07-12-2003 22:34									#91
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Sky: The link works for me, perhaps try again or I can send it to you via PM?

I just couldn't find it before on your website.

	07-12-2003 22:46									#92
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Boshko On their website they say that they don't post anything until they've called the person and definately established a meeting for sex.

But they haven't actually gone. You don't know if they intend to go through with it, or, as many say, if they just wanted to see, but not go through with it.

quote: Originally posted by Boshko Anyone who goes that far more or less deserves whatever this website does to them.

In your opinion. The law is a little different though, in that they have done nothing illegal, and thus they don't deserve punishment.

quote: Originally posted by Boshko Still having a hard time understading how some people seem to think that making plans to **** a kid is worse than telling other people that a given person likes to **** kids, I've known far too many people who've had this sort of thing happen to them to have any sympathy for the pedos.

What sort of things? Consensual underage sex? I've known many too. To be honest, I think the age of consent is too high, and it should be up to the person if they want to have sex or not. I think consensual sex with a younger teenager is not as bad as ruining someones life, yes.

	07-12-2003 22:46									#93
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Azazel did those people who's details were published commit a crime? Yes or No.

No. Having sex with someone underage is illegal. Wanting to, setting it up and talking about it to them, is not.

Will reply to Whaleboy's long post when I have time.

	07-12-2003 22:55									#94
	Support Apolyton

Ah, fudge it. I still believe it's the utilitarian thing to do ( although altered )

	07-12-2003 23:01									#95
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Really? You think wrecking the lives of that many people, but possibly having more underage sex, creates more happiness than it destroys? I think a site set up purely to voice hatred for people who the author doesn't agree with isn't the most utilitarian thing to do. And that's ignoring the precident it sets of vigilante justice, and that if someone disagrees with something, they can simply publish details of everyone that does it. Say, for example, someone publishes personal details of all the abortion doctors in the USA. They will be harassed by pro-lifers, punished, for doing something that is legal. Is that acceptable? If this site is allowed, there is nothing to stop people doing that either.

	07-12-2003 23:09									#96
	Remove this text

quote: Really? You think wrecking the lives of that many people, but possibly having more underage sex, creates more happiness than it destroys?

I fail to follow you.

	08-12-2003 00:15									#97
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: But they haven't actually gone. You don't know if they intend to go through with it, or, as many say, if they just wanted to see, but not go through with it.

Seems pretty ad hoc to me. Nonetheless, the risk these people pose is too great, and rationally, one would not compromise private information to who they believe to be a receptive individual, without the intention of carrying through. Since they have not committed a crime, the only way to combat their activites is legal (non police) means.

quote: In your opinion. The law is a little different though, in that they have done nothing illegal, and thus they don't deserve punishment.

Its not punishment! . Any discomfort caused is consequential of others exercising their rights. And that is a matter of interpretation... too subjective to be used in an objective system of justice!

quote: I think consensual sex with a younger teenager is not as bad as ruining someones life, yes.

Your opinion, and I would not consider a 12/13 year old girl to be able to decide to have sex or not. Mental preparedness comes later than physical in my and my friends experience. Taking active measures to arrange such sex, as lucid as ruining that persons life (consequentialist, thus very dodgy legal territory (for a good reason)). You're an 18/19 year old male. Do you consider it ok to **** a <=12/13 year old girl? I most certainly don't, and a communicated desire to do so would surely bring upon the communicated disapproval of others. This site (ideally) serves a conduit for that disapproval. Free speech mon ami!

quote: Really? You think wrecking the lives of that many people, but possibly having more underage sex, creates more happiness than it destroys?

If you want to be taken seriously as a utilitarian, i.e. JS Mill, not James Mill, you will refer to greater welfare, as opposed to happiness. And yes it does. You talk to people who've had sex that young. How many, when reaching the age of 18, support that decision. Very few I think you will find. How many felt used and abused? We both live in the Northampton, the obvious answer surrounds us.

Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory. That is, its the act that should bring about the best consequences (which holds numerous problems, but irrelavant mostly here). The conseqences of removing the threat of one paedophile by indirectly and via influence damaging his life, vs the alternative of allowing the risk of him harming others, via impedence, and I dare say more so, looking at the psychological problems suffered by those who engage in very underage sex.

Use the felicific calculus too. Intensity, duration, certainty/uncertainty, remoteness, fecundity, purity (problematic that one, hence I'm only utilitarian to a point), and extend.

