed through.

At the very least the one check in place should be that sites aren't actually shutdown/blocked until there's been a successful prosecution, but I know that wouldn't be a popular method either.

I do still stand by my original point about that if people should come in contact or have knowledge of paedophilia sites then it's really their duty to inform the police. Yes, it may make you a rat but is grassing up those elements really such a bad thing?

why would you think it is wrong for us to report it to government authorities?

Assuming that everyone agrees that it is "evil, etc" I'll answer that.

It's legal to post videos of neo-nazis beheading, torture videos, and so on. What's the difference. What is the difference between an adult women being raped and it uploaded to a site and a 6y/o being goatsed.

2. You forget the pervasive "stop snitching" mentality that I agree with. You have a problem? Don't place YOUR morality and what the mainstream wishes on them.

You seem to be against the idea of simply conforming to the masses, but not everyone that makes a moral stand is doing so because of the masses.

Instead, they're biased, easily goaded ino scapegoats, etc. Society/the state/etc says "get them, they're evil evil evil" without a reason or logical argument.

PROTIP: Pedophiles are the new Jews

By the same reasoning, I would use violence to stop child pornography.
so you would beat the shit out of anyone who downloads r@ygold then? Hahahaha. I can see this now. Byss tracking IPs of people who go on 12chan and knocking the muthafuckin' door and kicking ass...because someone d/led a model pic.


incorrect in assuming that this means the government will always go further just because we let them monitor the Internet.


No, we are correct. Since we're discussing child porn..

anyone noticed the criminalization of lolicon/shotacon (hentai child porn for n00bs to anime)? First they go for "the real shit" then thy go to hentai, then they take away my shitting dick nipples, then my jailbait, etc. Then the FBI sets up those nice bait sites, which is where most of the porn comes from currently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolicon#Legal_status_in_the_United_States

also see this shit McCain tried
http://www.news.com/2100-1028_3-6156976.html


Yes, the government will want to go further, but that is why it is our job(as citizens) to assure that they do not go further, and instead have reasonable limits placed upon them to insure a proper balance of government power and individual liberty.

And anyone who points out the MAN doing this would either be A. Too late (a frog finally noticing it's cooked by having the heat turned slowly up) and they can't do shit, here you're saying turn up the heat a little on the frog but the people would notice the same.

Or B. They would be attacked by the mainstream for going against the will, called a "sick fuck" lampooned and made fun of by comedians and the general society, etc. Ignore that and take it all down now.

I reckon very few people here would say that the government catching pedophiles through tracking Internet child pornography is a bad thing except for the precedent of monitoring and censorship it gives.Popularity of something is not a good thing to base things on. For one what gives the man to criminalize downloading that when I can d/l beheading, torture and genocide videos instead. Will they now go after people downloading beheading and torture videos now? Oh, they probably won't. Because people have stigmatized this issue and scapegoated people who d/l and seed this.


This doesn't mean that all courts must be done away with, only that courts must be watched and monitored for injustices.The Anarchists thought otherwise. I'd say that a shitload of things need to be legalized for one. 2, things needs to be decriminalized. 3. Make it harder for Prosecutors to convict, MAKE IT HARDER. 4. Inform defendants of the bullshit "plea deal" crap the Persecutors...err "prosecutors" pull

By the same reasoning, this doesn't mean that the government should in no way look at the Internet as a means for criminals to plan and organize. There are very real threats that could be planning on the Internet this very moment. But could they possibly be found somewhere, in some dark corner, where very real racial supremacists, rapists, terrorists, etc. could be planning an attack, and who would be doing so without fear of reprisal if the government was in no way allowed to monitor the Internet? Yes, they could, and it is for this reason why the government has a vested and just interest in the Internet.FUCK THAT. Some of us post on the internet so we don't have to deal with "real life" Social consequences of our actions. We can't spray paint of post Goatse on skyscrapers without a decent risk of being caught (well I'm wrong here; bad example). We can't deny the Holocaust and say Kill all Niggers in real life without being beaten up or some "incitement" charges.

