And how did you get this information?

How did you get this information?

Oh I've got lots more information. :thumbsup Names. Family members. Phone numbers. PO boxes. Street addresses. Home addresses. Business addresses. Cell numbers. Fax numbers. Business contacts. Email addresses. URLs.

Real ones. Not the shit you've posted here. For some reason, I'm feeling awfully benevolent today. Shall I share them?

Share what - about who?

Are you saying - you are prepared to put children, teens and innocent spouses in potential harms way?

Are you threatening me?

What's up here?

Do you not realize who is watching these threads?


Are you threatening to post personal information about who you think I am in this newsgroup?

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

How did you get this information?

No threats. Just promises. :)

I just had to quote you from page 4 of this thread where instead of pulling child porn pics you told everybody to shut thier graphics off

And on page 7 of this thread you again say you have child porn on your site. Amazing this continues on.

Just who is slandering who on this board ???

Come on JFPdude ,,, I put up with way more then I needed to.

none - the hun gets revenue from pre-paid gallery placements on the top 15 spaces and banners. the rest of thegalleries are free placements.

LOL! I'd almost forgotten about that :)

When you're in jail and being ass raped that may start to come close to being true.

Really, really long threads are just a trip...

The domain is going ...
The police have not called, phoned or come to get me.
The sky did not fall - and - the sun comes up daily.

And this once again is the only thread I will look at regularily.

UPDATE: I should have time this weekend to fix the "email only" membership code ...

Have a great day everyone.
I will keep you informed.
And never again - will GFY - spark an emotional response from me.
I appologize to those I cursed at. It was wrong.
Never again.

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

sexeducation:

"John E. Beacock" I doubt anyone is interested in what happened in your life today, your "opinions" or your apologies.

As a reminder, you published child pornography, you stole material which you had no rights to use.

You were advised yesterday to shut down all adult or "sex education" domains in your control. You have failed to do this.

Material and data in my possession is being passed to several people who are welcome to invesitigate further and do as they see fit with this information.

As a reminder - I have never published child pornography - although I do discuss it.

I did not quote material properly in some cases with regards to "fair use" ... I was made aware of that issue - it is being corrected and studied up on to ensure not only compliance to the law but the spirit of it as well.

Anyone - may investigate me - at any time.
You can only do the best you can do in life.

[PLUG]
"Feed the world and you feed peace. How many do you want to feed?"

Many in the religious world today believe and teach the doctrine that we are saved by faith only. They teach that all one has to do is pray a "sinners prayer" and God will forgive their sins and at that point, they will be saved.
I believe with all my heart that man is saved by faith in the Lord. And that men will be saved eternally by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. I have always believed that without faith it is impossible to please God, I believe this because the Bible teaches this. I do not believe in the doctrine of " salvation by faith only" because it is false, not taught in the Bible. There is a great difference between the two.
The doctrine of faith only was made popular by Martin Luther. His break from the Roman Catholic Church resulted in the first protestant denomination. Martin Luther's protest to the false doctrine of salvation by the works of the Catholic Church was the cause of his contending for salvation by faith only. In other words, as a protest against one false doctrine he fathered another. In his swing away from the accepted idea of saved by Catholic works doctrine, he did
not stop with the Bible truth of salvation by faith, but ended up teaching the doctrine of faith alone.
His trouble and the trouble with most people that believe this false doctrine was and is a misunderstanding of what the Bible means by the term "works." In other words, a misunderstanding of the Bible word, "works," was really the cause of Luther's preaching the doctrine of salvation by faith alone. here is what I mean. Luther saw Paul teaching in Eph. 2:8-9 salvation is not by works and then read James 2:24 were James says we are not justified by faith only but by works. He could not correlate the two. His decision was to reject the inspired writings of James. The trouble was not with James and the trouble was not with Paul; the trouble was with Luther's misunderstanding of the term "works" and how it is often used in the New Testament.
The word works is used in at least three ways in the New Testament.