In all but certainty, the FC shows that this website is right by utilitarianism.

quote: And that's ignoring the precident it sets of vigilante justice

You take it that far with utility, you introduce the problem of the infinite regress. Utiltarianism (even classical), is consequentialist, but only by a relative. As such, the consequences of the uncertain risk this man poses, vs the certain consequences of actions, and as these are intended consequences, their dependents are affected by util. The felicific calculus holds here.

You need to stop using the fallacious notion of punishment. A punishment is not consequentialist (or rather, only directly as a result of ones actions, not by influence or the actionsof others, whose REACTION is consequential, but whose actions as a result are not). Indeed, if you want to talk about utility, then you are several generations of consequences away from a punishment. You should rather be talking about causality. Actions, resutl, result, result, result, result bites you in the arse. Life's a *****, and its the paedo's fault for pissing her off.

quote: I fail to follow you.

Welcome to my world!

	08-12-2003 00:19									#98
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

The simple fact is that it is not vigilantism, it is not punishment, and it is a NATURAL CONSEQUENCE of freedom of speech.

	08-12-2003 00:21									#99
	Support Apolyton

Sky has summed up my argument in one line!

	08-12-2003 00:22									#100
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

It's easier when you don't use words like " fecundity"

	08-12-2003 00:23									#101
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by skywalker The simple fact is that it is not vigilantism, it is not punishment, and it is a NATURAL CONSEQUENCE of freedom of speech.

I don't see how you go from 'freedom of speech' to people to pretending to be 14 year old girls and tricking older men into planning a meeting for sex and giving you their address and contact information, and then stalking them, harrassing them, and slandering them to everyone they know. Where's the 'natural' connection?

	08-12-2003 00:23									#102
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

[POUTS] But it makes me look clever!! [/POUTS]

	08-12-2003 00:25									#103
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well, if I'm free to say what I want (excluding libel, which is a special case), then I am free to tell people "this guy said such and such to me and so I think he's a pedophile". The people who own the site are exercising their freedom of speech.

	08-12-2003 00:28									#104
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Osweld and slandering them to everyone they know.

Slander? I was under the impression that truth was the ultimate defense in cases like that.

	08-12-2003 00:28									#105
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by skywalker Well, if I'm free to say what I want (excluding libel, which is a special case), then I am free to tell people "this guy said such and such to me and so I think he's a pedophile". The people who own the site are exercising their freedom of speech.

But it's not a natural consequence of freedom of speech. If anything, it's an abuse.


There's a 'feminazi' website that snaps photos of people going into porn shops and posts their faceshot and license plate on the web accusing them of being rapists. Are you all OK with that, too?

	08-12-2003 00:31									#106
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: But it's not a natural consequence of freedom of speech. If anything, it's an abuse.

By "natural consequence", I mean that the right to do this follows naturally from the right to freedom of speech (that is, it is covered by the right to freedom of speech). And how is it "abuse"?

quote: There's a 'feminazi' website that snaps photos of people going into porn shops and posts their faceshot and license plate on the web accusing them of being rapists. Are you all OK with that, too?

Yes. That's their right. I think they're morons, but it's their right.

	08-12-2003 00:31									#107
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc Slander? I was under the impression that truth was the ultimate defense in cases like that.

Do they tell the employers that the guy flirted with a 40year old man who was pretending to be 14 years old, or do they tell them he's a child molester?

	08-12-2003 00:32									#108
	Get a bigger avatar today!

IIRC libel is only illegal if you talk about a famous person (I forget what the Supreme Court case was). Anyway, the fact that people can lie doesn't justify removing their freedom of speech.

	08-12-2003 00:33									#109
	Increase Your PM Length

Also, the deathblow to the arguments here: how would you word that law that forbade this site, without having it also forbid other, (in you minds) legitimate uses of freedom of speech?

	08-12-2003 00:36									#110
	Support Apolyton

I'm not really talking about legality, I'm just saying that I think what they're doing is despeicable. I couldn't really care less what the law says about it.

And there's nothing I hate more then agruging about legal mumbo-jumbo, so i ain't gonna.

	08-12-2003 00:36									#111
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Osweld Do they tell the employers that the guy flirted with a 40year old man who was pretending to be 14 years old, or do they tell them he's a child molester?