I don't want the pigs fucking up the internet. The people, the fringe, deviants, etc fled here due to Social bias and persecution but the fucking pigs follow them in the name of the law, or for people deemed 'criminals' by the state and society to congregate and organize.

From the Hacker's Manifesto:
"This is our world now... the world of the electron and the switch, the beauty of the baud."

Here's what I use:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freegate

If the Chinese government can't figure out how to stop it from being used, the British government won't. Atleast not for ages yet.

why would you think it is wrong for us to report it to government authorities?

Because you are making an impulsive knee-jerk decision based on YOUR morality and trying to force it onto someone else. Listen, for me this topic isn't just about kiddie porn......but about whistle blowing narcs in general. Live and let live I say......I'll elaborate more on that in a bit (and return to the kiddie porn aspect as well) but let me give you a simple analogy to make a point.

Imagine a neighbor invites you over to a dinner party. He's a fun guy, total family man, somewhat active in his community, coach of a boy's little league.....all American person. In the middle of the party you discover he has a small crop of marijuana in his backyard. Do you call the cops....because its "against the law"? Does the fact you've discovered he's a toker or possibly selling change your opinion of him? Does that make any of his other accomplishments less valid now? Maybe for you its....."live and let live, who is he harming". But to someone else with a DIFFERENT morality and set of life experiences, that may be tantamount to calling in the S.W.A.T team. Perhaps they had a sister die of heroine overdose or something....and are now a vehement anti-drugger. That person could very well run to the cops, yet the host with the crop is no more "bad" than he was 5 minutes ago.....its just the perception of the people witnessing his actions.

In that scenario I think its profoundly wrong to go running to the cops. Where there's a difference is if you went to the cops with EXTRA information only AFTER he has been arrested/suspected of something else. Lets say he was toking or selling that weed to the 8 year old players on that baseball team. At that point you wouldn't be creating the situation (or making it any worse) if you told the cops...."hey, his stash is growing around his tomatoes". My whole point is a whole host of crap and a couple of lives could be ruined.....just because someone isn't living up to YOUR moral standards and you took the cowardly way out calling the cops to try to force your morality down someone else's throat.

Back to kiddie porn....another scenario. You go to pick up your golfing buddy a week after he gets back from Hawaii. As he is finishing getting ready he hands you his digital camera to check out his pics. What do you discover along with beaches and volcanoes? Naked pics of his young children in a variety of poses aged 5 and 7. *Gasp*! Your golfing buddy is a child molesting creep....is he not? Not necessarily. Who is to say the kids didn't take the pics themselves? Those photos could have been taken while he was on the trip.....under the supervision of grandma or a sitter. So are you going to run to the cops pronto, or maybe ask your friend what that's all about?

One thing that has to be remembered is a mantra that most child advocates used to live by that is no longer valid. The one that goes something like...."a child doesn't act out sexually, unless they have been molested or raped". With the internet today, that mindset is erroneous. In 1975 the only way a child could emulate anal sex is by witnessing/experiencing it firsthand or in a movie. Ya think any 5 year old could find, hook up, and easily watch a porno in the old school 8 mm reel to reels? Nowadays its easy as "click, click, click, click"........2 adults having full blown anal right there on the computer. Again if you discover a 5 and 7 year old mimicing acts they've seen on the computer.....it COULD be just playful fun, and nothing insidious is going on as "abuse" from an adult. In that scenario, while the parent may be "guilty" of being aloof or somewhat negligient in his parenting because there is no porno block on his computer (or easy access and unsupervised time with the digital camera)........he certainly is NOT a child pornographer, nor is he a child molester.