1. Sometimes the word refers to the works of the Old Testament or the works of the law of Moses.

2. Sometimes the word is used to refer to our own personal plans, mans ideas, or traditions devised by men. Of course we don't believe that these works will lead us to God or save us from sin. We could call these our own works or works of men, or works of men's righteousness.

3. And there is the kind the Bible calls the "works of God." If we do not under stand the clear difference between these terms as used in the Bible then we will always have a difficulty understanding Gods plan of salvation By faith in Christ.

* The works of God

In John 6:28 people came and asked Jesus " What shall we do that we may work the works of God?" Jesus answers in verse 29 "this is the work of God that you believe on him whom He hath sent." Yes Jesus said that to believe on Christ is to do the works of God. Yes,faith in the Lord is a work of God. FAITH IS A WORK. It is not the kind of works that Paul is speaking of in Eph. 2:8-9. Jesus said it was the work of God. When God gives a command, and man obeys, man is working the works of God. The act of obedience to Gods command is not the work of man. It is the work of God. Personal obedience to the will of the Lord is the Work of God. Faith is a work. Jesus said so. If you
are saved by faith, you are saved by works. You cannot believe insalvation by faith and disbelieve in salvation by the works of God.
You can believe in salvation by faith and reject the doctrine of salvation by the works of men. You can Believe in salvation by faith in the Lord and disbelieve the proposition of salvation by the works of the law of Moses. Neither salvation by the works of man nor by the works of the law of Moses is true. But, salvation by faith in Christ and salvation by the works of God-they are both true.They are both taught in the New Testament.

*THE WORKS OF MEN

Eph. 2:8-9 "By grace are ye saved through faith: and that not of yourselves. It is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast." Study the context you will see that Paul does not have in mind the same kind of works that James is referring to in James 2:24 where James says we are justified by works.In Eph. 2: Paul is speaking of our own personal goodness. He means our own deeds that we devised ourselves. to paraphrase, you can't do it yourself; you can not devise yourself schemes or plans or traditions or righteous ceremonies that will save you. You can not do enough of your own invention to save yourself or make yourself worthy of salvation.

* THE WORKS OF THE LAW

Paul in Romans chapter four discusses Abraham and the justification of this patriarch of God ages before the law of the Jews was given to them at Mt. Sinai. He is proving that Abraham was not justified by works but rather by faith in God. Careful reading shows that Paul has in mind the Works of the law of Moses-the deeds of the law of the Jewish nation.. Rom. 3:20 says, "for by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight." Paul speaks here of the law of Moses, "by the deeds of that law"-by the obedience of that law
you cannot be redeemed or saved in Gods sight. Paul says that Abraham was not saved by that old law. He is arguing with those Jews in Rome who were still holding to the idea that the rites and ceremonies and traditions handed down to them by their fathers and received from Moses would save them. The works of the O. T. law will not save us.

* "SAVING FAITH" IS "OBEDIENT FAITH"

Often times in the New Testament the word faith is used as"saving faith" and often the term believer means a " saved believer." Whenever you find that faith saves, or the expression saving faith, it always means obedient faith. Saving faith is obedient faith.
Whenever you find a believer that is saved you always find an obedient believer. His obedience is always included in the expression or idea of faith. If the believer is saved then that believer has obeyed. Saving faith always includes obedience. Rom.13:11 talks of those that believed, these were obedient believers as we see when we go back and see them in Rom. 6:3-4.. Paul tells us when and how they believed in chapter 6 he tells us very plainly that these same
persons had been baptized by a burial and that is when their newness of life began. Rom. 13 talks about "obedient faith" Rom. 6 explains that "obedient faith", Look at Rom. 6:17 "But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you."

* EPHESIAN'S FAITH INCLUDES OBEDIENCE

Check out Acts 19, Paul goes to Ephesus and there finds 12 disciples who knew only the baptism of John and Paul said "Have ye received the Holy Spirit SINCE YE BELIEVED?" Look at what they said; "We have not so much as heard that there be any Holy Spirit." Paul said unto them, " Unto what then were ye baptized?" They said "Unto Johns baptism."
Reading this passage carefully you can see that their baptism was included in the term "believed." Baptism is a command of God.Repentance is a command of God and these are included in the idea of Bible faith or saving faith because saving faith is obeying faith.

