Sablesword
TMF Master
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2001
- Messages
- 790
- Points
- 18
I'm done. Goodby
Last edited:
-
If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread -
Check out Tickling.com - the most innovative tickling site of the year. -
The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us. -
>>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
Don't forget to include your username
Should "snuff" be banned here?
- Thread starter Sablesword
- Start date
SlaverTickler
Guest
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2001
- Messages
- 10,155
- Points
- 38
I don't know...
I understand keeping out the stuff with kids, but if we start blocking out "snuff" just because some people don't like it, where do we stop. I like erotic stories, quite frankly my witing is a release, a place where I can live out stuff I can't do for real because I know breaking into someones house, binding them in their sleep, and tickling them with out mercy is wrong. In a story I can get away with it.
I guess what I'm saying is that even though I wouldn't read it (at least not knowingly, that doesn't mean somebody shouldn't have the right to write it. If we don't let them, then someone could turn around an say "I'm aposed to stories with homosexual content" then Anna and Heathers stories would have to go, and nobody could apose that because the Snuff stories were removed. Where would it end?
Do I like them? Not at all. Should they be band from the forum? No. because it goes against what people faught in a big war for, freedom of expresion. Thats what this forum is about, thats why we joined her!
I understand keeping out the stuff with kids, but if we start blocking out "snuff" just because some people don't like it, where do we stop. I like erotic stories, quite frankly my witing is a release, a place where I can live out stuff I can't do for real because I know breaking into someones house, binding them in their sleep, and tickling them with out mercy is wrong. In a story I can get away with it.
I guess what I'm saying is that even though I wouldn't read it (at least not knowingly, that doesn't mean somebody shouldn't have the right to write it. If we don't let them, then someone could turn around an say "I'm aposed to stories with homosexual content" then Anna and Heathers stories would have to go, and nobody could apose that because the Snuff stories were removed. Where would it end?
Do I like them? Not at all. Should they be band from the forum? No. because it goes against what people faught in a big war for, freedom of expresion. Thats what this forum is about, thats why we joined her!
Last edited:
tickledorange
2nd Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2002
- Messages
- 2,429
- Points
- 0
Since fiction can be about anything, it really doesn't matter much to me that the stories exist. The same reason why banning books is pointless: where does it stop? What's too crazy?
I completely agree with you Sablesword. The whole idea of death from tickling is disturbing to me. I think that it is a bit extreme, even for this forum. Tickling is something that is supposed to be pleasurable and arousing, but if it results in death then it is just terrible. I have including some rather gruesome death scenes in some of my stories, but they have never resulted from tickling. I think that the whole "tickling to death" thing is wrong and should not be allowed. But thats just my opinion, and I'm pretty sure it doesn't count much.
TeeHeeLawrence
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2003
- Messages
- 460
- Points
- 0
A Matter of Taste...
Sabs, it's obvious the story ticks you off, and you've every right to tell the author and the TMF in general that it does. That, after all, is what the Forum's about: open expression.<br>
When you call for a ban on "snuff fiction" on the Forum, however, I must disagree. It's not because I'm an advocate of stories where characters are fatally tickled. (I actually found the story in question a perfunctory exercise, meaning it was more ruthless in its quick exposition than in any moral sense.