Again, my issue is with whistle blowers in general.....not just in regard to kiddie porn. Maybe its people calling the cops on that illegal card game, or someone that is an anti-spanker seeing a family swat their kids on the rear end in aisle 5 of a grocery store. Here in Ohio now its "report the smoking violaters" signs on EVERY fuckin business since they enacted the public smoking ban. Our society is being indoctrinated to rat out their neighbor....and its starting at an early age, like the D.A.R.E. program I mentioned earlier.

Couple that with the psychotic alarmist situation involving child molestation and kiddie porn......it's going completely out of whack. A real life story that happened to my family a couple of months ago to make that point clearer. My son who was 4 was having group photos taken with his tee-ball team. They were waiting their turn and as 4 year olds go, were into all kinds of mischief during that wait. My son and another boy got into a wrestling match just playing like boys do. At one point when they were on the ground my son had his head on the boy's stomach like it was a pillow....them both laughing with glee during this wrestling match. The other boy's mother calls him over and asks him...."did that little boy touch your privates?" WTF????????? She didn't realize my wife was about 5 feet away from her, overhearing the whole thing. No lady, they are kids in a fuckin wrestling match in broad daylight.......and if you continue your chicken little paranoia you are going to raise a weirdo. I was off to the side having a smoke, and when the wife told me about this I almost went ballistic. Everyone else in the world sees 2 kids having fun like kids do....and in her twisted, perverted and overly alarmist mind, she is fearing molestation by another 4 year old. It took EVERYTHING I had to not go over to that lady and put her into her place. We decided to make sure our son stayed FAR AWAY from that boy as much as possible the rest of the season......along with having ZERO interaction with his psycho idiotic parents.

And that is just it, everyone is going nuts over child molestation to the point of assinine paranoia. And some of you may respond to this...."well kiddie porn is harmful, there are no grey areas". Again that is YOUR morality. I've already proven how kiddie porn could be created by the kids themselves. And everyone has their own view of what "kiddie porn" really is. For some its sexual acts, others its just nudity in general. Are many of you aware that long before the internet/picture cropping you had the means to create "kiddie porn" yourself? Yup, all one has to do is cut a pic of a little girls head and paste it on a Playboy model.....voila, in the eyes of the law that is "child pornography".....at least in the USA.

Back to Jack and the issue at hand. As I said before....."live and let live", or better yet...."an eye for an eye". Lets say Jack is the one at that dinner party and walks in on the marijuana crop. To me, he would be a complete creep for calling the cops with no instigation. Now if this guy was fuckin Jack's wife, or vandalizing his property.....then yeah, go fuck someone over that is doing shit to you. But beyond that it is NOT Jack's obligation to "report" someone just because they have a different morality system than his. And just the same for Totse posters. A couple of days ago someone was trying to hack Jack's email......I could understand if he returned in kind to THAT person if he had the means or ability. But to the average person that has never done any harm to Jack posting a pic? Jack isn't a candyass and has certainly more of a life than to try to shove his lifestyle choices or morality down someone else's throat.

Live and let live.....that is the ADULT and MATURE thing to do. And for those not agreeing with that mindset, I only have one piece of advice for ya. Get off your ass and do something with YOUR life productively, instead of being a chicken shit nobody just analyzing and trying to ruin everyone else's.

It's legal to post videos of neo-nazis beheading, torture videos, and so on. What's the difference. What is the difference between an adult women being raped and it uploaded to a site and a 6y/o being goatsed.

People seem to take a special notice when it is children being exploited for sexual gratification, as opposed to violence against adults. The police will still often look into the criminal acts of both, but the law also happens to say child pornography is illegal in and of itself.

My best guess towards this is that beheading and torture videos are more along the lines of shock value and disturbing, whereas child pornography is posted and viewed entirely for sexual gratification from minors. Minors are not able to give their consent, and are thus prevented from engaging in a broad range of acts that society feels should be left to adults.

2. You forget the pervasive "stop snitching" mentality that I agree with. You have a problem? Don't place YOUR morality and what the mainstream wishes on them.

