SexEducation.com - Page 6 - GoFuckYourself.com

sexeducation · 07-07-2003, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by XYCash

Sure..the copyright stuff he could be taken to court over - but he isn't going to go to jail. Fined through the ying yang yes...but I think it would more than likely be a civil matter.

Canadas laws are very different from what I can tell. I literally cannot find anything related to proof of age of models. Their criminal code does not even have the word pornography in it according to this.

Here's the closest thing I've found relating to the subject:

Canada Response
Over the past several years, the Internet has grown in many ways. Along with benefiting the education system, the Internet has also provided a useful tool for research and collaboration. Access to the Internet has even spread throughout the world, allowing people from different backgrounds and ways of life to unite. On the surface this increased communication appears to have only positive benefits, however there are many negative consequences that are also connected to this issue. One such issue is the concept of privacy. How the United States views privacy is much different than how other nations view privacy. Even Canada, a country that is very close in proximity, has differing views on what rights citizens have with respect to Internet privacy. This section is going to discuss the Canadian response to the issue of Internet privacy.

In Canada, laws and regulations regarding privacy are very favorable to the citizens. Rather than the government having control over a user's online actions, Canadian citizens are given a full right to Internet privacy. In January 2001, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act came into effect, providing laws to protect Canadian citizens' right to privacy. These regulations are mainly concerned with e-commerce, ensuring that users are informed about the data being collected, and are given rights to restrict its distribution. Canada also has differing policies in regard to online content. Whereas most countries restrict "inappropriate" content, Canada has very lax laws in this regard. One such example is Canada's laws regarding pornography. In the Canadian criminal code, there is no reference to the term pornography. The only related law governs the concept of "obscenity", stating that "any publication a dominant characteristic of which is the undue exploitation of sex, or of sex and one or more of the following subjects, namely crime, horror, cruelty and violence is deemed to be obscene" is not allowed. However this law is very open to speculation, and does not even apply specifically to Internet actions. Therefore Canada allows much more freedom to its citizens in their online endeavors; giving them a full right to Internet privacy.

Therefore it can be determined that the Singapore scenario would not have occurred in Canada. Forcing all users to log in through a single proxy server, retaining information on users and restricting their access to specific Internet sites would be considered a violation to the Canadian Privacy Commission.

http://courses.cs.vt.edu/~cs3604/lib...01/canres.html

This is interesting ...
I never knew about this ...

However, it is irrelevant as it is my intention to obey the laws of my primary suppliers and credit card processors.

However - I want a magazine where no sexual topic can not be discussed and that all members are 100% anonymous.

Membership - being simply a "intellectual" test that you have the capability to understand that as you continue to enter the website - it's content tends to be more explicit and the WORDING of those documents are intended to push your sexual prejudice "buttons". Facts and stats - are - facts and stats. Sometimes lessons need to be discussed ... my website is more like a magazine or OPTIONAL INTERCOURSE methods ... different ways of handling situations - when the generic "medical websites" fail ...
Father type answers ...

Hence the handle "[email protected]" ... which clearly identifies my gender, that I am not a Doctor - and my person perspective of things ...

XYCash · 07-07-2003, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexeducation

\
Hence the handle "[email protected]" ... which clearly identifies my gender, that I am not a Doctor - and my person perspective of things ...

That's all well and good...but if you are literally putting up pics of kids under 18 having sex you are subject to serious repercussions under canadian law.

Do actually sexually explicit pics of kids under 18 exist on your site?

The copyright issues are secondary to that.

Posting sexually explicit pics of kids under 18 is a serious legal and moral issue.

sexeducation · 07-07-2003, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SandManHI

What the heck is that supposed to mean?

A while back he said he didn't have any illegal stuff... I don't know about this second because it MIGHT have changed since, but I checked it out when he first posted over on the other board. I can guarantee you he had content from other porn sites (ideepthroat.com was one of them). Directories of content from Hustler, but I never even touched the stuff (or opened the folder called) ch*ld porn that was on his server.

I don't know of any affiliate program that offers content from the ideepthroat.com site. There might be one, but there were no ads for ideepthroat.com so how would that qualify for using content from the site. BTW, the copyright is listed clearly in the mpg, so it can't be "public domain" (if there ever was such a legal thing) since it's a copywrited work.

I saw the pages as it was orriginally posted and it definately DID look like it was encouraging teens to enter the site.

This whole mixed up website looks like an attempt to fool people into going to the site when they type in other terms, I think the term is called keyword stuffing. Sure, let's get some early teen to go to the site when they are trying to do a report on gorrillas. Let's protect them from getting pregnant by showing them sexual pictures and movies. Can we read that more like getting MORE of them pregnant by peeking their interests in what it is like?

And what is this crap you keep posting? "1 BILLION about to enter the consumer marektplace. And we are still debating whether there needs to be a website where no sexual issue or discussion is barred." Who is debating you about that? I don't think anyone here is... We are saying you are trying to make money selling porn (ch*ld porn no less) to people in the guise of educating them so they won't get pregnant, and are trying to show you the error of your ways so you can try to swing back on the good side of the law before you spend the rest of your life behind bars.