The author's aim was so modest that the tale was over before its implications had time to offend.) I just naturally balk when I'm told that some ideas are so unacceptable that they can't be expressed, even in fiction.<br>
Criticize a story, yes. Loudly refuse to even read a story, OK. But, demand that someone can't even write a story about a, er, ticklish subject because it disturbs you...no, I don't think anyone has that right.<p>
In the interest of full disclosure, I once wrote a story for MTJ Pubs a few years back entitled "The Cootchy-Coo Contract." It involved a mob assassin hired to tickle to death a witness set to testify against a crime lord. While the story was intended to be a bit of a send-up of a well-worn crime scenario, I, for the sake of suspense, made it plain that the victim, who was asthmatic, found the tickling absolutely terrifying. (Just so you know, the
plot was foiled in the nick o' time. 🙂 )<br>I don't find murder, even by tickling, to be erotically stimulating. However, I found the challenge to try to write a remotely plausible story about murderous tickling to be creatively stiimulating--and an irresistible challenge. If someone had told me that I couldn't post such a story here because it dabbled in ideas too disturbing for the Forum, THAT would cause me to question being a member. <br> It really is a fundamental question of freedom...the freedom even to offend...<p>
Now, speculating a bit more. on the matter of the Forum's ban on material involving minors: <br>
While I have qualms about the ban from a free speech perspective, I bow to the Forum's concern that it not run afoul of laws--or the commonweal--on the matter. Kids and the Internet is an issue, for better or worse, of keen concern by well-meaning authorities and exploited by, as I see them, censorious Puritans. Either way, if the Forum displayed such material, I've little doubt it would face crippling harrassment or, worse, outright abandonment by servers. This is one case, sadly, where discretion really is the better part of valor.
Sabs, it's obvious the story ticks you off, and you've every right to tell the author and the TMF in general that it does. That, after all, is what the Forum's about: open expression.<br>
When you call for a ban on "snuff fiction" on the Forum, however, I must disagree. It's not because I'm an advocate of stories where characters are fatally tickled. (I actually found the story in question a perfunctory exercise, meaning it was more ruthless in its quick exposition than in any moral sense.
The author's aim was so modest that the tale was over before its implications had time to offend.) I just naturally balk when I'm told that some ideas are so unacceptable that they can't be expressed, even in fiction.<br>
Criticize a story, yes. Loudly refuse to even read a story, OK. But, demand that someone can't even write a story about a, er, ticklish subject because it disturbs you...no, I don't think anyone has that right.<p>
In the interest of full disclosure, I once wrote a story for MTJ Pubs a few years back entitled "The Cootchy-Coo Contract." It involved a mob assassin hired to tickle to death a witness set to testify against a crime lord. While the story was intended to be a bit of a send-up of a well-worn crime scenario, I, for the sake of suspense, made it plain that the victim, who was asthmatic, found the tickling absolutely terrifying. (Just so you know, the
plot was foiled in the nick o' time. 🙂 )<br>I don't find murder, even by tickling, to be erotically stimulating. However, I found the challenge to try to write a remotely plausible story about murderous tickling to be creatively stiimulating--and an irresistible challenge. If someone had told me that I couldn't post such a story here because it dabbled in ideas too disturbing for the Forum, THAT would cause me to question being a member. <br> It really is a fundamental question of freedom...the freedom even to offend...<p>
Now, speculating a bit more. on the matter of the Forum's ban on material involving minors: <br>
While I have qualms about the ban from a free speech perspective, I bow to the Forum's concern that it not run afoul of laws--or the commonweal--on the matter. Kids and the Internet is an issue, for better or worse, of keen concern by well-meaning authorities and exploited by, as I see them, censorious Puritans. Either way, if the Forum displayed such material, I've little doubt it would face crippling harrassment or, worse, outright abandonment by servers. This is one case, sadly, where discretion really is the better part of valor.
HisFlyinFingers
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 163
- Points
- 18
TeeHeeLawrence, you make a fair point (along with everyone else), but your mention of minors at the end requires a second look.
As you point out, this forum housing material featuring minors could attract unwanted attention from authorities. I don't believe that this is the only reason that such content is prohibited, but it is a factor that needs to be addressed.
But, back to the topic at hand, sexual material featuring dead people or people who die during the act is no more legal than material featuring minors. Snuff films are definitely illegal, and although I can't claim to know all the laws in this area, I can't imagine that pictures, artwork or stories are far behind in that respect. Even if the law is fuzzy enough that the forum probably wouldn't get shut down for housing the stuff, I can't say that I feel good about it being here.