If you were to stop a rape in progress going on right before your eyes, this would be imposing your morality on someone else. If you were to support the ceasing of genocide in Darfur, you would be placing your morality on someone else. If you were to kick a guy's ass for beating up a 10 year old girl for no reason whatsoever, you would be imposing your morality on someone else.

Instead, they're biased, easily goaded ino scapegoats, etc. Society/the state/etc says "get them, they're evil evil evil" without a reason or logical argument.

I wholeheartedly agree that the talking heads and church minions often give no reason for their disgust of child pornography, but that is just because they have no voice of dissent that is mainstream that they must argue against. The actual reason the laws against child pornography came about was that children are incapable of giving informed consent, and must be kept away from as many potentially exploitive forces as possible. This is why children are not allowed to smoke, drink, give sexual consent, own firearms, etc.

PROTIP: Pedophiles are the new Jews

Note that to be a pedophile in the eyes of the public requires a choice on the pedophiles part, whereas what ethnicity you were born into does not.

anyone noticed the criminalization of lolicon/shotacon (hentai child porn for n00bs to anime)? First they go for "the real shit" then thy go to hentai, then they take away my shitting dick nipples, then my jailbait, etc. Then the FBI sets up those nice bait sites, which is where most of the porn comes from currently.

Of course it's a slippery slope. Naturally, the government is always trying to further it's stranglehold upon us the citizens. However, this doesn't mean that there are situations where the government has absolutely no interest in finding real criminals on the Internet. We must guard against the government taking it's power too far and outlawing ridiculous things, but I still believe that stopping child pornography is a good use of government.

And anyone who points out the MAN doing this would either be A. Too late (a frog finally noticing it's cooked by having the heat turned slowly up) and they can't do shit, here you're saying turn up the heat a little on the frog but the people would notice the same.

Or B. They would be attacked by the mainstream for going against the will, called a "sick fuck" lampooned and made fun of by comedians and the general society, etc. Ignore that and take it all down now.

The average American would be able to, with proper persuasion, see when the real line in governmental authority is being crossed. The line was not when the government outlawed child pornography, as anyone arguing for child pornography will probably never be given a fair shake, and in my eyes at least, this isn't a bad thing. It is our duty as citizens to make sure the line isn't crossed, and I bet you agree with me about that general concept, you just seem to feel the line actually is the outlawing of child pornography, whereas I feel it is slightly further down the line.

Popularity of something is not a good thing to base things on.

I was going off the people in this particular thread, who all seem to be far more level headed and intelligent than the average Brit or American.

For one what gives the man to criminalize downloading that when I can d/l beheading, torture and genocide videos instead. Will they now go after people downloading beheading and torture videos now? Oh, they probably won't. Because people have stigmatized this issue and scapegoated people who d/l and seed this.

I don't quite follow you. Could you rephrase that?

The Anarchists thought otherwise. I'd say that a shitload of things need to be legalized for one. 2, things needs to be decriminalized. 3. Make it harder for Prosecutors to convict, MAKE IT HARDER. 4. Inform defendants of the bullshit "plea deal" crap the Persecutors...err "prosecutors" pull

I don't think anyone in this thread is immature or uneducated enough to be an anarchist.

Even you are agreeing that courts need to exist, they just need to enforce only just laws, and they must do so in a just manner.

FUCK THAT. Some of us post on the internet so we don't have to deal with "real life" Social consequences of our actions. We can't spray paint of post Goatse on skyscrapers without a decent risk of being caught (well I'm wrong here; bad example). We can't deny the Holocaust and say Kill all Niggers in real life without being beaten up or some "incitement" charges.

No where have I advocated censorship of the Internet, except where it pertains to people blatantly committing crimes which were illegal long before the Internet. Criminals plotting online, just like criminals plotting in a church or a newspaper, is not covered by any kind of right to privacy. Once again, I want to make it very clear that the vast majority of things going on right now on the Internet are perfectly harmless, and the government needs to retract it's dirty snout from them. However, this doesn't mean we need to deny the legitimate interest the government has in stopping child pornography and actual criminal plotting that would go on on the Internet if it was completely unregulated.

