Responsibility v censorship

Responsibility v censorship

Peter Rogerson 1175707849|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

One or two comments have been aired recently regarding the nature of content available on this Wiki and I feel it ought to be open to general debate by any members who are either interested or concerned.
Bearing in mind that children's books are published on Lulu and therefore young people might visit these pages and that our own pages might contain links to other sites I think it might be wise to open a debate on the relative merits of personal responsibility and the dreaded censor.

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Chris Bond 1175723149|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

As it's not possible (as yet) to filter or attach ratings to the pages on this wiki, and considering that there are a number of authors/publishers here who produce books for children, then I, personally, believe that we have some sort of responsibility to be aware of where our younger visitors may wander here. As long as there is nothing explicit within the pages of this wiki, I have no objection to links here to content pages on Lulu which do feature explicit content, as long as those content pages contain the relevant access settings. Moreover, it is possible for the very young to actually publish on Lulu, and any from the UK would naturally be welcome as a member of this site, and it would be inevitable that they would want to check out the rest of the site.

Lulu enable their members to set their own access levels and some members choose not to set the appropriate access levels for their own material. In the UK, at least, where these access levels are not set, this may well, in some cases, be in contravention of the Protection of Children Act 1978, and where there are previews accessible on Lulu content pages where the access levels are set to "Everyone" containing explicit material, and which can, therefore, be freely viewed by children of any age, this may be in contravention of the Obscene Publications Act of 1959, and I have no wish for this wiki to become embroiled in any legal issues regarding this. It is obviously up to Lulu whether or not they choose to ignore this.

I am, in general, as much against censorship as Peter is, but I feel that we need to take some collective responsibility for how younger visitors may use this site. If wikidot happen to enable the setting of access levels to the pages on their wikis then this would, of course, not be a problem.

Other members are sure to have differing opinions on this matter and I wouldn't want it to cause the loss of any of them, myself included.

last edited on 1175723298|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover by Chris Bond + show more

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Taffybach 1175852674|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Always a tricky subject!

Remember that it is not just minors that you have to consider. On an open forum you also need to bear in mind the sexuality, creed, religious beliefs etc; etc; of others. Healthy debate is good but the line must not be crossed - what makes it even more difficult for moderators is that the location of hat line differs for each individual!
We can only do the best we can and keep a watchful eye if any 'debate' begins to get out of hand.

taff

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Peter Rogerson 1175874625|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Taff,
I think that consideration regarding minors is different from understanding adult variations in sexuality and religion and all the other differences that mark us as indiividuals. Children are at an early stage of a journey and may have their attitudes in the future distorted if they stumble across some issues too soon on that journey. Adults, on the other hand, have completed that journey and are unlikely to be corrupted by anything they may meet on an Internet site like this one. But I agree that everyone's right to believe what they want to believe should be respected, and the variations in sexuality and morality that exist in any group acknowledged without offence being offered.

Peter

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Taffybach 1175986715|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Peter,
I agree totally.
What I meant is that all groups should be considered when posting.

taff

Re: Responsibility v censorship

kapali 1176050764|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Hello all,
I have to admit that I haven't found anything on this site that concerns me. Lulu itself provides a means by which works can be rated (thereby preventing children from accessing adult material). This seems sufficient to me. As for debates in forums, simple common courtesy should be sufficient. Admittedly, online debates do seem to attract more than their share of rude individuals, but if we show respect for one another, then differences of opinion should not be an issue. There is, of course, the possibility that one person's opinion will offend someone else. That, however, is something a person living in a free society simply has to accept. I see no reason to engage in self-censorship to avoid offending others. I myself have been offended by certain opinions I find noxious, but I don’t think I or anyone else has the right to prevent those others from speaking their minds. It is enough to be courteous. A modicum of ordinary decency, and the use of the tools Lulu itself has provided, should be enough to keep this site amenable to the great majority of users.
Dorian

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Chris Bond 1176137221|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Hi Dorian.