* CRISPUS SAVED BY OBEDIENT FAITH

Read Acts 18 for this example.

* JAILER'S BELIEVING INCLUDES OBEYING

Read Acts 16 for this example.

* THE KIND OF FAITH THAT WILL NOT SAVE

John 12:42-43 is an example of the kind of faith that will not save. "Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many BELIEVED on Him but because of the pharisees they did not confess him lest they should be put out of the synagogue, for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God." Saving faith is faith that obeys.
Is there any one that cannot quote Jno. 3:16? I do not think so. Lets look at verse 36 of this same chapter. " He that believeth on the son hath everlasting life, but he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, for the wrath of God abideth on him.(R.S.V.) Look at it carefully, what's the negative of he that believeth. He that obeyeth not. Why should this be worded like this? He that believeth on the son means the obedient believer. That is why he then could logically say in the next part,"he that obeyeth not" or " he that believeth
not." Hebrews 5:9 And being made perfect he became the author of eternal
salvation unto all who obey him; Author of eternal salvation to who? Believers that obey him. Gal.3:26" For ye are all children of God by faith in the Lord Jesus." Faith made them God's children, the question is if faith made them God's children then how did faith do it? God answers this in the very next verse. Verse 27 " for as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ." That is the inspired writers explanation of how faith makes us God's children. Obedience is again included in saving faith.

* HOW TO LET YOUR FAITH SAVE YOU

Mankind has devised so many different plans of salvation it seems difficult to know who to listen to. Man is not the author of salvation, Jesus Christ is. Lets hear Him; Christ said, "Believe on me." Then he tells me to repent of my sins, and then he commands me to be baptized for the forgiveness of my sins ( Acts 2:38 ). He promises to save the baptized believer Mark 16:16. That is Gods plan
of redemption for mankind revealed to us in his Holy Word.

Instead of spending your money getting new domains, why not fucking save your pennies and hire yourself a lawyer. In fact, most lawyers will give you a free telephone consultation.. Instead of acting like you know something, do the right thing and call a lawyer.

sexeducation:

Save all that for others... I'm finished with you.

I believe in the Lord Jesus and that he died on the cross for our sins. I have read the entire bible - cover to cover.

Even Einstein believed in God.

I do have a problem with "religions" that is unresolved with my personal faith.

I try to be a "contributor" to the planet - and not soley a "consumer" of it's limited resources.

It took the Catholic Church centuries to admit the earth revolved around the sun - and not vice-versa. This planet does not have centuries to gain a mature understanding of sex.


The fact is - women are not treated equally throughout the world.
Sexual prejudice is learned - it is NOT genetic.
Most women can not calculate the only day in their cycle they become fertile - that's pretty sad ... very sad indeed.

sexeducation:

Yes.. tell it to the judge and others - they may think it relevant when dealing with a child pornographer.

Why do you keep posting here???? (Don't bother answering)

You need to change that sig to:

Everything else - is young girls and boys!

:321GFY

GFY is supposedly the world's busiest "Adult Webmaster" board.
What's happening to SexEducation.com considering recent events is now a valid and on topic - post.

I have no problem explaining my actions & motivations to any judge be that the Creator or a in a court of law.

There has never been - in all the many years - that SexEducation.com began evolving a "formal complaint".

And even - with this current temporary shut-down - I was not presented with any evidence or formal correspondence for the reason of the shut-down from the people involved in this shut-down.

What others need to realize ... and that you clearly do ... from other boards is that this started when I posted ...

"NO AROUSED GENITALS OR REPRODUCTIVE BODILY FLUIDS ON ANY DIRECTLY ACCESSED DOMAIN."

And from that single post - a "witch hunt" began ...
and quite honestly ... lessons were learned.

The decision to post this statement has been beneficial and SexEducation.com is in the process of changing.

But the readers of this post should know ...
There has not been a healthy focussed discussion of this statement regardless of where I go - what ever board - I have posted this on.