Ok, you want to make a site that serves a moral purpose.. Fine, do it the right way and take all the porn off of it and put some real educational material that you have rights to put up there. Hire some Doctors and get sound medical information. Hire some phychiatrists (did I get that one right, I always mix the two up) and have them review the site to ensure it doesn't screw up some developing mind. Hire a lawyer and ensure that you aren't violating any laws and most important of all, don't steal people's content whatever it is (porn or not porn). Clipart is licensed for a specific purpose, using it for any other purpose is illegal and can wind you in jail for a long time. Go read the fine print, those CD's 90% of the time are just licensed for print use only, or even more restricted.

Ok, you want to make money selling porn... Fine take the illegal stuff and stolen stuff off the site, invest a bit in it and go ahead and make money. I doubt any sponsor is gonna touch you with a thousand foot pole now though.

BTW, you claim that your site is not a porn site. Well I don't see how someone deepthroating a 12 or 14" cock is anything but porn and I am just using one example from your site. Or how about the mpg of Chaseylain getting fucked? Maybe in context you might get away with it if you were explaining that this is abnormal behavior or that this could get you pregnant, but this was just in a massive download area which is what you would expect on a porn site.

You wanted input, you have input, but you seem to only want to "blindly go where noone with a brain would go".

= = = = = = = DOUBLE QUOTE : SEE ABOVE = = = = = = hahahaha
A while back he said he didn't have any illegal stuff... I don't know about this second because it MIGHT have changed since, but I checked it out when he first posted over on the other board. I can guarantee you he had content from other porn sites (ideepthroat.com was one of them). Directories of content from Hustler, but I never even touched the stuff (or opened the folder called) ch*ld porn that was on his server.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Heather at iDeepThroat.com gave me permission to use her content she advertised in the newsgroups/usenet.

In fact - back then I asked her if she wanted to write for the magazine.

She said she had too much on her plate but would consider it another day. In fact it seemed to me that she was just getting used to some financial success.

She is still on my ICQ list until this day. And everytime a member has asked about something she does ... I have posted a "capture" of her TWO videos I use and provide high recommendations.

THE REASON I POST HIGH RECOMMENDATIONS ...
IS FOR YEARS ... NOT DAYS ... NOT WEEKS ... BUT FOR YEARS ...

Heather has not posted aroused genitals or reproductive bodily fluids on her homepage.

Have fun Heather and "special guy" you are a highly recommended ADULT ONLY WEBSITE of SexEducation.com.

You do something that is increasingly - asked about.

Dad@

sexeducation · 07-07-2003, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LadyMischief

If you didn't read it then how the fuck did you post in it, you idiot? You avoided all questions about child porn and posted about other shit. You need to take medication or something.

Oh - sorry ...
I forgot ...EVERY SINGLE WORD SENTENCE AND GRAMMAR MISTAKE.... I make .... is jumped on...
Yes I began to answer questions ...
It turned into a "curse" match ... if this thread does ... it too will be ignored ...

I need to fix my website ...
I only have so much time in a day.
But I see the long term importance of being accepted into the AVS community. It's a little tougher community ... but I will adjust things ... while still talking about the issues my magazine feels is important ..

NetRodent · 07-07-2003, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexeducation
Heather has not posted aroused genitals or reproductive bodily fluids on her homepage.

What do you call the facial on the banner at the top of http://www.ideepthroat.com/?

sexeducation · 07-07-2003, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by XYCash

That's all well and good...but if you are literally putting up pics of kids under 18 having sex you are subject to serious repercussions under canadian law.

Do actually sexually explicit pics of kids under 18 exist on your site?

The copyright issues are secondary to that.

Posting sexually explicit pics of kids under 18 is a serious legal and moral issue.

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!
No way - under any circumstance would I post a picture of a minor having sex.

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE WOULD I PICTURE A MINOR HAVING SEX!!!

I do have pictures of minors on my website.
I got banned by SexKey.com (I would like another chance) because I posted the picture of a Canadian version of Time Magazine which contained a Mother & Daughter with AIDS.

But ... and I do understand why ... their policy was absolutely no minors allowed ... the policy ... was probably correct then ... but ... SexKey.com is a business too ... I think it probably had to do with more of SexEducation.com being a "high maintenance" account ... then to do with AIDS. IMHO ...

I don't believe it was because I was a high maintenance account - but that I had the potential to become a high maintenance account.

Anyways just not logical to me ...

DJRCyberAVS · 07-07-2003, 05:11 PM

Listen you dipshit... you are just not grasping reality....

Many people here have been in the 'adult' biz for a long time - they know the law because they 'NEED' to in order to stay in business, not get sued or go to jail. Try reading and taking in what people saying to you instead of coming back with meaningless crap which would never stand up in a court of law.

Quote:

So if the graphics are what is making the essay so controversial, and if the graphics are illegal ... then we should also be taking BlockBuster Video, Rogers Video and another local privately owned video store to court too ...because that is where I got the graphics from.