I don't want the pigs fucking up the internet. The people, the fringe, deviants, etc fled here due to Social bias and persecution but the fucking pigs follow them in the name of the law, or for people deemed 'criminals' by the state and society to congregate and organize.

I agree. The fringe and the cultural outcasts congregating on the Internet for their mutual enjoyment and sharing of their culture is great and acceptable. However, when a group decides that it is going to act out criminally against society at large and use the Internet as an organizational medium, they are now criminals and are within the legitimate domain of law enforcement.

Because you are making an impulsive knee-jerk decision based on YOUR morality and trying to force it onto someone else.

If you were to stop a rape in progress going on right before your eyes, this would be imposing your morality on someone else. If you were to support the ceasing of genocide in Darfur, you would be placing your morality on someone else. If you were to kick a guy's ass for beating up a 10 year old girl for no reason whatsoever, you would be imposing your morality on someone else. If you were to save your own mother from an armed gunman you would be imposing your morality upon someone else.

Imagine a neighbor invites you over to a dinner party. He's a fun guy, total family man, somewhat active in his community, coach of a boy's little league.....all American person. In the middle of the party you discover he has a small crop of marijuana in his backyard. Do you call the cops....because its "against the law"?

I never once stated I did any action out of some sort of awed deference to "the law". I care about my own personal morality, and would only report a lawbreaker to law enforcement if that person's lawbreaking was also an affront to my own personal morality. A person cultivating drugs is very rarely an affront to my morality, so I would not report him.

But to someone else with a DIFFERENT morality and set of life experiences, that may be tantamount to calling in the S.W.A.T team. Perhaps they had a sister die of heroine overdose or something....and are now a vehement anti-drugger. That person could very well run to the cops, yet the host with the crop is no more "bad" than he was 5 minutes ago.....its just the perception of the people witnessing his actions.

Yes, many people are irrational and base their systems of morality off of personal and ultimately irrelevant anecdotal evidence, but that doesn't mean I should thus refrain from using my own morality as a system for judging my experiences.

In that scenario I think its profoundly wrong to go running to the cops.

Agreed.

Where there's a difference is if you went to the cops with EXTRA information only AFTER he has been arrested/suspected of something else. Lets say he was toking or selling that weed to the 8 year old players on that baseball team. At that point you wouldn't be creating the situation (or making it any worse) if you told the cops...."hey, his stash is growing around his tomatoes".

I would find that a situation like that warrants a law enforcement response, as he is now violating one of the precepts of my personal morality by exploiting a minor with a substance that is harmful to them and they are likely incapable of considering the implications of what they are doing.

My whole point is a whole host of crap and a couple of lives could be ruined.....just because someone isn't living up to YOUR moral standards

If I shot and killed a rapist while he was in the act of raping, his life would also be ruined, and all because he wasn't living up to my standard of morality, which includes the precept that rape is wrong. Do not try to make me feel guilty about myself having a sense of morality that I feel needs to be upheld whenever possible. All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

You go to pick up your golfing buddy a week after he gets back from Hawaii. As he is finishing getting ready he hands you his digital camera to check out his pics. What do you discover along with beaches and volcanoes? Naked pics of his young children in a variety of poses aged 5 and 7. *Gasp*! Your golfing buddy is a child molesting creep....is he not? Not necessarily. Who is to say the kids didn't take the pics themselves? Those photos could have been taken while he was on the trip.....under the supervision of grandma or a sitter. So are you going to run to the cops pronto, or maybe ask your friend what that's all about?