What has happened is personal attacks against me and my website or I just get banned.

"NO AROUSED GENITALS OR REPRODUCTIVE BODILY FLUIDS ON ANY DIRECTLY ACCESSED DOMAIN."

The discussion of this statement - which I believe - is necessary for the evolution of the internet and the reasonable rights of the majority of the world (children) to the information age - remains undebated among the adult industry which often does the opposite.

I'm taking the traffic of this discussion to another board.
Where hopefully - the rules are enforced - and a debate of the topic can take place and so that I may learn from that debate.

Quite truthfully - I was expecting - some type of constitional discussion that "once you force authors to ...." or "it's a slippery slope when Big Brother gets involved with freedom of speech ..."
What seems to be the answer is that Adult Webmasters feel that this will cut into profits ... pocketbooks.

But you know what? I don't think so.
Most consumers are prepared to click on an over "18 button".
They in fact expect to now.

What I did not say - is that there should be no "nudity" of any type.

However, I feel - and still do - that it is unreasonable to show aroused genitals or reproductive bodily fluids on a directly accessed domain - just that one page - and that doing so is not an unreasonable restriction to freedom of the press.

Adult Webmasters will still make money, and be able to show whatever they wish within the law, and it would aid software filtering companies like NetNanny etc.

[PLUG]
Every person that is reproductively capable has a self evident right to an understanding of such.

What and when they learn about certains aspects is a Parents decision.

too much here for me to read...i'll wait for the movie

Man, as long as you try to fit the laws to what you believe, you're going to have problems. Stop interpreting the law and start following it.

I am NOT trying to fit the laws to what I believe.
The misconception about SexEducation.com stems at least in this thread (IMO) from the thinking that my website is a "pornographic" website. This is incorrect - as it is not.

Yes - it is an adult website.
Yes - there is content on the website I recommend Parents give to their teens.
Yes - there is inappropriate content on the website that should not be given to teens.

SexEducation.com is an adult magazine of alternative discussions regarding sexual intercourse. SexEducation.com is NOT a porn site even though it is an adult site which contains discussions of teen emails.

It is each individual Parents (Adults) decision or not whether they wish to print or show a discusion which takes place there.

I have tried very hard to provide unique content / appropriateness filtering capabilites to those Adults that feel - for example; that their teen which has been caught surfing the "free tour" areas of adult websites - needs a more "adult" understanding - of sex.

The average of internet pornography is a lie. Most people are not having sex the way pornography in general is being portrayed on the internet.

50% of women never have an orgasm.
70% of men complain of premature ejaculation.

There are more modern Parents that wish their teens have a more modern and healthy understanding of sex - and do NOT grow up sexually dysfunctional - which seems to be the case in a majority of situations ( see percentages above).

Sometimes those "lessons" need to be a little more "punchy" then the standard "medical" or "politically" correct website.

That's what I provide.

sexeducation:

Get this... you are not an "adult webmaster" - you are a CHILD PORNOGRAPHER with zero skills in HTML.

What happened to "sexeducation.com" is a total irrelevance and it is not "a valid and on topic-post". This is an illegal domain which contained CHILD PORN. Webmasters are NOT interested in the "opinions" of a CHILD PORNOGRAPHER.

Don't waste your keyboard in some "freedom of speech" and "rights" oratory - you have NO freedom of speech with regard to child porn. You can deny till the end of time you had any child porn images, however I have copies of these and all HTML which is on your domains. Others have been provided copies of this and, they too, agree this is CHILD PORN.

Questions are already arising over banners used and where these are used in an inappropriate manner since you are appealing to children to get further involved in your "tendencies".
Is it "appropriate" to display this crap on boards which are visited by young girls??

<center>
<img src="http://www.sexeducation.com/private/sexeducation_com/graphics_sexeducation_com/banners/banners_freebanners.jpg">
</center>

Your conduct is not that of a webmaster in any respect - you ran an illegal business.

Now.. quit any "discussion" - there is nothing to discuss of value other than to other CHILD PORNOGRAPHERS.

Without saying much, I can assure you there is a lot coming your way - far more than you ever thought possible..