Then again, I think the reason the mods have come down so loudly against underage material is because several people really want to post it for some reason. As long as this murder-erotica stays as rare as it is now, I don't think we really need to officially ban it.
As you point out, this forum housing material featuring minors could attract unwanted attention from authorities. I don't believe that this is the only reason that such content is prohibited, but it is a factor that needs to be addressed.
But, back to the topic at hand, sexual material featuring dead people or people who die during the act is no more legal than material featuring minors. Snuff films are definitely illegal, and although I can't claim to know all the laws in this area, I can't imagine that pictures, artwork or stories are far behind in that respect. Even if the law is fuzzy enough that the forum probably wouldn't get shut down for housing the stuff, I can't say that I feel good about it being here.
Then again, I think the reason the mods have come down so loudly against underage material is because several people really want to post it for some reason. As long as this murder-erotica stays as rare as it is now, I don't think we really need to officially ban it.
SlaverTickler
Guest
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2001
- Messages
- 10,155
- Points
- 38
Sablesword said:
By the very fact that this is an Adult Content site, part of your being here is your right to freedom of speach. What if relgious right type were to come around and have this site shut down for some of it's more erotic content. What if someone found your name offencive because it has the word Sword in it. Where does it end Sable, thats what I'm trying to get across. Some people here don't like strong sexual content in the vid clips or stories. Some don't like any nudity. Now me, I'm not into M/M tickling, but I don't say "Ban it" simply because I don't like it, would that be fair to someone like Goes4thelaughs ? My advice is that if you don't like something, don't read them. If you want (and I think you already have one) start your own site and don't permit what you don't aprove of.
SlaverTickler
Guest
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2001
- Messages
- 10,155
- Points
- 38
HisFlyinFingers said:
Yeah I'd agree with a "Keeping it in check" idea. Who know it may have been a one time deal. I have a feeling that if the author doens't get alot of possative feedback he won't be writing it to offten. I didn't relize writing a snuff fantasy was against the law. A snuff film I can understand. Any content featuring kids I deffenetly understand.If somebody wants to write a story about a person being exacuted by tickling let them, just make sure they put (M/F, Noncon, Snuff) next to it.
Last edited:
Slippery slope
I've written a piece with death (It was near Halloween I was on a horror movie kick, and wanted to try something close) So let me throw my two cents in on this one. I don't have a problem if people decide to ban "snuff" tickling. I'm not married to the idea and didn't greatly love the story with death in it... it was an idea to try, but here's my opinion and why if it were up to a vote I'd vote no. First is the obvious, just cause this isn't a free speech forum doesn't mean we have no reason to keep it as free as possible. Minors, are a legal restriction, you can at least see why it really needs to be there, even if you are FREE SPEECH MAN (for me at least) it wouldn't be anywhere near worth it to stand for the principle and then watch the whole forum get shut down. I don't know if the same threat exists with snuff type tickling, but if it doesn't then the same reasons for banning it cease to apply. Now there's the point of personal taste (it might be intense to the core passionate and deeply held personal taste supported by comunity standards, but it's personal taste just the same), and that's where I just can't get behind you even if I agree with you, because when we start editing on personal taste where does it end? It can't kill... ok, can it drive someone insane... still too much? Can it be non-consensual? If not we are cutting off a large leg of the forum. You see what I mean. Maybe your only limit would be the death but if we make rules by consensus rather than simply relying on freedom and a "if you don't like it brother don't read it" policy then perhaps the majority would vote to rid the forum of anything m/m... or anything overtly sexual whatever. Only the largest group would have there voices heard and there tastes pandered too. Now wouldn't that be a bit hypocritical of a group that is MADE to cater to a minority (tickling fetishists) I understand where your coming from... maybe certain things like Snuff, non-con should voluntarily label there work. At least in the case of snuff if I ever did anything else, after reading this thread I would just out of respect, but to ban it because it is to the taste of a smaller group and distasteful to the rest, I think we should look at what the "rest" would think of our little forum as a whole... and I wouldn't want all the vanilla people of the world to gang up and ban us. So I would allow even the most tasteless of stories stand. Lastly there is a prase used in this thread "tickling is supposed to be" I think tickling is different to different people, and I don't think anyone has a right to say what tickling is supposed to be, especially a group of people who uses tickling for "deviant" purposes. We're kinnda living in the glass house here, so I would put the stones away. *puts his soap box away for another day* (sorry if I repeated other peoples points, I just felt it was worth repeating)