I would always give a friend the benefit of the doubt, or else he wouldn't be a friend. I would talk to him about this. You seem to be viewing child pornography through rose-colored glasses, as so many cases of child pornography it is obvious that the child is being harmed or coerced, especially the instances where an adult is doing sexual acts to the child, or children are being forced to do sexual acts with each other.

The one that goes something like...."a child doesn't act out sexually, unless they have been molested or raped". With the internet today, that mindset is erroneous. In 1975 the only way a child could emulate anal sex is by witnessing/experiencing it firsthand or in a movie. Ya think any 5 year old could find, hook up, and easily watch a porno in the old school 8 mm reel to reels? Nowadays its easy as "click, click, click, click"........2 adults having full blown anal right there on the computer. Again if you discover a 5 and 7 year old mimicing acts they've seen on the computer.....it COULD be just playful fun, and nothing insidious is going on as "abuse" from an adult. In that scenario, while the parent may be "guilty" of being aloof or somewhat negligient in his parenting because there is no porno block on his computer (or easy access and unsupervised time with the digital camera)........he certainly is NOT a child pornographer, nor is he a child molester.

I agree with this overall, that children can and do more often act out sexually because it is very easy to come across explicit sexuality these days. Of course these parents are not child molesters, but they do seem somewhat negligent. I would not want them punished as child pornographers or such, but once again, just because they happen to be an anomaly doesn't mean every law on child pornography and molestation should be thrown out.

Again, my issue is with whistle blowers in general.....not just in regard to kiddie porn. Maybe its people calling the cops on that illegal card game, or someone that is an anti-spanker seeing a family swat their kids on the rear end in aisle 5 of a grocery store. Here in Ohio now its "report the smoking violaters" signs on EVERY fuckin business since they enacted the public smoking ban. Our society is being indoctrinated to rat out their neighbor....and its starting at an early age, like the D.A.R.E. program I mentioned earlier.

We almost always follow certain laws we do not agree with in our society, it's the whole idea of a social contract. But I think someone would have to be insane to look upon someone calling the police to report a rape or murder as the same as some whiny snitch reporting someone for smoking a cigarette in the park. The problem is like you said, not that we are reporting crime to the police, but that our society as a whole is being encouraged to report every little violation of every little law to the police.

Couple that with the psychotic alarmist situation involving child molestation and kiddie porn......it's going completely out of whack. *NOTE: I cut this story out of the quote because I reached the character length for my post, which is the same reason I split up my response to you and Star Wars Fan

That is a problem, just like with the reporting of public smokers, with people taking things too far. People like that are disturbing and untrustworthy, as they are often just waiting for you to commit something they can call you on. But those people also don't mean we should do away with every law on child molestation, just because they can't handle things realistically.

Again that is YOUR morality.

If someone were to murder your son and you wanted revenge, that would be you imposing your morality upon someone else.

I've already proven how kiddie porn could be created by the kids themselves. And everyone has their own view of what "kiddie porn" really is. For some its sexual acts, others its just nudity in general. Are many of you aware that long before the internet/picture cropping you had the means to create "kiddie porn" yourself? Yup, all one has to do is cut a pic of a little girls head and paste it on a Playboy model.....voila, in the eyes of the law that is "child pornography".....at least in the USA.

I do not agree with all the laws on the books regarding child pornography, and every law that doesn't involve the actual use of a real and living child for sexual images is absurd, but the people in this thread are often saying that children being sexually used by adults is not harmful, and that to think so makes you somehow evil for wanting the world to be just and the weak and helpless to be protected from the powerful.

Lets say Jack is the one at that dinner party and walks in on the marijuana crop. To me, he would be a complete creep for calling the cops with no instigation. Now if this guy was fuckin Jack's wife, or vandalizing his property.....then yeah, go fuck someone over that is doing shit to you. But beyond that it is NOT Jack's obligation to "report" someone just because they have a different morality system than his. And just the same for Totse posters. A couple of days ago someone was trying to hack Jack's email......I could understand if he returned in kind to THAT person if he had the means or ability. But to the average person that has never done any harm to Jack posting a pic? Jack isn't a candyass and has certainly more of a life than to try to shove his lifestyle choices or morality down someone else's throat.