Now... stay away from any more children and :321GFY

Not only has their never been an issue until this thread with my nick used on my website as "Dad@".

There was only one issue with that banner - ever - which was - the word "intercourse". The "complaint" occured within a week of posting the banner.

When that issue was raised - I included a paragraph on the homepage that said ...

The dictionary defines intercourse as "social discussion" AND "sexual interaction."

Way - previous - to the explosion of CP on the internet, and way previous to any "discussions" in these Adult Webmaster boards - I posted a "contest" to replace the banner.

I have not really looked at that banner for many years actually.

I do feel - especially considering recent events - meaning continued CP exploitation - that it is no longer sensitive to peoples feelings and it will be changed.

In fact - my new slogon of "Everything else - is just intercourse!" was the beginning of changing all slogons every where.

When ever concerns have been raised with my website - from whoever - they have been addressed and corrected.

That's how SexEducation.com has evolved - that's how it will continue to evolve.

It must be noted - that until now - after over a MILLION banners served no-one has come forward and said anything about the banner except for the first person which - just that ONE PERSON changed the SexEducation.com website for years.

I will change that banner within the week. If this is a concern to you.

SexEd, you are the proof that some people actually ARE as dumb as a rock. The fact that you stay here and try to carry on 'business as usual' or whatever you're twisted mind percieves this so called 'discussion' or 'newsgroup' (as you call the board). shows that you have NO conception that NO one wants you here.

Do you think you are gaining something by insisting on posting or this makes you the 'man'... upper hand... do you think your petty little set of domains will gain something if you get banned here?? You have posted that you will _________ (whine, cry, rant, act even more ignorant... fill in the blank) if you got banned.

Seems you haven't yet so I'm calling for a Mass GFY Ignore Button, lets turn our backs to his very existance.

Off to investigate that feature! See ya DogBert

sexeducation:

Pedo DAD...Can't you fucking read??? Are you so dumb that you do not comprehend ANY English??

YOUR PATHETIC DOMAINS HAVE NO VALUE OR ANY RANKING IN SE's - IT IS LITTLE SURPRISE NO ONE HAS COMPLAINED SINCE THE ONLY "MEMBERS" YOU HAVE ARE PEDOS LIKE YOURSELF AND A FEW MEMBERS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.

YOUR OPINIONS ARE IRRELEVANT! YOUR "SLOGANS", YOUR "SOCIAL DISCUSSIONS", YOUR "SEX INTERACTION" ARE ALL MEANINGLESS CRAP. WHAT YOU SAY IN WORDS AND WHAT YOU DO IN REAL LIFE IS VASTLY DIFFERENT.

YOU ARE A CHILD PORNOGRAPHER - YOU HAVE NO CREDENTIALS TO EVEN "DISCUSS" SEX - NEVERMIND WITH CHILDREN.

FUCK OFF OUT OF HERE PEDO AND WAIT FOR SEVERAL VISITS! THEY CAN COME AT ANY TIME .. MAYBE SOONER.. MAYBE LATER, SINCE YOU ARE GOING TO GET SOME REAL "SPECIAL" ATTENTION.

:321GFY

I'm not trying to carry on "business as usual" ...
I am trying to get some issues solved and move on.

I'm trying to address issues and solve them.

I'm even considering an offer to turn SexEducation.com into more of "portal form" ...if there can be no consensus on what SexEducation.com a very generic domain should be.

You know what - if the adult industry is so concerned about my best efforts - then buy me out.

Because all I am trying to do is the best that I can do.

Are you saying that SexEducation.com should not exist in any form what so every... no matter what ?

Do you think that their should be a magazine of sexual intercourse, where not topic is banned - and all members remain 100% anonymous?

FYI ...
I just checked to be sure ...
and SexEducation.com is ranked in the number one position for the search term "sexual intercourse" ...
exactly what my website is about.

However, when I realized that much of my time was being spent working really for a "program" or "algorithm" - I stopped worrying about Googe.com and placement. My website will not be dictated by someone elses binary code.