I've written a piece with death (It was near Halloween I was on a horror movie kick, and wanted to try something close) So let me throw my two cents in on this one. I don't have a problem if people decide to ban "snuff" tickling. I'm not married to the idea and didn't greatly love the story with death in it... it was an idea to try, but here's my opinion and why if it were up to a vote I'd vote no. First is the obvious, just cause this isn't a free speech forum doesn't mean we have no reason to keep it as free as possible. Minors, are a legal restriction, you can at least see why it really needs to be there, even if you are FREE SPEECH MAN (for me at least) it wouldn't be anywhere near worth it to stand for the principle and then watch the whole forum get shut down. I don't know if the same threat exists with snuff type tickling, but if it doesn't then the same reasons for banning it cease to apply. Now there's the point of personal taste (it might be intense to the core passionate and deeply held personal taste supported by comunity standards, but it's personal taste just the same), and that's where I just can't get behind you even if I agree with you, because when we start editing on personal taste where does it end? It can't kill... ok, can it drive someone insane... still too much? Can it be non-consensual? If not we are cutting off a large leg of the forum. You see what I mean. Maybe your only limit would be the death but if we make rules by consensus rather than simply relying on freedom and a "if you don't like it brother don't read it" policy then perhaps the majority would vote to rid the forum of anything m/m... or anything overtly sexual whatever. Only the largest group would have there voices heard and there tastes pandered too. Now wouldn't that be a bit hypocritical of a group that is MADE to cater to a minority (tickling fetishists) I understand where your coming from... maybe certain things like Snuff, non-con should voluntarily label there work. At least in the case of snuff if I ever did anything else, after reading this thread I would just out of respect, but to ban it because it is to the taste of a smaller group and distasteful to the rest, I think we should look at what the "rest" would think of our little forum as a whole... and I wouldn't want all the vanilla people of the world to gang up and ban us. So I would allow even the most tasteless of stories stand. Lastly there is a prase used in this thread "tickling is supposed to be" I think tickling is different to different people, and I don't think anyone has a right to say what tickling is supposed to be, especially a group of people who uses tickling for "deviant" purposes. We're kinnda living in the glass house here, so I would put the stones away. *puts his soap box away for another day* (sorry if I repeated other peoples points, I just felt it was worth repeating)
Yeah, we're just getting a lot of repeated ideas here...let me sum it up for everyone: some people like the whole "tickling to death" thing, and some people don't...so whatever, lets just let everyone form their own opinions on the issue. This is so stupid, I need another beer...
Maybe it's different
I wouldent have imagined writing fiction where people die could have been illegal, simply because I would have imagined Stephen King, Douglas Preston, Michael Crichton, heck even Homer, and Shakespeare would be in major trouble. But then again you never know what censors and thought police will go after, I mean "How I Learned to Drive" is about child molestation but the intent is different so its not attacked, if it were here it would be child porn... so maybe the law takes into account intent. This would be interesting, because then youd have to make a difference between those tickled to death for erotic purposes, and those tickled to death for dramatic purposes. It is as they say a conundrum
I wouldent have imagined writing fiction where people die could have been illegal, simply because I would have imagined Stephen King, Douglas Preston, Michael Crichton, heck even Homer, and Shakespeare would be in major trouble. But then again you never know what censors and thought police will go after, I mean "How I Learned to Drive" is about child molestation but the intent is different so its not attacked, if it were here it would be child porn... so maybe the law takes into account intent. This would be interesting, because then youd have to make a difference between those tickled to death for erotic purposes, and those tickled to death for dramatic purposes. It is as they say a conundrum
Whoa, Sablesword, take it easy buddy. I'm not a huge fan of nudity or sexuality in stories, but they are there. I'm not going to leave the forum just because some stories have content that I don't agree with. If the story bothers you so much, just ignore it. Anyway...thats all I have to say about that. I'm out.