The debate was sparked by an application from a Lulu member whose Lulu contant pages contain previews of unquestionably adult material and whose ratings are still set to Everyone. This is, obviously, a concern. The author was advised that, due to the links from this wiki to his Lulu content pages which would inevitably appear here, they would need to change their Lulu ratings in order that young children would not end up reading these previews. The author refused and the application has therefore been denied. I don't think that any of the content currently on this wiki is of any concern whatsoever. I'd say that it's very suitable for visitors of all ages, especially considering the diversity of members here.

As to the rest of your comments, I totally agree.

Chris.

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Peter Rogerson 1176142668|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

It's a gnarly problem and one Chris has dealt with in the only way he could. All I can add to his comment is that an author of adult material does have a problem if he clssifies it on Lulu as adult, because it then appears nowhere, not even on his storefront. So to ask him to change the classification with Lulu is to ask him to effectively remove the title from that storefront, which will impede anyone who, having read one of his books, wants to find others by the same author. The sad thing is that Lulu has the teen classification, which is just about as broad as any classification can be. We're all aware that 13 is very different from 18 or 19. If there was something in between teen and adult, a classification like Older Teens that didn't involve the almost total suppression that happens at the moment with adult, then I feel everyone would be a great deal happier. Why, I'd have used it for two or three of my titles myself.

Peter

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Chris Bond 1176226664|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

This is partly true, though any material with an adult rating will show up in the searches, content pages and storefronts of anyone browsing Lulu who has their own browsing Access level set to adult (as I do). This can be changed by going to My Account, then to Change Access Level on the left menu. Then all titles with all ratings will be seen. Many of the titles on Lulu are purchased by other members of Lulu and any of these who are specifically looking for adult material is surely going to have their own access set to adult. Of course this doesn't help with non-Lulu members who are simply browsing the site but I cannot see in any way how this problem could justify setting a rating of Everyone for an adult title. Lulu is not renowned for its marketing (this being one of the very reasons for the existence of this wiki) and there are more than enough relevant websites around where links can be added and titles advertised. It is very easy these days for authors/publishers to set up their own personal websites and this can easily be done for free. Links from these would be followed by Google and anyone who has the safe search turned off on their browser would therefore have the possibility of finding these titles when using a search engine. So, as previously stated, I can personally see no justification for making available explicit material and which can easily be accessed by young children, and which might, in this respect, be in breach of UK law, not to mention US law.

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Peter Rogerson 1176241946|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I agree with every word you say, Chris, but I think it would be a good idea if Lulu opted for an additional category equivalent to the cinema 15 classification. As for Lulu's including adult materials on storefronts, and back to the cinema for an example, 18 films are advertised where young people have access to that advertising - daily newspaper, for example. So what's so different about the printed word except for the simple truth that younger teens almost certainly wouldn't understand some printed stuff whilst they would understand the same subject matter in a visual medium.

Peter

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Chris Bond 1176312242|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I very much agree with you about the 15 rating. But either you have not seen the preview in question or you have access to newspapers that I have never seen, not even in the Sunday Sport. Moreover,the previews on Lulu are actually image files, and considering that these images have no tags, they cannot be filtered by any safe search or parental filters. I find it disheartening that anyone who has brought up children could condone this. It is clear to me that this cannot be resolved. I simply don't have the spare time or the inclination to devote to this debate any further and there are far more interesting, creative and positive things that I can be doing with my time than this. I am therefore resigning as Admin. As the creator of the site it is not possible for me to actually resign, or even demote myself, but I shall be removing all of my pages and links and will make no further contributions to this wiki. If I can find a way to completely remove myself I shall do.

