You have this need to be "us" again??? :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Wash yourself down the toilet - your beginning to smell again :pimp

Thats ok Webby you just keep on making backwards accusations against a program that is 100% 2257 compliant...

Will repeat - you are just too stupid. Do you just not comprehend the meaning of irrelevant (you) or just need to behave like a schoolgirl in heat?? :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Sure.. the world revolves round 2257 in your closeted fried brain cell - dream on.

You are skating the rules of gfy thats for sure.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Hell... "irrelevant" has even lower levels than even I thought possible :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Dang that chick has a big head

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

She's prob an OK model - just the camera angle is obviously geared to showing a massive cock suck in her face :1orglaugh - while she plays with her "colors" and teddy bear :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Fucking absurd :1orglaugh

I don't know.. she looks young and like a tranny !

Sheesh.. the troll is back to posting nice little pics again... Gawd help us :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

I would hit it with no rubber AND promote her.

Dwb how many girls from where you frequent are over 18 and look just as young if not younger than Lupe. :winkwink:

I thought you where gonna tone down a bit and stay out of drama... Or are you starting tommorrow?

US Code Title 18 Chapter 110 section 2256 - Definitions for chapter

paragraph 8:

(8) ?child pornography? means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where?

.................

(B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or

paragraph 11:

(11) the term ?indistinguishable? used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults.

************************************************

Without getting into any specifics about littlelupe.

if you purposely try to make an over 18 model appear to be underage, you could definitely be looking at some trouble.

Maybe you'll learn to look at the date the post was you are referring to. And someone is calling a company I promote as pedo panderers. Which is technically breaking a gfy main rule.

How is it breaking the rule. He did not call anyone a pedo, he did not threaten a life.

Not even "technically" close.

Sure does like to invoke the word Pedo when referring directly to a site though huh?

Me thinks you doth protest too much.

Webby is not comfortable promoting that particular site and he stated why he wasn't. That is his opinion and he is entitled to it.

If you didn't keep pushing on it, he would not keep replying and using the word you are so uncomfortable with so much.

Each decides in this world what they are comfortable doing and what they are uncomfortable with.

If you are comfortable with littlelupe, promote away.

Those that aren't comfortable with it, shouldn't.

That simple really.

just my :2 cents:

Actually none of his pedo accusing posts were directed at me, they were at Aussie Rebel, so that boat doesnt float. So its ok for him to insinuate anyone promoting, or signing up for the site is endorsing pedofile behavior just because there is a thread, he has a right to say that? I dont think so Tim.

Who's Tim?

Ok, I missed that he was replying to AR and not you. Either way, if an opinion is not attacked, the person with the opinion rarely feels the need to defend it.

And yes, he has the right to his opinion (what you refer to as insinuating), just as you do.

It just seems that there is a lot of wasted arguing going on over what is basically a dead horse.

10-03-2006, 01:50 AM

I guess it is old.. I didn't really pay much attention.. Just read the paragraph you made and nothing else... I guess the "Represents Split" part shoulda gave me a clue..

You have had alot of piss matches lately though so I figured it was new...



So what made you give up on that idea you had that day?

This is Tim

http://i.tbs.com/v5cache/TBS/Images/...2820041524.jpg



This is Al
http://elazulspad.net/j/wp-content/idontthinksotim.jpg

I dont think so Tim.

Who said I gave up on it. I got tired of all the America bashing that was going on, and made some posts about it. Drew the attention of the Sticky haters and they took advantage of the opportunity. :winkwink:

So, you don't think he has a right to his opinion?

.

To keep it to himself absolutely. He is on a very very thin line with the gfy rules whether you agree or not.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh Sheesh... this still going on??

Idiot - will repeat again - you are irrelevant and your "opinion" matters little - this has been clear in almost every thread you make a post - and on *any* subject.

Do not even attempt to tell me what is CP or otherwise - or what is, for the lack of a better term, "pedo marketing". You are assured if I know of an actual CP site - this will not be another drama "discussion topic" on a chatboard. If it falls into a category of "pedo marketing" I will say whatever I think without your help and stupid dialog.

If you want your well-punctured ass to have more holes in it - carry on with your pathetic dialog. That is always assured to screw up any thread to the banal level of a 12 year old school kid.

Go and waste your time with another poll and check if everyone "hate's America" and if the have reached your fried-braincell level and posted some pics yet :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

When you are a mod, your opinion on that might count. Right now, it isn't worth spit.

:thumbsup

Webby has a right to his opinion, whether you agree with it or not. He also has the right to express that opinion.

The argument going on here is an old one. I remember discussions of this back in 2001 with Shaw and Ai getting on LS's ass over the age of his models versus the "look" of his models and who did he think was buying memberships to his sites, yadda yadda yadda.

Do you care who your sponsor is marketing to? or not? Not trying to insinuate anything about littlelupe there, it is just a question we all have to deal with at times with various sponsors and products.

I used to be in the liquor business. I got out of there because I watched the targeting of brands that were basically destroying certain parts of our society. I decided I didn't want to be part of it and I left.

We each have to make our own decisions.

I love you guys.

Totally agree with your post sarettah :thumbsup

Jon Clark:

That is a red flag to a bull without a brain - you know that??? :winkwink: :pimp

I just figured it was a good responce ;)

I better start some original polls now - it's kinda quiet :winkwink:

(a) "Who are you?"

(b) "Do you hate America?"

(c) "Everyone post a pic!"