If a man were fucking jack's wife and jack kicked his ass for it, jack would simply be imposing his own morality upon someone else. This particular piece of morality would be that a man isn't supposed to fuck a woman who is married and isn't his wife. Not everyone agrees with that sentiment, there are swingers, open relationships, etc. So how would jack be justified in imposing his own morality upon someone else? He is using violence against someone just because they don't conform to his ideas on sexuality, so how is this different than my belief that child pornography is bad?

Live and let live.....that is the ADULT and MATURE thing to do.

I wonder if that's what the Germans felt when they saw their neighbors being taken away to death camps, "It's their problem, not mine. Why would I want to impose my morality upon others and speak up? They're just living by a different moral code than mine which states that genocide isn't evil, why should I intervene?"

And for those not agreeing with that mindset, I only have one piece of advice for ya. Get off your ass and do something with YOUR life productively, instead of being a chicken shit nobody just analyzing and trying to ruin everyone else's.

I'll tell that to you next time you impose your morality upon a man who rapes your wife and you kill him, that you shouldn't have imposed your morality upon him, he just happened to feel rape is great and okay, why would you kill him?

This thread is useless without pics.

:(

If you were to stop a rape in progress going on right before your eyes, this would be imposing your morality on someone else. If you were to support the ceasing of genocide in Darfur, you would be placing your morality on someone else. If you were to kick a guy's ass for beating up a 10 year old girl for no reason whatsoever, you would be imposing your morality on someone else. If you were to save your own mother from an armed gunman you would be imposing your morality upon someone else.

If I shot and killed a rapist while he was in the act of raping, his life would also be ruined, and all because he wasn't living up to my standard of morality, which includes the precept that rape is wrong. Do not try to make me feel guilty about myself having a sense of morality that I feel needs to be upheld whenever possible. All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

But I think someone would have to be insane to look upon someone calling the police to report a rape or murder as the same as some whiny snitch reporting someone for smoking a cigarette in the park. The problem is like you said, not that we are reporting crime to the police, but that our society as a whole is being encouraged to report every little violation of every little law to the police.

If someone were to murder your son and you wanted revenge, that would be you imposing your morality upon someone else.

If a man were fucking jack's wife and jack kicked his ass for it, jack would simply be imposing his own morality upon someone else. This particular piece of morality would be that a man isn't supposed to fuck a woman who is married and isn't his wife. Not everyone agrees with that sentiment, there are swingers, open relationships, etc. So how would jack be justified in imposing his own morality upon someone else? He is using violence against someone just because they don't conform to his ideas on sexuality, so how is this different than my belief that child pornography is bad?

I wonder if that's what the Germans felt when they saw their neighbors being taken away to death camps, "It's their problem, not mine. Why would I want to impose my morality upon others and speak up? They're just living by a different moral code than mine which states that genocide isn't evil, why should I intervene?"

I'll tell that to you next time you impose your morality upon a man who rapes your wife and you kill him, that you shouldn't have imposed your morality upon him, he just happened to feel rape is great and okay, why would you kill him?

Byss, you make a great argument and hit a lot of fabulous points. But the situations you listed above are not relevant or similar to the discussion. Because in those scenarios there IS a clear cut perpetrator AND victim in those instances. Whereas Jack seeing a pic posted that was kiddie porn....we don't know WHO the perpetrator is, or even if there IS a victim.

The most important wrong assumption you are making with these comparisions is putting the poster of that pic on the same level as the one TAKING the picture, or engaging in those acts with a minor. I'm sorry, but it ain't even in the same universe...if in fact the person that just posted the pic wasn't the one that did it originally. So if Jack were to report the poster to the proper authorities, has he really "captured" the one that actually photographed and committed those acts? Perhaps in SOME scenarios he would, but the mathematical probability of that would be slim. In essence, the perp is still out there, the victim has still been harmed, and someone that happened to have pics of the crime is the one now in trouble. How exactly has Jack "helped" or "brought justice" in a universal sense?