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Peter Rogerson 1176324228|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

If you've departed Chris then you won't see this, but I have not seen the preview in question and have no idea what it is or who it's by. But there are simple advertisements for DVDs of films that have been classified above PG in the press. They are not previews of any kind but listings of events and so obviously contain no unsuitable content but they do advertise matter that in itself is certainly unsuitable. In the same way there are films on the television that contain matter of an adult nature and although these are transmitted after the watershed they are advertised in television listing pages - and I have only ever been in this debate referring to this wiki as a listing, an advertisement. What I wanted to do here was have a debate on a subject that was being hidden on a private wiki away from the general membership, and I thought that to be wrong. It's a shame you have decided to withdraw because you are a strength that this embryonic group will miss. There are varying shades of opinion on most matters and it is only right that they shoud be aired freely and without prejudice.
As for the technicalities of previews on Lulu as described by you, maybe I should be more aware of them, but I'm afraid I'm not, nor do I understand the strengths and weaknesses of parental filters, and have no idea what a tag is. I will certainly try to educate myself, but the substance of my intended debate remains unchanged: it concerns the basic principles of personal responsibility as opposed to censorship, and it is only right for that debate to continue. And by the way, I've condoned nothing, just tried to understand the issues.

Peter

last edited on 1176324708|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover by Peter Rogerson + show more

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Peter Rogerson 1176363659|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

As what I hope may well be a final addendum to my comments above I would like to point out that I, like many people of all ages, have an area on My Space. This morning I found images of two practically naked and certainly very enticing young females inviting me to be their friends and when I clicked on their picture to get an idea who they might be I was directed to an adult dating site complete with indecent images of the female form divine, incorporating one photo of a tastefully shaved lower body in all of its naked glory. I did, of course, deny the request. This kind of thing is widespread on the Internet so to have a bitter row about what may or may not appear on this Wiki seems somewhat irrelevant, and for its founder to use the honest and well-intentioned desire for us to debate the matter of inclusion and exclusion by committee as an excuse to leave our number is somewhat unbelievable. I'm old enough to remember the Lady Chatterley trial, you know! It is my firm belief that a site publicising an eclectic mix of British writings will never become any kind of porn site because pornographers will find more fertile ground elsewhere.
Peter

Re: Responsibility v censorship

lasatalayas 1176369061|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I'm confused as to what is going on.
I wonder if some are getting hold of the wrong end of the stick.
May I suggest that any further comments are posted in the Private Wiki?

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Peter Rogerson 1176372169|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Good idea. But I brought the debate to this more public forum because I don't like the idea of censorship by self-appointed committees. Maybe we should so as you suggest and return to private debate.

Peter.

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Taffybach 1176394550|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

«As the creator of the site it is not possible for me to actually resign, or even demote myself, but I shall be removing all of my pages and links and will make no further contributions to this wiki. If I can find a way to completely remove myself I shall do.»

Chris and Peter.
You need to sort this out guys.
In my experience if the driving force of a forum (ie; Chris) leaves then in the majority of cases the forum dies.
If Chris really does want nothing more to do with the forum then I will also have to question my own involvement.

…and for the record. I agree with Chris.
If an individual wants to promote adult material that contains adult imagery (whether on Lulu or elsewhere) via click through from this site then they should be given the option to remove this and, if they refuse, then they should be denied access to the Wiki.

If this is not the given rule for this site then I no longer want to be listed as a moderator as I do not want my name associated with moderating a forum that supports links to uncensored adult material.

Taff

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Peter Rogerson 1176395784|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I'm replying to this on the private forum

Peter

Re: Responsibility v censorship

kapali 1176396737|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

To everyone involved in this debate,
I am saddened to see that several persons could be leaving this site because of the behaviour of only a few (perhaps only one). I do not think that asking a person to classify adult material as adult is unreasonable. There is, of course, a grey area, which Peter has noted. His suggestion of a classification for older teens is a good one, one, I wish, Lulu would take note of. Unfortunately, I doubt if he will be heeded in this.