It's the overall context mate... a guy got jailed over here for making a 'fake' scat site using chocolate. You push something to be illegal (depciting CP), - regardless if the actual picture/screengrab from the movie is legal or not you risk having your arsed shagged silly.

The part about surfers can disable graphics means shit... it's still visible.

And the 'Dad' part I don't buy for one second. You're a freak. Mixing porn and the other topics is NOT sex education and you are NOT qualified to have such a site if you think it is.

It's a waste of time discussing copyright or the above with you further...... you obviously think you are far smarter then anyone here and know more about the online business so fuck off.

sexeducation · 07-07-2003, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by NetRodent

What do you call the facial on the banner at the top of http://www.ideepthroat.com/?

Stand by ...
Her page is not loading ...

DJRCyberAVS · 07-07-2003, 05:14 PM

Oh... and

Quote:

But I see the long term importance of being accepted into the AVS community.

I can't imagine any reputable avs touching your site.... and if you can't figure out why, pull the fucking trigger and do us all a favour.

sexeducation · 07-07-2003, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by NetRodent

What do you call the facial on the banner at the top of http://www.ideepthroat.com/?

It's still not loading.
grrr ....

The browser is showing (as it passes by) that the graphics are loading but they are not visible in the browser.
Rebooting ...

sexeducation · 07-07-2003, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DJRCyberAVS
Oh... and

I can't imagine any reputable avs touching your site.... and if you can't figure out why, pull the fucking trigger and do us all a favour.

ON IGNORE ...

sexeducation · 07-07-2003, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by NetRodent

What do you call the facial on the banner at the top of http://www.ideepthroat.com/?

No ... I have rebooted and it is not working.
Her graphics on her homepage are not showing up.

Can someone post a screen shot of her homepage...

You never know these days if the server is adjusting the homepage for the community referring it ...

Obviously from the anger of this room - I need to do something.

I can not currently get her graphics to show.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU FOR 3-4-5 maybe five years ...I am not aware of any instance she has displayed aroused genitals or reproductive bodily fluids.

However, I will still back her even if she experimented with these types of "Google Gag Gah" algorithms ... I have.

There is now way to know unless you test your hypothesis.

If it is currently - I will chat her.
To see why.

sexeducation · 07-07-2003, 05:36 PM

Okay ...
I have to go ...
If I missed your posts today ...
Please - repeat your question.
I will be back tomorrow.

John E. Beacock
[email protected]
1-403-619-2739

LadyMischief · 07-07-2003, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexeducation
Okay ...
I have to go ...
If I missed your posts today ...
Please - repeat your question.
I will be back tomorrow.

John E. Beacock
[email protected]
1-403-619-2739

Even if she gave you permission to use the images, you STILL do not have proper 2257 information posted on the site.. AND you have them in conjunction with IMAGES OF MINORS. You are a complete moron if you think this is ok. People have foudn your lovely "hidden directories". I think I'll post the thread in here so anyone who's in doubt can check for themselves.

LadyMischief · 07-07-2003, 05:50 PM

HEre is where our little friend refuses to answer questions about his "tendancies". There are people here and elsewhere who HAVE reported him to authorities, etc... If anyone wants more info, contact me.. here is the first thread I referred to:
http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth... cation+defend

And here's our friend looking for more material (or trying to protect his interests):
http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth... cation+defend

Listen, mister "Dad" (Dad is a COMMONLY KNOWN keyword in CP, coincidence? I htink not). I am NOT going to leave you alone until they ban you or you go to jail.. I refuse to allow anyone like yourself to maintain ANY credibility.. Why? Because I'm a mother, and those kids you victimize have mothers.. your thin veneer of respectability has worn off, and you've dodged too many questions. Someone needs to put you in jail, right now.

gothweb · 07-07-2003, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexeducation

Assuming you are correct ... that 2257 refers to "ALL websites" ... then I would say that 2257 is unconstitional as it forces a magazine to reveal it's sources. If 2257 only refers to "pornographic websites" I can see that ... but I have no intention of revealing the majoritiy of sources for "textual content". Now with regards to graphic content ... I do try to to state the sources ... there may be some old articles I do not ... but I will endevour as a result of recent feed back to be more aware of this need....regardless of whether it is "the law" or not as it makes my website more acceptable to the general adult community. I will work on this issue with expeditious due dilligence (after my other job ..)

I don't think you understand 2257 at all. I think you badly need to talk to a lawyer, because you are trying to make sense of it based on what you think *should* happen, and the result is that you are breaking the law.

Please note that 2257 does not require you to reveal your sources. It requires you to keep documentation on file that proves the age of the models-- copies of their ID, and documents they sign stating they are 18 or older. You keep these on file. All your site needs to have is the name and address of the person who keeps the records.

You are only required by law to show these in the case of a model-age investigation, and can't be asked to share them just because someone wants your source. This means that if someone tried to get a journalistic source from those files, you could fight it under a first-amendment defense.

XYCash · 07-07-2003, 07:32 PM

You all need to understand that 2257 has no relation to anyone living outside of the United States.