(d) "StickyFingerz is dead" (damn.. missed that one on the "charts" but bet it's the usual attention trolling :winkwink: )

(e) "Are you Anti, or Pro sword?" (more attention whoring)

(f) "Enough with the bashing. Make it clear how you feel." (disturbed mind at work)

(g) "Why do you HATE us?" (mind has reached the deranged level)


Damn... better add another...

"Webby Called Everyone A Pedo!" :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

well, she is selling, been seeing her everywhere around tgps and what not

People said the same thing abouit Little April...Now April looks like she's pushing thirty and it's only been a few years....Nobody gives two fucks about ones "opinion" abouit a girl or a site...The only thing that matters is the legality and how well it sells.

It's all about double standards, we can either choose to accept certain moral standards and stay away from material that violates them or we can say as long as it's legal, it's ok.

There are so many programs and sites out there with screaming and crying girls, groups of guys pissing and cumming on girls, girls vomiting from deep throat, almost bleeding gaping asses. "Daddy's little girl violated", "Destroyed pussies", there are thousands of slogans like these.

Bash any site or program you want, but ask yourself if you are really in a position to do so or if you are just jumping on the train because it's easy to do so.

Yawn...If that was the case, there would be no porn at all....

So let's accept certain moral standards and ban porn altogether....Let's all delete our sites right now....

Are you with me?

Ha...And this is the sales text for a site YOU'RE promoting in your sig, big tits at school:

# Busty College girls getting pounded by their teachers
# The hottest teachers showing how to suck cock
# Mothers doing anything to get her sons pass
# Nasty principles drilling tight asses
# Your homework has never been this fun
# The school of tits is now open to the public

sniff sniff....I smell a hypocrite.

Dude, you are attacking the wrong person, read my post again and you'll see that I said exactly the same you did...:1orglaugh

hahaha you gotta be kidding, im 18 and all my friends who are girls do NOT look like that.

go for it:thumbsup

True, to a point. However a few years ago Little April website was on a screen of a monitor when the finnish national news were talking about some big pedo-ring bust. I even posted about it on GFY. However, I do sincerely believe teenrevenue sites are 100% legal in the US.

I wouldn't promote them here though, finland's pretty damn tight on teen porn, for example every teen porn DVD that goes to sale has to be reviewed, and 'suggesting' someone is underage isn't approved of. The fact that one of their sites (among other sites) was shown on tv when talking about pedos is enough to convince me that *I* shouldn't promote them. I don't want any attention from the finnish police. :)

Oh.... more than I would admit to.

Sometimes there are just small and young LOOKING girls. But the fact is, if they are 18+, who gives a shit, she's getting a creampie. :thumbsup

The answer is exactly an issue of "jumping on the train" :winkwink:

Sure... this industry is as hypocritical as any other, - often due to two factors (a) lack of judgement by publishers and (b) desperation by the potless hoping to earn a dime.

On one hand, enter high drama over a CP website and five pages of "I hate pedos" and an online-industry slant to try and disown (or is it denial?) that we have anything to do with pedos - "We are the mainline adult industry!".

The flip side of the real "adult industry" is portraying talent as kids of around 12 years of age with hairclips and playing with teddy bears and coloring pens, but with a cock stuck in them.

Along comes screams of justification that "It's legal!" and "I've got 2257 paperwork!". Does the online industry think for one moment that they have generated an original idea by portraying legal talent as children and having dicks stuck in all orifices???? Nope - that level of pedo-marketing has been tried before the online-industry was ever heard of, and resulted in legislation in several western countries to prohibit this sales tactic. Obviously the industry is incapable of policing itself.

Currently there is reference in US law against "pedo marketing" (2257). In most other western countries, there is legislation specifically prohibiting the "styling" of legal talent to imply they are under legal age. Each country varies, but generally legislation falls under obscenity laws or laws related to child protection.

Do images of a carefully selected "small model" decorated with hairclips, pigtails with teddy bears and coloring pens suggest underage??? No, no... the toys just happened to be on the set and the girl just happens to be small in stature (we try hard to find small models). That must be the basis of naming a website "Little Lupe" The hypocrisy is oozing again.

In all countries on the planet, oddly, excepting the US, there exists an treaty in the form of the Convention for the Rights of the Child. The Convention was formulated to, basically provide basic rights to children globally and dampen elements of abuse (in all forms) and give respect to children. "Pedo pandering" by the mainstream adult industry is not exactly in keeping with the spirit of this Convention. It is unfortunate that the US appears to be unable to offer their children the same rights granted in all other nations or enforce the "words" already contained within US law.

Despite claims to the contrary of being "legal" - there are several specific laws stating the illegality - it is up to a jury to decide. Ironically, the offshore jurisdiction used by the operators of "Little Lupe" and where they are represented by Sampson Investments AAV, would not be amused - or care about the technically of laws.

Sure StarkReality - know what you mean about "slogans" - it's basically the same thing, and most prob stemming from an element of "amateurism", trying to be dramatic/shock and appealing to pedos to earn a living. It is amazing how naive and immature the "adult online industry" actually is - but, looking around, perhaps not :pimp

Only my :2 cents: but meanwhile, I'll reject the kind offer of earning based on images of talent dressed to look like 12 year olds and continue to report CP websites to whatever relevant agency.

Lol like you have friends...

Has your braincell still not recovered?? Still trying to deride people to overcome your personality defect??? Don't bother responding - you are irrelevant and too stupid :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

that was a bad angle to have an answer. how old is she? damn!

The model is fine and either 21 - or may be 22 now, but selected to portray a kid - which was not be accident :winkwink:

Sometimes my wife puts her hair in pigtails for me and puts on her old Japanese school girl uniform.. Does that make me a pedo cause it turns me on?

Here we go again...