My own works often contain descriptions of sex and violence, and I would prefer them to be classed for older teens (or above). Classifying them as adult, however, would be both misleading and unduly cautious. I am sure that there are others who have had similar thoughts about their own writings. This, undoubtedly, is a problem, and it is one for which I don’t have a solution (Peter’s is good, but I suspect it won’t be followed). If there are members classifying adult works as available to everyone, the simplest solution would be simply to ask them to change their Lulu settings to “adult” and to deny them membership in this site if they refuse to comply. This doesn’t seem unreasonable to me.

Dorian

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Peter Rogerson 1176398052|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Dorian,
An excellent suggestion, and to start the ball rolling I'm going to reclassify one of mine as you suggest.
But I would ask anyone thinking of flying hither and thither to look at the very first entry with which I started this thread, and tell me what's wrong with it.
Right. "A Fall From Grace" is now mature, and I will modify anything that needs modifying on my wiki page regarding that particular book (which happens to be my favourite)
Peter

last edited on 1176398479|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover by Peter Rogerson + show more

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Chris Bond 1176489161|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Hi.

The material in question has been reclassified as Mature, presumably by the author, but as I had threatened to pull all of my material from Lulu, they may possibly have had some say in this, I really couldn't say. The important thing is that it has been recategorised. I can sympathise with authors and publishers who may struggle for page views when the access levels are set to Mature, but the setting is there for a reason. I am, and always have been, inherently, an advocate for free speech; but Peter made the point concerning personal responsibility, and the operative word here is responsibility. I, and, I may add, many others, did not feel that the author in question was showing any such responsibility in this respect, and there are, very occassionally, times when pressure needs to be exerted for the common good. I do not, generally, make a habit of such protestations (my last being to help rid us of the Poll Tax some 17 years ago).

I must here apologise to Peter. All of my replies to his comments were based on the assumption that he had actually read the preview in question; and I had already taken the decision to stand down by the time that I realised that he hadn't. As said, it was my intention to quit Lulu itself, so my reason for being here would have been negated anyway. The situation has now changed, though I will, of course, be keeping a close watch. I have today received the proof copies of my latest publication and about which I am very happy indeed. So, it is with some personal relief that I don't now have to quit Lulu.

I will, if the members are agreeable to this, be happy to return to administering the wiki, though, as stated on my Lulu forum post, I am increasingly busy at present, and am likely to be so for some time to come, so I may not have quite as much input as before. As far as I am aware, all of the moderators on this site have exactly the same permissions as I myself have, so, there are, in effect, three administrators for this wiki (and four if I resume), and one or two others may well be needed at some point; so it is certainly not imperative that I return to this role, and I await the advice of the members here with regard to this.

Re: Responsibility v censorship

lasatalayas 1176495000|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Welcome back.
You have my full support.

Your temporary absence gave me the opportunity to look at your work and I'm well impressed.
I trust that you'll have a pint or two tomorrow and snack on an 'oggie awaiting a great victory at Twickers.

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Taffybach 1176546013|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Welcome back !

I know your time is tight but it would be great to have you on the admin team again.
You are the founder of this forum and it is growing fast so, even if your involvement is only in a limited way you should be enjoying what you started as this moves from strength to strength.

btw; don't forget I am not a Lulu author either so even if you left Lulu there is no excuse LOL
There is a lot here that is general to self publishing, not just Lulu.

taff

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Peter Rogerson 1176559822|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I echo everything Taff says here.
This wiki is nothing without you, Chris.

Peter

Re: Responsibility v censorship

SiHolmes 1176711179|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Just seen this censorship debate and I think it is a very interesting one. It echoes an experience I went through, well a couple of experiences I'll try and summarize. First of all publishing itself. I set my books to mature as they have adult themes and some (limited) sexual scenes. I then realised they are completely invisible to non-members of Lulu who are browsing the site. So I changed it, the one piece of thinking that convinced me was just that in a general bookshop there is nothing to stop children buying or looking at highly adult titles.

