egafd.com

I think that you flatter the power of porn Mr Thring. As an ex pat, you are still thinking that things are the same as when Mary Whitehouse ruled the UK media. The truth is that mainstream porn is now an irrelevance. No one debates it, considers it or fears it anymore. It has become mere wallpaper and certainly not on anyones political agenda. I really think that using, "The pizza delivery boy, I saw in a porn film, made me commit mass murder!" defence, would have even the judge splitting his sides with laughter, in this day and age. They might cite extreme, violent porn, however, for which there is already legislation in place.

I think the plan is merely to allow some people to block porn at the ISP source if they so wish. It will be a checked box that you can choose. What's so wrong with that? Some families will do this and dad will ensure his laptop receives porn through a different ISP, ie business as usual.

When in the history of the world has prohibition stopped ANY so called illicit trade, whether it be drink, drugs or porn? In fact prohibition enhances our image.

Hasn't anyone noticed that the huge increase in the viewing of porn is inversely proportional to the collapse of the porn industry? This is because the mass viewing is done by people who will never or cannot pay for their porn, they in turn support all the bit torrent sights/ pirate websites. So the "Mass" of viewers is made up of millions of 14-18 year old boys (Who don't have credit cards) and a sprinkling of adults. If this lot get booted off, it's great for us porn producers, because they'll have to start making an effort to get their porn, ie find ways of paying for it. Porn wont be served up on a plate, for free.

Anyway fear not, good folk of BGAFD, your filth is safe!

If thus measure comes in it will be great news for all those models who have, or wish to retire from porn. The nightmare of family, friends and work colleagues stumbling on your stuff in the future becomes less likely. There will be many in porn keeping their fingers crossed!

jimslip wrote:

>>>


It's wrong Jim because how long will it be before the government then puts pressure on ISPs to provide them with a list of people who tick that box and "opt in"? Or legislates to force them to do it?

At which point anyone "opting in" has their card marked for the future as some sort of sexual deviant.

The next step after that would be to ban mainstream porn altogether again, with the UK returning to the porn dark ages of the 1970s (all to "protect children" of course, not to mention protecting us from ourselves).

Because as someone else said above, all it would take would be some nutter saying in court that "porn made me do it" and there'd be another Liz Longhurst launching a personal crusade, with her local MP's new anti-porn private member's bill being fast-tracked through Parliament accompanied by the mass jerking of politicians' knees on both sides of the House.

At that point, anyone already in the government's database of people who "opted in" would be the first to have the Old Bill kicking their front door in at 6 o'clock on a Sunday morning (on grounds of "reasonable suspicion"). At the very least they'd be quietly monitoring your every move on the Internet.

It's the thin end of a very sinister wedge.

- Eric

Yes you are right to be worried, but I think once these measures are taken we will become out of sight out of mind. No ones talking about banning porn, they are trying to stop their kids Googling the word,"Porn" and getting 100 million returns. Who, these days is going to give a toss if you opt in to view adult material, even the previous Home Secretary was a porn junkie! The days of, "The Evil of Porn" are long gone.Noone cares, we are being plunged back to peddling our wares from the shadows! Lol

Yeh

But you shouldnt have to opt in to anything Jim thats the point. It doesnt matter that its porn it could be anything its the simple matter of opting in. If all they want to do is protect children they should have an opt out clause, its the wording in this case that makes all the difference. We dont want to end up like America and get a Patriot Act all of our very own - thats not what I want for Christmas (i want lights) x

I agree with you Masie that an opt out is preferable. But looking at the bigger picture (and I have a lot to lose if I am wrong) anything that restricts the free availability of smut will makes it all the more desirable. Porn is not appreciated now. Cos there are sackfuls of it for free. All restrictions will do will get rid of the freebie hunters, adolescents, pirate supporters and general time wasters.
Ask yourself why has porn collapsed while consumption has rocketed? Let's get back to the shadows and murky backwaters where we belong! Lol

I think we will benefit in the long run.

[quote]All restrictions will do will get rid of the freebie hunters, adolescents, pirate supporters and general time wasters.[/quote]

Personally i think that the restrictions will just push more people to the free stuff.

If i dont opt-in, NNTP/IRC/FTP/Torrent Sites/Rapidshare etc etc won't be blocked, so content from them sources will still be accessible to pretty much everybody. Tube sites would most likely be blocked however.

If i do opt-in, once i've gone through the hassle of opt-ing in, most likely paid some bullshit admin charge per month extra on top of bill, then i will have access to the tubes again and paysites.

So don't opt-in and have access to the "free" stuff only, is the option i feel a lot of people will take.

Twingo wrote:

>
> Personally i think that the restrictions will just push more
> people to the free stuff.
>
> If i dont opt-in, NNTP/IRC/FTP/Torrent Sites/Rapidshare etc etc
> won't be blocked, so content from them sources will still be
> accessible to pretty much everybody. Tube sites would most
> likely be blocked however.
>
> If i do opt-in, once i've gone through the hassle of opt-ing
> in, most likely paid some bullshit admin charge per month extra
> on top of bill, then i will have access to the tubes again and
> paysites.
>
> So don't opt-in and have access to the "free" stuff only, is
> the option i feel a lot of people will take.

Good Point.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12041063

There's no excuse for the idea though. Proper nanny state stuff and open to exploitation to get money out of customers.