TeeHeeLawrence
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2003
- Messages
- 460
- Points
- 0
A pinch of snuff...
Sabs, you can, of course, petition the Mods to remove any post on the TMF that you wish. That's a privilege any member--indeed, I assume, any user--has. I'm not offended either by your wish to express a dislike for "snuff fiction" nor your petitioning to have it banned from the site.<br>
But, you yourself acknowledged the perils of a "slippery slope" when one starts banning concepts not for any fear of legal retribution (as is obviously the case with material involving minors) but as a matter of taste.
Unless I'm very much mistaken, there is no law or even a general consensus
opposing the depiction of death in written fiction (or in visual media, for that matter). It MAY be tasteless to detail a tickling to death, but it is NOT against the law. <br>Actual murder is, of course, illegal, and I would violently
object to even the suggestion that a visual depiction of an ACTUAL murder by tickling be posted here. However, a FICTIONAL killing--in prose or in the visual arts--is, however cleverly presented, NOT real. Again, it's fiction, and perhaps
tasteless, but not real, and so, it seems to me not subject to legal (or Forum) sanction.<p>
I can't emphasize enough that if we start imposing sanctions based not on
reasonable concerns for prosecution but over matters of taste, we threaten not only the liveliness of the Forum, but perhaps its very viability.<p>
The Forum is private property, yes, but it's public "space", too, of a kind. like any mass media. One must be very careful citing property rights as holding absolute sway over free expression. It's not that simple...<p>
Gosh, and to think that all I wanted to do when I logged into the Forum this evening was to merely entertain tickling thoughts...(sigh)
Sabs, you can, of course, petition the Mods to remove any post on the TMF that you wish. That's a privilege any member--indeed, I assume, any user--has. I'm not offended either by your wish to express a dislike for "snuff fiction" nor your petitioning to have it banned from the site.<br>
But, you yourself acknowledged the perils of a "slippery slope" when one starts banning concepts not for any fear of legal retribution (as is obviously the case with material involving minors) but as a matter of taste.
Unless I'm very much mistaken, there is no law or even a general consensus
opposing the depiction of death in written fiction (or in visual media, for that matter). It MAY be tasteless to detail a tickling to death, but it is NOT against the law. <br>Actual murder is, of course, illegal, and I would violently
object to even the suggestion that a visual depiction of an ACTUAL murder by tickling be posted here. However, a FICTIONAL killing--in prose or in the visual arts--is, however cleverly presented, NOT real. Again, it's fiction, and perhaps
tasteless, but not real, and so, it seems to me not subject to legal (or Forum) sanction.<p>
I can't emphasize enough that if we start imposing sanctions based not on
reasonable concerns for prosecution but over matters of taste, we threaten not only the liveliness of the Forum, but perhaps its very viability.<p>
The Forum is private property, yes, but it's public "space", too, of a kind. like any mass media. One must be very careful citing property rights as holding absolute sway over free expression. It's not that simple...<p>
Gosh, and to think that all I wanted to do when I logged into the Forum this evening was to merely entertain tickling thoughts...(sigh)
Caroo - make love..not death
I myself have put myself in a position that has distanced me form a great deal of the furry fandom. The reason for this is because I refuse to endorse killing or pleasure.
In my eyes.. and this isn’t the proper term for snuff.. but in my eyes Snuff is killing someone for pleasure and/or satisfaction be sexual or non-sexual.
Which fictional or not pings very high in the "Fuck you , you total sick sack piece of shit that doesn’t deserve the earth you stand on."
I consider myself a pretty tolerant guy.. But killing for pleasure on a personal level is wrong. That goes double for when it's done by another person.