This brings me to the other experience I mentioned: When i was about 12 I bought what looked like a horror book about Hitler and vampires from a bookshop and it turned out to be incredibly sexually explicit from the word go (I think the first sentence). I remember my parents being slightly worried but then letting me read it, probably because it was easier to do so than to explain why not. However back then I didn't really know what was going on and what all the words meant. It wasn't a very good story either. The point is, does it not come down to the idea that if someone is too young to understand the words then reading them does them no harm? I am not sure where current understanding is on this, but would be interested what other people think.

It does however strike me that while films are rated in the real world, books are not. Music too can contain all sorts of offensive material and be sold to children. So I really don't see it as being a double standard putting adult fiction at a lower rating so it does not dissapear from view. The problem is with lulu really, and I do not understand their thinking when you can write whatever you want on most websites offering user-created content. If my books ever did get published they would be accesbile to minors, so in my mind that makes me perfectly happy making them the same on lulu. While I totally agree that it would be wrong if any books marketed as "everyone" had offensive imagery, I don't see the same need for censorship of the written word. If real bookshops let children browse adult material in books then why shouldn't sellers on Lulu?

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Malcs 1177667588|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Dear wikiluluites

I have found this debate fascinating!

I would say, please let us remember censorship leads to the burning of books (and paintings)!

The Burning of Books leads to Auschwitz!

As someone who has personal, ACTUAL first hand experience as a gay man of the violating impact and effect of Devon & Cornwall Constabulary (metaphorically) kicking in my front door early one morning, but actually seizing my computer on spurious allegations. The impact and effect upon the spirit of what remains to me in my sincere belief and opinion grossly homophobic conduct by numerous Cornwall police officers subsequently involved from Cornwall over a prolonged period of intimidation, the result of which has been total destruction of my lawful businesses, destruction of my social circle, affect upon health, abuse of my lifestyle & culture by police.

All on censorship!

This finally led as a result of my complaints to TWENTY-TWO recommendations (the mere tip of the ice-berg) in 2006 by the Independent Police Complaints Commission of improvement of public service by the Devon & Cornwall police, but this information itself censored and attempted to be gagged, leading me to write my books.

Oh! Just for the record, my computer and all my CD ROM property HAD to be returned to me as NO illegal material was found on them by the Criminal Forensics team. Likewise other spurious allegations, unfounded.

Also for the record it is my opinion and belief based upon my actual personal experiences that I have encountered No honesty, No integrity, No impartiality and No transparency in the conduct from Devon & Cornwall police. (I personally would no today trust a single Cornwall police officer with so much as used chewing gum as a result of my multiple experiences of numerous officers) and all this kicked off over personal interpretation of censorship regarding sexuality .

That has not stopped what has now entered its fourth year of serious intimidation, violence and abuse against myself, family and friends, by and as a result of conduct within Cornwall authorities based upon a spurious witch-hunt regarding my open sexuality and my voracious criticism of Cornish Authorities for engrained and entrenched prejudice & homophobia I have personally experienced and observed over almost two decades as an out gay man.

It’swhy I wrote my books!

I have some very strong views on censorship! There are some great over reactions in today’s society trying to undermine freedom of speech and some very insidious conduct by those in positions to abuse their power.

I think Juvenal wrote ‘who guards the guards’ or ‘who polices the police?’

Censorship;- it’s a sticky!

Hugz

Malcs

Re: Responsibility v censorship

Peter Rogerson 1177691223|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Your experiences are unforgiveable
I started this debate because I hate censorship (I think maintaining that it is one end of a road that leads to Auschwitz is taking it a bit far, but I get the point)
As an acceptable alternative to the dreaded censor and his evil machinations I proposed that as this is a site that is open to people of all ages including minors we established a healthy practise of self censorship based on awareness of our responibilities to all sectors of society. I've never seen much wrong with that.

Peter