RE: Porn using Cu-Seeme

Mike Stubblefield (mike_st@iah.com)
Mon, 4 Mar 1996 23:59:27 -0600


Well, it only had to be a matter of time before someone would get =
offended that they would go to a reflector and see people showing each =
other their personal and private parts. You know, if you are one of =
those that run a reflector and "don't want ANY kind of behavior except =
everyone staring at the screen like I have seen at some "EDUCATIONAL" =
sites. Now what good does that do? well, it shows a bunch of faces... =
and to a bunch of computer nerds, that may be fun...

If there are those out there that want to do the kinds of things this =
article was complaining about on public reflectors and the reflector =
admins don't want to let others see that, then TAKE THE G@#(()#( =
D((#)#_@( reflector offline and rue the very day you put it up. At =
least those who found the reflectors fun to show each others sex organs =
have found something useful to do with it...

Bottom line: if you don't like nudity, don't get the books, magazines, =
videos or cuseeme reflector sites that show it. The responsiblity has to =
lie with the individual viewing...

my two cents worth and someone who plays on the sex reflectors quite =
often and has fun doing it - and is not disuaded or shamed or anything =
by a bunch of sexually uptight computer nerds who are generally socially =
illiterate.

----------
From: Bill Woodland[SMTP:wcw@bga.com]
Sent: Monday, March 04, 1996 10:34 PM
To: CU-SEEME-L@cornell.edu
Subject: Re: Porn using Cu-Seeme

>Date: Sat, 02 Mar 1996 15:10:49 -0500
>Reply-To: heuman@mtnlake.com
>Sender: owner-CU-SEEME-L@cornell.edu
>From: heuman@mtnlake.com (R.S. [Bob] Heuman)
>To: <CU-SEEME-L@cornell.edu>
>Subject: Porn using Cu-Seeme
>X-To: owner-CU-SEEME-L@cornell.edu
>X-PH: V4.1@cornell.edu (Cornell Modified)=20
>X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.2(a) -- ListProcessor by CREN
>
>Will all those complaining about the availability of 'porn' or nudity =
via
>Cu-Seeme reflectors be kind enough to provide specific addresses so =
that
>the rest of us can:
>
>a) view said proported to be offensive to some screens, and
>b) make up our own minds on whether or not to be offended, and
>c) determine for ourselves if this material offends OUR community
> standards.
>
>Otherwise we are left in the "dark" on this entire issue....
>
>Anyone then not interested in viewing this material can then know where =
not
>to go to be offended, if it is, indeed, offensive material.
>
>R.S. (Bob) Heuman Willowdale, ON. =
Canada
>=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> <heuman@mtnlake.com> or <heuman@user.rose.com>
> <rn.1886@rose.com> or <aa969@torfree.net>
>
>An inquiring mind in an aging body... My opinions are my own... (I =
hope)
> Copyright retained as per Canadian and International law... <FWIW =
grin>=20
> Void where prohibited by law
> If this message is illegal where you are, do not read it.
>

Or at least we would all know where the sex sites are, if that's what we =
ARE
looking for! Yea, sure, Bob :-)

Bill Woodland (wcw@bga.com)
Squeek on Undernet IRC
Channel Manager #CU-SeeMe
http://www.realtime.com/~wcw/