This law should not even be quoted except specifically as it applies to a U.S. company.
Yes...maybe his hosting could get taken away. But that would be about the extent of it.

The laws that NEED to be quoted to him are Canadian laws which may be similair to 2257.

What are the Canadian laws as related to age verification?
I can't seem to find them...does anyone have a reference?

gothweb · 07-07-2003, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Registrant:
Sex Education Centres Calgary (SEXEDUCATION-DOM)
Box 55163, Unit 18, 7196 Temple Dr.N.E.
Calgary, AB T2A 4T8
CA

Domain Name: SEXEDUCATION.COM

Administrative Contact, Technical Contact:
Beacock, John (JB1367) [email protected]
CANfind.net LLC
3104 E CAMELBACK RD # 101
PHOENIX, AZ 85016-4502
US
1-800-706-3011 fax: 1-602-957-8178

Record expires on 09-May-2004.
Record created on 18-Sep-2002.
Database last updated on 7-Jul-2003 22:36:14 EDT.

Domain servers in listed order:

NS1.SECURE.NET 192.220.124.10
NS2.SECURE.NET 192.220.125.10

He has given his name as John Beacock, I believe. Interesting that his place of business in in Arizona, isn't it?

What I see is someone who owns a business in Canada that owns the site domain, but who is himself also doing business in Arizona. Does he live there? Is he a citizen? Maybe. Certainly, he is using his US-based email to run a site violating 2257. There are all sorts of ways that this overlaps into US jurisdiction. How sure are you that this guy, as he has represented himself on here, is completely insulated?

LadyMischief · 07-07-2003, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by XYCash
You all need to understand that 2257 has no relation to anyone living outside of the United States.

This law should not even be quoted except specifically as it applies to a U.S. company.
Yes...maybe his hosting could get taken away. But that would be about the extent of it.

The laws that NEED to be quoted to him are Canadian laws which may be similair to 2257.

What are the Canadian laws as related to age verification?
I can't seem to find them...does anyone have a reference?

If you are hosting in the US and are a Canadian you have to comply with 2257 as well, because otherwise you will have your hosting pulled.. Just because YOU aren't liable for it, doesn't mean your HOSTING company isn't.. therefore most hosts do require 2257 compliance.

Maxpixelz · 07-07-2003, 07:46 PM

This guy is fucking out of it!

what a waste of a perfectly good domain name.
You should sell it and not even look back to continue in this biz since youd dont have the slightest clue.
One more tip, dont get tricked into coming on a board where you will be ripped in pieces.
Do your homework first.

LadyMischief · 07-07-2003, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gothweb

He has given his name as John Beacock, I believe. Interesting that his place of business in in Arizona, isn't it?

What I see is someone who owns a business in Canada that owns the site domain, but who is himself also doing business in Arizona. Does he live there? Is he a citizen? Maybe. Certainly, he is using his US-based email to run a site violating 2257. There are all sorts of ways that this overlaps into US jurisdiction. How sure are you that this guy, as he has represented himself on here, is completely insulated?

He's not.. and he may currently reside in canada, however he moves around a lot I'm sure.. these types don't stay in one place long.

LadyMischief · 07-07-2003, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Maxpixelz
This guy is fucking out of it!

what a waste of a perfectly good domain name.
You should sell it and not even look back to continue in this biz since youd dont have the slightest clue.
One more tip, dont get tricked into coming on a board where you will be ripped in pieces.
Do your homework first.

He tried to make himself look credible.. the images of underage children on his site kind of killed that though.

Maxpixelz · 07-07-2003, 07:49 PM

Quote:

He tried to make himself look credible.. the images of underage children on his site kind of killed that though

My hat off to you.
I like your style

XYCash · 07-07-2003, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gothweb

He has given his name as John Beacock, I believe. Interesting that his place of business in in Arizona, isn't it?

What I see is someone who owns a business in Canada that owns the site domain, but who is himself also doing business in Arizona. Does he live there? Is he a citizen? Maybe. Certainly, he is using his US-based email to run a site violating 2257. There are all sorts of ways that this overlaps into US jurisdiction. How sure are you that this guy, as he has represented himself on here, is completely insulated?

Then why is everyone and their mother reporting him to Canadian police?

Has anyone verifiably found sexually explicit pics of kids on his site?

The 2257 argument is literally the most ridiculous thing I've seen going in this thread since most American adult webmasters don't even have 2257 posted on their site.

An example: Adult Revenue Service...one of the BIG players:

http://www.teenboyz2000.com/

see 2257 anywhere on there?

LadyMischief · 07-07-2003, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Maxpixelz

My hat off to you.
I like your style

Thank you sir

LadyMischief · 07-07-2003, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by XYCash

Then why is everyone and their mother reporting him to Canadian police?

Has anyone verifiably found sexually explicit pics of kids on his site?

The 2257 argument is literally the most ridiculous thing I've seen going in this thread since most American adult webmasters don't even have 2257 posted on their site.

An example: Adult Revenue Service...one of the BIG players:

http://www.teenboyz2000.com/

see 2257 anywhere on there?