But I seem to be the minority on this. If I wasn’t, HOSTEL wouldn't have been as popular as it was. And that’s a movie I’d buy just to throw it into my fireplace so no one has to view that shit.
So it goes the same for my favourite fetish. I can tolerate unhappy endings for the victims as much as I don't like it. But if they die and you wrote that story don’t expect me to ever like you.
Seriously.. Tolerance should be wide and diverse.. But not infinite.
I myself have put myself in a position that has distanced me form a great deal of the furry fandom. The reason for this is because I refuse to endorse killing or pleasure.
In my eyes.. and this isn’t the proper term for snuff.. but in my eyes Snuff is killing someone for pleasure and/or satisfaction be sexual or non-sexual.
Which fictional or not pings very high in the "Fuck you , you total sick sack piece of shit that doesn’t deserve the earth you stand on."
I consider myself a pretty tolerant guy.. But killing for pleasure on a personal level is wrong. That goes double for when it's done by another person.
But I seem to be the minority on this. If I wasn’t, HOSTEL wouldn't have been as popular as it was. And that’s a movie I’d buy just to throw it into my fireplace so no one has to view that shit.
So it goes the same for my favourite fetish. I can tolerate unhappy endings for the victims as much as I don't like it. But if they die and you wrote that story don’t expect me to ever like you.
Seriously.. Tolerance should be wide and diverse.. But not infinite.
Disclosure
Whether or not "snuff" (which I always thought of as an inhaled finely ground tobacco, but what do I know) is allowed or not is up to the moderators. There is, in my opinion, however a responsibility on the part of the author to disclose certain elements regarding the content of the work in a standard way. For instance, some may be looking to read various gender orientations to the tickling (m/f vs. f/m vs. f/f vs mm/m, etc.). Unfortunately not all authors disclose this information ahead of time and admittedly this is BASIC! In addition, it would be helpful to disclose nudity, sexual content, other forms of BDSM, and in light of this thread I suppose death related themes.
Should this disclosure be provided, one is not part way through a story realizing it is not what one thought or worse yet being surprised by a disturbing piece of content. It allows the reader to pick and choose what they wish to read and allows them to avoid that which makes them uncomfortable.
I am not saying that there should be any censorship, but I am saying that some form of standard disclosure should be present on ALL stories presented here as a courtesty to the reader. Again, just my $0.02.
Professor Tkl
Should this disclosure be provided, one is not part way through a story realizing it is not what one thought or worse yet being surprised by a disturbing piece of content. It allows the reader to pick and choose what they wish to read and allows them to avoid that which makes them uncomfortable.
I am not saying that there should be any censorship, but I am saying that some form of standard disclosure should be present on ALL stories presented here as a courtesty to the reader. Again, just my $0.02.
Professor Tkl
well i tend to avoid bdsm stories that involve snuff, unless it is incorporated within the plot...i'm not a fan of being tickled to death, however i don't think it should be banned from the forum..maybe in the title, there could be a warning of some sort..Sablesword, i would hate to see you leave over this..Bulletbill's story involved the death by tickling, but considering her crime, i felt she got off fairly easy. i do believe in freedom of speech, and what i would do, is just to avoid reading those stories that do use snuff in the plot..which i normally do..also in all fairness to Bulletbill, i do think it would have taken much longer for her to die than he had in the story..i'm thinking if she was in good health, it might have taken days..
If I may interject something, since I've seen this happen on other boards before: I think before any further discussion can take place the issue needs to be more clearly expressed. Is the issue of tickling to death limited to taste, or are there other issues that need to be considered (for example, the issue of minors included legal factors for consideration). Are there substantive arguments for tickling to death in and of itself that do not relate to taste? If there are, it would probably be a good idea to lay those out, since it would likely raise points many haven't considered.
If it is limited to taste, I think we need to concede that and then examine whether or not taste should be a factor, and if it is, to determine what should be considered acceptable and unacceptable areas of bad taste (in other words, rather than this being a discussion of the place of tickling to death, it become a discussion of everything that should be permitted or excluded).