I don't care where I am in search engines ...
EXCEPT that when "SexEducation.com" is searched for and when "www.SexEducation.com" is searched for a link is immediately provided if the SE does not have "adult content" filters on.

If an SE's filtering is on ... as my page is ranked with ICRA.org as having the most extreme content rating possible ... I do not expect a link and would prefer they do not.

Nobody cares. Go away you fucking idiot, we don't want to hear your updates.

I'm not trying to carry on "business as usual" ...
I am trying to get some issues solved and move on.

What do you call updating us to what you are doing etc etc if its NOT business as usual

I'm trying to address issues and solve them.

We don't CARE, got it??

I'm even considering an offer to turn SexEducation.com into more of "portal form" ...if there can be no consensus on what SexEducation.com a very generic domain should be.

[i[See above response[/i]

You know what - if the adult industry is so concerned about my best efforts - then buy me out.

I don't have much now, but if anyone who wants to pitch in, ICQ me, I'll put it on our ded. All I need is some extra $$. Sorry! Have a broken leg and insurance hasn't kicked in, let alone the storm damage we had to pay for this last 2 weeks. Dried the till up.
BUT if we DID take that domain, You'd have ONE hour to get ALL banners down on other domains linking to it....

Because all I am trying to do is the best that I can do.

Are you saying that SexEducation.com should not exist in any form what so every... no matter what ?


Look bud... At this late date in life, I don't care what anyone thinks of me... So let me clue you in to something... The life I lead is not even close to what your imagination could wrap around. I was a dancer... For a VERY long time... I don't need to go further than that.
I have FORGOTTEN more than you ever knew about sex yet I wouldn't even attempt to run a site like you are purportedly running. You are using outdated if not outright incorrect information and realling screwing up beyond all repair.
What I think about if such a site should exist is unimportant, what IS important is the fact that I know THIS one isn't doing what it should be. It would take someone with alot of college in many areas, to deal with such a subject correctly... let alone the legal staff thats needed. You're looking at more like 10-30 people to deal with the subject and ALL thats related legally, correctly and informatively.


Do you think that their should be a magazine of sexual intercourse, where not topic is banned - and all members remain 100% anonymous?

There is NO such thing deary. Even *I* know how to trace you right to your login physical address and I'm no whiz kid on a puter or the net. And there ARE some topics that should NOT be addressed or the guys in the ski masks knock down your door. Didn't you hear about Townsend?????? He has more money than I could dream of and HE got popped.... What chance in H*LL do YOU think you have dealing with (even) articles on child porn???? You aren't even educated well enough to deal with discussing your site with US, let alone with the general public.

Now I AM going to use the ignore feature. If I hear of you asking for a reasonable amount, then I'll come looking for you. Better Yet... you can discuss it with my old man. He doesn't take ANY *BS* from anyone like you try to ram down here.

But the domain would remain 404 until I could locate a organization that is qualified to use it correctly.

I am NOT against the adult industry ...
I am a defender of it.
In particular AVS's ...
And I am very concerned about recent CC changes.

I've made mistakes and they are being corrected.

I've often wanted to get a "Mom@" SexEducation.com for a different female perspective of things.

You can do that if you want - I guarantee your posts will be published.

No I don't know of this "Townsend" guy but will do some research.

I have to scoot to work.
Have a good day - everyone.
John E. Beacock
[email protected]
1-403-619-2739

The handle "Dad@" has been dropped on the new restructuring SexEducation.com website ... as I review each page it will be replaced with "JB@" ...

Even though - 20,000 double opt email address members never complained of this issue - not even once ...

I am going to cross every "t" and dot every "i" ...with regards to the "adult" community as the website revamps itself ...

On all Adult Webmaster boards the question - which started all this mess - basically a "witch hunt" ... still remains unanswered ...EVEN ONCE!!!!!

The question is ...
Should aroused genitals or reproductive bodily fluids be allowed on any directly accessed domain name? Just that one page.

What's the answer?


The handle "Dad@" is now being replaced with "JB" ...
Next reason not to answer the question will be what?

[email protected]

Jeez, do you EVER give up?