As I've asked you to about 10 different times, please contact me via ICQ 3522039 or email [email protected] and I can explain certain things a little further :P

Maxpixelz · 07-07-2003, 07:52 PM

Quote:

As I've asked you to about 10 different times, please contact me via ICQ 3522039 or email [email protected] and I can explain certain things a little further :P

there is no explaining to this guy

leave the moron be.

gothweb · 07-07-2003, 07:57 PM

The fact that lots of people are breaking a law does not make the actions of one person breaking that law more legal.

Webby · 07-07-2003, 10:13 PM

sexeducation:

Quote:

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!
No way - under any circumstance would I post a picture of a minor having sex.

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE WOULD I PICTURE A MINOR HAVING SEX!!!

I do have pictures of minors on my website.
I got banned by SexKey.com (I would like another chance) because I posted the picture of a Canadian version of Time Magazine which contained a Mother & Daughter with AIDS.

The first "absolutely not" is a blatant lie!

The second "absolutely not" is a blatant lie!

Other more relevant people already have images from your website that prove my point. Their reaction was "it wants to make me puke".

The admission the "I do have pictures of minors on my website" in conjunction with both lies above say it all.

You are a CHILD MOLESTOR and your "hypothisis" on "sex education" for young boys and girls shows what a SICK FUCK you are!

Now...

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 03:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Maxpixelz
This guy is fucking out of it!

what a waste of a perfectly good domain name.
You should sell it and not even look back to continue in this biz since youd dont have the slightest clue.
One more tip, dont get tricked into coming on a board where you will be ripped in pieces.
Do your homework first.

Aaaaah ...
Boards are boards ...there are all kinds of boards.
The "F" of GFY probably ensures that Google algorithms do not high rank this site in general audience searches.

However, GFY is exactly where the message ...

No aroused genitals or reproductive bodily fluids on any directly accessed domain.

... should be posted.

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LadyMischief

Even if she gave you permission to use the images, you STILL do not have proper 2257 information posted on the site.. AND you have them in conjunction with IMAGES OF MINORS. You are a complete moron if you think this is ok. People have foudn your lovely "hidden directories". I think I'll post the thread in here so anyone who's in doubt can check for themselves.

I do not have ANY hidden secret directories.
The directory structure - the files - even the roughup of graphics, indeed even the "steps of" the roughup of graphics - are an identical mirror of my personal work station.

If the server crashes or my personal work station crashes - I can replicate the site from the other.

I do not do "backups" - the server is my backup (and vice versa).

I used to have a generic 2257 message on my homepage ... but it increased the density of words on my homepage and thereby lowered Google ranking so I removed it.

And I do have the "sources" for the more controversial and more adult type graphics. And can and will present them - if so demanded by a court of law or if requested by the Police.

Posting a generic blurb about 2257 on my homepage - gives a wrong impression on what the site is about. SexEducation.com is not a "porn" site - by any definition of "pornography"

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 03:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Webby
sexeducation:

The first "absolutely not" is a blatant lie!

The second "absolutely not" is a blatant lie!

Other more relevant people already have images from your website that prove my point. Their reaction was "it wants to make me puke".

The admission the "I do have pictures of minors on my website" in conjunction with both lies above say it all.

You are a CHILD MOLESTOR and your "hypothisis" on "sex education" for young boys and girls shows what a SICK FUCK you are!

Now...

I once had a picture (and link & source credits) to a Canadian Version of Time Magazine which was a Mother & Daughter with AIDS complications. This means YES - I have pictures of minors on my website.

NO ABSOLUTELY NOT - SEXEDUCATION.COM DOES NOT HAVE ANY PICTURE OF ANY MINOR ENGAGED IN ANY SEXUAL ACTIVITY.

"CHILD MOLESTOR" GARBAGE ANSWERED ABOVE ...

SexEducation.com provides alternative forms of intercourse for maturing adults - which PARENTS(ADULTS) can optionally use.

It is a place where adults can discuss (with out the cursing) ... stronger replies to common questions.

It is not a hypothesis that schools begin teaching 10 year olds about the "birds and the bees" - it is factual.

It is also factual that many girls begin having their periods as early as age nine.

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 03:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LadyMischief

As I've asked you to about 10 different times, please contact me via ICQ 3522039 or email [email protected] and I can explain certain things a little further :P

Are you asking me to contact you by ICQ?
I thought you were referring to others.

My ICQ is 32315652.
A simple search of the email address [email protected] would provide that.

Any chat at that ICQ may be used on my website after being "anonymised" - however.

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 04:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by XYCash

Then why is everyone and their mother reporting him to Canadian police?

Has anyone verifiably found sexually explicit pics of kids on his site?

The 2257 argument is literally the most ridiculous thing I've seen going in this thread since most American adult webmasters don't even have 2257 posted on their site.

An example: Adult Revenue Service...one of the BIG players:

http://www.teenboyz2000.com/

see 2257 anywhere on there?

2257 exactly ...
This "CHILD MOLESTOR" crap will die - it just a big "rumour mill" ...an unsubstantiated "witch hunt" because I say stuff that some in the adult industry do not like.