Then there is the whole aspect of...... is the minor in the photo a victim at all? That starts delving into the topic of the other thread, but suffice it to say it is NOT 100% accurate to state that "every minor involved with sexual acts with adults is being harmed". How many kids will grow up to be adults after being molested beliving notihng "bad" happened to them? I would never even begin to guess.....but if that number is just 1%, then you can not look at a photograph and automatically believe they are DEFINITELY a "victim". Mathematical probability may suggest they PROBABLY are, but without knowing the person/child's side of things......that isn't necessarily so. In the scenario where the child never does think it was "wrong".....there is NO victim, nor is there a perpetrator (at least for the parties involved) other than society's outside interferring beliefs. If a girl is now 30, and having sexual relations with her dad since she was 10 (still engaging in them) and in HER sense of morals there is nothing wrong with it.....then who are we to inflict our will, our morality into other people's lives?

The ONLY way Jack's poster situation would be comparable to the scenarios you listed would be this way........If Jack KNEW who the poster really was offline, along with KNOWING that the poster either took those pics or were part of the sexual antics that took place, AND the kids involved expressed to Jack (or cried for help to him) about those antics that were taking place creating them discomfort/harm. At that point Jack does recognize a victim, can assess exactly WHO is the perpetrator....and THEN make whatever morality decision he thinks is right. Anything short of having all of those FACTS.....is just making assumptions and then impulsively acting on those assumptions, basing that decision SOLELY on his morality and a whole mess of possibly inaccurate assumptions.

If I'm witnessing a rape in an alley, there is a clear cut victim and perpetrator.
If I could get the funding to take over Darfur and end that horrific dictatorship, there are clear cut victims and perpetrators.
If someone killed my son and they found the murderer, there is a clear cut victim and perpetrator.

But a pic getting posted of kiddie porn by a possible third party? You don't even know if there IS a victim with certainty, nor can you make any valid assumption on WHO the perpetrator is....if in fact there is one.

Let me start by reiterating totse's policy on Kiddy porn pics and links to paedo sites.

Its simple:

DON'T! Or you will be banned.

Could I ask you to clarify that last one??? 'cause I'm noticing...

1. If I make a site entirely consisting of chemistry tutorials, it would be a "paedo site" solely on the basis of the race of the author...

...and, possibly more to intent...

2. When I briefly answered totsewhore (http://www.totse.com/community/showpost.php?p=9168278&postcount=137)'s assertion that "lolita is paedopropaganda teh paedoz luuv its!!!," one of the first things that came to mind was to look up a few of the times it'd been mentioned on GC and actually link to the flamefest and critiques that ensued. It's fully legal, and will remain so ad infinitum, but it too would fall under your latter description...

...as would a link to a lyrics site of Gary Glitter's works, any of the writings of Michaelangelo or da Vinci (several of which would also fall under "child porn," but that's a seperate question), a link to the legalities of mescaline on mr. McLellan's (legal, nonpornographic, slightly boring) webpage, a wide handful of political sites on topics ranging from drug legalization to the myanmar junta, Inquisition21, the ILGA or any of its members (which - despite kicking its members out and forcing "loyalty oaths," is still banned from UN consultation under false allegations of being a "pedophile group,") the US Department of Health and Human Services (which, while not operated by the paederotic, are among our allies in domestic violence prevention), the entire feminist movement and any of its elder spokespeople (same thing, plus the charming works by Greer et al), a wide array of famous historic individuals (ginsberg died, but some are around) and more...

...so... could you clarify? Legality, "forbidden topics," or race? 'cause it's a pretty damned nebulous term...

...just to clarify the record, if you'd be so kind.