To follow with the example you set up earlier, the likely tell the employers that they were planning on meeting a 14 year old girl for sex. Which is true.

	08-12-2003 00:37									#112
	Inflate your Upload Space

So it's "despicable". That's a PURELY subjective argument, and based totally on your own morality. Which means it isn't really an arguable topic in the first place.

	08-12-2003 00:38									#113
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Azazel quote: Really? You think wrecking the lives of that many people, but possibly having more underage sex, creates more happiness than it destroys? I fail to follow you.

I was merely asking why you think the utilitarian thing to do is to wreck these peoples lives, because they want to have consensual sex with an underage girl. In some cases it may be, but overall, I think it causes a loss of utility.

quote: Originally posted by skywalker The simple fact is that it is not vigilantism, it is not punishment, and it is a NATURAL CONSEQUENCE of freedom of speech.

They are losing out because of it, and that is the intention of the site. That is punishment. The site aims to punish these people for what they have done, even though it isn't illegal.

quote: Originally posted by skywalker Well, if I'm free to say what I want (excluding libel, which is a special case), then I am free to tell people "this guy said such and such to me and so I think he's a pedophile". The people who own the site are exercising their freedom of speech.

Yes, but his personal information is private unless he gives consent. Also, there are limits on free speech. Incitement, hate speech, libel and defamation for example. With posting just the chatlogs you may be right. However with the commentary and personal details it is beyond what is legal in this country.

	08-12-2003 00:41									#114
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: I'm not really talking about legality, I'm just saying that I think what they're doing is despeicable. I couldn't really care less what the law says about it.

So, you disagree with it, ergo, that site must be shut down?

quote: To follow with the example you set up earlier, the likely tell the employers that they were planning on meeting a 14 year old girl for sex. Which is true.

God I feel like a natural born conservative!

	08-12-2003 00:42									#115
	Put an end to popups!

quote: They are losing out because of it, and that is the intention of the site. That is punishment. The site aims to punish these people for what they have done, even though it isn't illegal.

You are using a completely different definition of "punishment", it seems. Very well. Would you also be opposed to my friends and I excluding someone from our group because we didn't like that person? Do you think that should be illegal, too? Because that is what this is.

quote: Yes, but his personal information is private unless he gives consent. Also, there are limits on free speech. Incitement, hate speech, libel and defamation for example. With posting just the chatlogs you may be right. However with the commentary and personal details it is beyond what is legal in this country.

If the person TELLS the other person the personal details in a non-personal setting, then they are public! Elijah has been saying this over and over, but you don't seem to get it.

	08-12-2003 00:44									#116
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc To follow with the example you set up earlier, the likely tell the employers that they were planning on meeting a 14 year old girl for sex. Which is true.

No, it's not, actually. They where planning on meeting an adult who was pretending to be a 14 year old girl.

The people who are doing this look for people. I don't care what you say, no one would contact them if they didn't advertise themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if their bio reads "14 year old, looking for older man" They lead the guys on, they flirt with them, they encourage them, and they assure them that an age difference does not matter and that they like to be with older men. And this is all being done in deception by an adult, so that he can get this persons phone number and address, and then proceed to stalk and harrass him.

	08-12-2003 00:45									#117
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Whaleboy So, you disagree with it, ergo, that site must be shut down?

I said I wasn't talking abotu legality, ergo, I don't think it should be shut down.


I'm just saying that I think it's wrong - I'm giving my opinion on the matter, imagine that!

	08-12-2003 00:48									#118
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: No, it's not, actually. They where planning on meeting an adult who was pretending to be a 14 year old girl.

Wrong. The person was planning to meet a 14-year-old girl. If a guy in the Air Force recieves intel that some building had Hussein in it, but it really had Michael Jackson, he would still be planning to bomb Hussein.

	08-12-2003 00:48									#119
	Inflate your Upload Space

EDIT - Whoops, replied instead of edited.

	08-12-2003 00:51									#120
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: but overall, I think it causes a loss of utility

According to what version of utility (and upon what basis that version is set), and how it determines that loss?

quote: They are losing out because of it, and that is the intention of the site. That is punishment. The site aims to punish these people for what they have done, even though it isn't illegal.

This is getting boring. Please define punishment.

quote: Yes, but his personal information is private unless he gives consent.

If it is in a private conversation, and not copyrighted, one participant is free to use that info to his ends. That is both the law, and philosophically sound imo.