If so many people have reported me to the police - where are the police? Time will terminate this "fluff & fodder".

There has never been a formal complaint on SexEducation.com and all the "questionable" content articles have been on the website for several YEARS! Not days - not weeks - but several YEARS ... unaltered. And anyone - ANONYMOUSLY - may make a contribution to that article. No-one has even ANONYMOUSLY.

In fact - then ending of my child pornography article is a challenge to President George W. Bush - which has come true.

That "challenge" being - that it was unreasonable to those who are not yet reproductively capable (children) to be presented sexual graphics IMMEDIATELY when going to WhiteHouse.com.

That has now been changed.
As we all know to WhiteHouseSEX.com.

BigFrog · 07-08-2003, 04:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexeducation

SexEducation.com provides alternative forms of intercourse for maturing adults - which PARENTS(ADULTS) can optionally use.

It is a place where adults can discuss (with out the cursing) ... stronger replies to common questions.

It is not a hypothesis that schools begin teaching 10 year olds about the "birds and the bees" - it is factual.

It is also factual that many girls begin having their periods as early as age nine.

you want parents to show 10 year olds your site? you are one sick fuck

i love how your browser fails to show pictures when you are directly questioned about them...

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BigFrog

you want parents to show 10 year olds your site? you are one sick fuck

i love how your browser fails to show pictures when you are directly questioned about them...

I still can not get the graphics to load in Explorer 6.0 ...
However - the iDeepThroat.com graphics did load in Netscape 6.2.

Yes - I see what you are saying now...
That's pretty dany border line... you really have to look.

However, she has rated the page with RASC (I think she should update that with ICRA.org) and therefore as previously discussed on my website ... and in other threads ... would not in my opinion be required to meet ...

No aroused genitals or reproductive bodily fluids on her directly accessed domain.

The issue is - how reasonable would it be for a child to visit the directly accessed domain.

In the case of - WhiteHouse.com VERY HIGH.
In the case of - Sex.com VERY HIGH.
In the case of - SexEducation.com VERY HIGH.

These types of domains (IMO) must take higher precautions when displaying sexual content on their directly accessed domains.

Currently, I feel that if a domain name contains the word "SEX" and the domain name is rated with ICRA.org - which thereby allows over 90% of web browsers to use parental functions contained therein ... then have at it for adult content on your directly accessed domain - IF - IF - there is an adult warning.

iDeepThroat.com - still meets the requirements as discussed.

How likely is it that a child would enter iDeepThroat.com directly into a web browser? VERY VERY LOW - HIGHLY UNLIKELY.
Yet she contains - relatively - obscure graphics.
Ample - filter content options.
"2257 compliant" text for filtering software to check for.
An "ADULT ENTER" ... and kids be gone links.
AND is rated to enable browser controls to work.

Currently - her directly accessed domain name does not violate the rights of the majority of the world (children) to reasonable access to the information age.... and

therefore - is still recommended.

Dad@

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 04:46 AM

I am out of this thread for the day.
If I missed any questions please repost them.
CYA - tomorrow.

John E. Beacock
[email protected]
1-403-619-2739

LadyMischief · 07-08-2003, 05:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexeducation

I do not have ANY hidden secret directories.
The directory structure - the files - even the roughup of graphics, indeed even the "steps of" the roughup of graphics - are an identical mirror of my personal work station.

If the server crashes or my personal work station crashes - I can replicate the site from the other.

I do not do "backups" - the server is my backup (and vice versa).

I used to have a generic 2257 message on my homepage ... but it increased the density of words on my homepage and thereby lowered Google ranking so I removed it.

And I do have the "sources" for the more controversial and more adult type graphics. And can and will present them - if so demanded by a court of law or if requested by the Police.

Posting a generic blurb about 2257 on my homepage - gives a wrong impression on what the site is about. SexEducation.com is not a "porn" site - by any definition of "pornography"

Bullshit.. And NOT having any 2257 warning on your page puts you in DIRECT violation of Title18 laws.. you may be in canada, you idiot, but you HOST in the states... Fuck that i'll just contact your host and see what they think about it. Doesn't matter WHAT impression it gives, if you have sexual material on your site, YOU MUST HAVE 2257 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS INFORMATION, if you do not, I don't give a flying fuck if it's a website about a tribute to clowns, YOU ARE IN VIOLATION. You have pornography on your site, therefore it's under the jurisdiction of title 18.. AND canadian obscenity laws. Ok smartypants.. show me a license that allows you to display the material you have there? The material that "heather" supposedly told you you could use? You must have SOME kind of license agreement? Who's the custodian? Can you PROVE difinitively that the participants in the sexual intercourse in those images are of legal age? Or do you know the name of the custodian of records so they can?

Fuck off, you wannabe. You'd be smartest to hire yourself a damn good lawyer, because you are going to fucking need one.

LadyMischief · 07-08-2003, 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexeducation

I still can not get the graphics to load in Explorer 6.0 ...
However - the iDeepThroat.com graphics did load in Netscape 6.2.

Yes - I see what you are saying now...
That's pretty dany border line... you really have to look.

However, she has rated the page with RASC (I think she should update that with ICRA.org) and therefore as previously discussed on my website ... and in other threads ... would not in my opinion be required to meet ...

No aroused genitals or reproductive bodily fluids on her directly accessed domain.

The issue is - how reasonable would it be for a child to visit the directly accessed domain.

In the case of - WhiteHouse.com VERY HIGH.
In the case of - Sex.com VERY HIGH.
In the case of - SexEducation.com VERY HIGH.

These types of domains (IMO) must take higher precautions when displaying sexual content on their directly accessed domains.

Currently, I feel that if a domain name contains the word "SEX" and the domain name is rated with ICRA.org - which thereby allows over 90% of web browsers to use parental functions contained therein ... then have at it for adult content on your directly accessed domain - IF - IF - there is an adult warning.

iDeepThroat.com - still meets the requirements as discussed.

How likely is it that a child would enter iDeepThroat.com directly into a web browser? VERY VERY LOW - HIGHLY UNLIKELY.
Yet she contains - relatively - obscure graphics.
Ample - filter content options.
"2257 compliant" text for filtering software to check for.
An "ADULT ENTER" ... and kids be gone links.
AND is rated to enable browser controls to work.

Currently - her directly accessed domain name does not violate the rights of the majority of the world (children) to reasonable access to the information age.... and

therefore - is still recommended.

Dad@

Are you a fucking moron? 2257 information is NOT for kids, it's for the AUTHORITIES... To prove that the people depicted in the images are OF LEGAL AGE TO PARTICIPATE IN SUCH IMAGES.. You really want to go to jail, and you're fixated on children.. hmm I wonder why...

mule · 07-08-2003, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexeducation
Time will terminate this "fluff & fodder"

Damn, if this idiot posts here one more time, I'm sure GFY will be in top position on Google searches for "fluff and fodder"

malakajoe · 07-08-2003, 07:06 AM

1. Why is it ok for minors to see pictures of hardcore sexual intercourse?
2. Why do you use the nickname dad?
3. Are you a member of NAMBLA?
4. Do you support NAMBLA?
5. Do you get aroused looking at naked pictures of minors?

LadyMischief · 07-08-2003, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mule

Damn, if this idiot posts here one more time, I'm sure GFY will be in top position on Google searches for "fluff and fodder"

hahahah probably.. how're you doing darlin?

LadyMischief · 07-08-2003, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by malakajoe
1. Why is it ok for minors to see pictures of hardcore sexual intercourse?
2. Why do you use the nickname dad?
3. Are you a member of NAMBLA?
4. Do you support NAMBLA?
5. Do you get aroused looking at naked pictures of minors?

I wonder just HOW many times he's avoided these questions... we should go through all the threads and count them up.

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 03:35 PM

THIS IS THE ONLY THREAD I REPLY TO NOW ....

I will keep you informed of the proceedings ... the situation ... and what appears to be an apparent website shut down.

At least currently - my Zone Files - seem to be not working correctly.

I have about 2 hours to solve this otherwise what happens - will happen - and life will go on - AND - I will continue to report the events to the best of my knowledge.

Have at it ...
It's all fun - it's all fun ...
Life that is.

John E. Beacock
[email protected]
1-403-619-2739

Female Genital Mutilation is a global sickness cured simply with knowledge.

[ oopps ... plug]

LadyMischief · 07-08-2003, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexeducation
THIS IS THE ONLY THREAD I REPLY TO NOW ....

I will keep you informed of the proceedings ... the situation ... and what appears to be an apparent website shut down.

At least currently - my Zone Files - seem to be not working correctly.

I have about 2 hours to solve this otherwise what happens - will happen - and life will go on - AND - I will continue to report the events to the best of my knowledge.

Have at it ...
It's all fun - it's all fun ...
Life that is.

John E. Beacock
[email protected]
1-403-619-2739

Female Genital Mutilation is a global sickness cured simply with knowledge.

[ oopps ... plug]

You are a sicko and I hope you never ever get that piece of shit website up again....

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 03:43 PM

You know what ...

I am ... FUCKING PISSED OFF ...

I need to take a break ... and calm down ...

I'm just livid.

I might take the whole night off.
Well not really - I just worked - friggen - 10 hours ...
wtf ... I need break.

I need a Bud ... lol

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 03:44 PM

FUCKOFF - LADYFUCK...

LadyMischief · 07-08-2003, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexeducation
FUCKOFF - LADYFUCK...

Start listening to some truth, instead of being mad at me.. be mad at yourself for being the kind of fucking creep you are, a predator of children and someone who refuses to listen to reason.

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 03:55 PM

This is interesting ...

If I had not stopped for gas - I would have beaten the internets DNS caching system.

As it stands now I can not access my email to make modifications to the DNS zone files.

sexeducation · 07-08-2003, 03:58 PM

My ... backroom.iserver.com login and password seems to be failing ...

It's not the first time of dozens I have forgot it though ...
And I am still quite "emotional" ... lol

NOTE TO SELF: calm down ...

07-07-2003, 05:50 PM	#265
LadyMischief Orgasms N Such! Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Oakville, Ontario Posts: 18,135	HEre is where our little friend refuses to answer questions about his "tendancies". There are people here and elsewhere who HAVE reported him to authorities, etc... If anyone wants more info, contact me.. here is the first thread I referred to: http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth... cation+defend And here's our friend looking for more material (or trying to protect his interests): http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth... cation+defend Listen, mister "Dad" (Dad is a COMMONLY KNOWN keyword in CP, coincidence? I htink not). I am NOT going to leave you alone until they ban you or you go to jail.. I refuse to allow anyone like yourself to maintain ANY credibility.. Why? Because I'm a mother, and those kids you victimize have mothers.. your thin veneer of respectability has worn off, and you've dodged too many questions. Someone needs to put you in jail, right now. __________________ ICQ 3522039 Content Manager - orgasm.com [email protected]

07-07-2003, 07:32 PM	#267
XYCash Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: here and there Posts: 582	You all need to understand that 2257 has no relation to anyone living outside of the United States. This law should not even be quoted except specifically as it applies to a U.S. company. Yes...maybe his hosting could get taken away. But that would be about the extent of it. The laws that NEED to be quoted to him are Canadian laws which may be similair to 2257. What are the Canadian laws as related to age verification? I can't seem to find them...does anyone have a reference? __________________ XYCash Gay Affiliate Programs - Making Money For Webmasters Since 1999 - click here to sign up

07-07-2003, 07:46 PM	#270
Maxpixelz Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 219	This guy is fucking out of it! what a waste of a perfectly good domain name. You should sell it and not even look back to continue in this biz since youd dont have the slightest clue. One more tip, dont get tricked into coming on a board where you will be ripped in pieces. Do your homework first. __________________ Thanks [email protected] \| ICQ: 174198632

07-07-2003, 07:57 PM	#278
gothweb Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Back in the USSA Posts: 8,849	The fact that lots of people are breaking a law does not make the actions of one person breaking that law more legal. __________________ Photos by Ian X.: Distinctive photos of goth babes. Blood Money:Your traffic, my sites, our money. MojoHost: Still the best.

07-08-2003, 07:06 AM	#291
malakajoe Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Sacramento Posts: 1,751	1. Why is it ok for minors to see pictures of hardcore sexual intercourse? 2. Why do you use the nickname dad? 3. Are you a member of NAMBLA? 4. Do you support NAMBLA? 5. Do you get aroused looking at naked pictures of minors? __________________ Selfpleasure.com for sale on auction. Closes on Tuesday March 11th at 9pm PST!!!! Dirty enough to be good, but clean enough for everyone! ------------------------------------------------------------------ Moral Police - First graduating class coming soon! - Forcing our values across the internet

07-07-2003, 05:36 PM	#263
sexeducation So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Calgary - Alberta - Canada Posts: 7,315	Okay ... I have to go ... If I missed your posts today ... Please - repeat your question. I will be back tomorrow. John E. Beacock [email protected] 1-403-619-2739

07-08-2003, 04:46 AM	#287
sexeducation So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Calgary - Alberta - Canada Posts: 7,315	I am out of this thread for the day. If I missed any questions please repost them. CYA - tomorrow. John E. Beacock [email protected] 1-403-619-2739

07-08-2003, 03:35 PM	#294
sexeducation So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Calgary - Alberta - Canada Posts: 7,315	THIS IS THE ONLY THREAD I REPLY TO NOW .... I will keep you informed of the proceedings ... the situation ... and what appears to be an apparent website shut down. At least currently - my Zone Files - seem to be not working correctly. I have about 2 hours to solve this otherwise what happens - will happen - and life will go on - AND - I will continue to report the events to the best of my knowledge. Have at it ... It's all fun - it's all fun ... Life that is. John E. Beacock [email protected] 1-403-619-2739 Female Genital Mutilation is a global sickness cured simply with knowledge. [ oopps ... plug]

07-08-2003, 03:43 PM	#296
sexeducation So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Calgary - Alberta - Canada Posts: 7,315	You know what ... I am ... FUCKING PISSED OFF ... I need to take a break ... and calm down ... I'm just livid. I might take the whole night off. Well not really - I just worked - friggen - 10 hours ... wtf ... I need break. I need a Bud ... lol

07-08-2003, 03:44 PM	#297
sexeducation So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Calgary - Alberta - Canada Posts: 7,315	FUCKOFF - LADYFUCK...

07-08-2003, 03:55 PM	#299
sexeducation So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Calgary - Alberta - Canada Posts: 7,315	This is interesting ... If I had not stopped for gas - I would have beaten the internets DNS caching system. As it stands now I can not access my email to make modifications to the DNS zone files.

07-08-2003, 03:58 PM	#300
sexeducation So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Calgary - Alberta - Canada Posts: 7,315	My ... backroom.iserver.com login and password seems to be failing ... It's not the first time of dozens I have forgot it though ... And I am still quite "emotional" ... lol NOTE TO SELF: calm down ...