If it is limited to taste, I think we need to concede that and then examine whether or not taste should be a factor, and if it is, to determine what should be considered acceptable and unacceptable areas of bad taste (in other words, rather than this being a discussion of the place of tickling to death, it become a discussion of everything that should be permitted or excluded).
SlaverTickler
Guest
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2001
- Messages
- 10,155
- Points
- 38
No Kids is good enough...
The rule that prohibits Minors (for leagal and moral reasons) is good enough for me. You can't ban something just because it's in bad taist. Look at how many people made money off of bad taist. It's simply not what people here want. You asked us (fellow forum members) if Snuff should be band. Even though most of us don't like it, we've pretty much said no it shouldn't. None of us said you were wrong for proposing it, it is your right (under the same freedoms I might add) to do so. In the end thats what it comes down to, the same Right to Freedom of Expretion that allows someone to post Snuff is the same Freedom of Expretion that allows other people to say they don't like it.
The rule that prohibits Minors (for leagal and moral reasons) is good enough for me. You can't ban something just because it's in bad taist. Look at how many people made money off of bad taist. It's simply not what people here want. You asked us (fellow forum members) if Snuff should be band. Even though most of us don't like it, we've pretty much said no it shouldn't. None of us said you were wrong for proposing it, it is your right (under the same freedoms I might add) to do so. In the end thats what it comes down to, the same Right to Freedom of Expretion that allows someone to post Snuff is the same Freedom of Expretion that allows other people to say they don't like it.
Oh jeez, is this still going on? Look, if this is such an issue for you Sablesword, take it up with the admins. You can all go back and forth about this all day, but I think I'll pass because no one is effectively getting their point across here. Besides, I have a killer hangover (its my weekend off, yaaay!).
tickledorange
2nd Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2002
- Messages
- 2,429
- Points
- 0
What about stories where someone almost dies? Not like really dies, but either feels like they're going to die or has a near-death experience, either from tickling or other.
tickledorange said:
ack that's really complicating things..i say if one doesn't like snuff stories, simply don't read them..there should probably however be a warning that it is contained within the story in a disclaimer..
Tricky...
This was an interesting discussion to read on. I think I'm with the majority here by saying "snuff" isn't my cup of tea, but banning it seems...overly restrictive.
I've been guilty of not following the rule (apologies all around, it shan't occur again) but I think labelling solves just about all of these problems. You don't have to click on a link that specifically states something outside your comfort zone. What you don't read, can't hurt you.
If we follow the procedure of labelling our stories, then "snuff" and anything else can be avoided as if it wasn't there. And if you can avoid it easily, this eliminates the need for a ban, because you can't be offended by something you don't read.
I'd be in favor of a ban if everyone was subjected to something without an opportunity to opt out of it...but this isn't the case we're up against.
Hopefully this is of value, but I'm getting the nagging feeling I'm just reiterating established positions....
This was an interesting discussion to read on. I think I'm with the majority here by saying "snuff" isn't my cup of tea, but banning it seems...overly restrictive.
I've been guilty of not following the rule (apologies all around, it shan't occur again) but I think labelling solves just about all of these problems. You don't have to click on a link that specifically states something outside your comfort zone. What you don't read, can't hurt you.
If we follow the procedure of labelling our stories, then "snuff" and anything else can be avoided as if it wasn't there. And if you can avoid it easily, this eliminates the need for a ban, because you can't be offended by something you don't read.
I'd be in favor of a ban if everyone was subjected to something without an opportunity to opt out of it...but this isn't the case we're up against.
Hopefully this is of value, but I'm getting the nagging feeling I'm just reiterating established positions....
milagros317
Wielder of 500 Feathers
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2002
- Messages
- 617,375
- Points
- 113
This forum is blessed with an Ignore utility. If the author of a fiction story describes activities between adults that you deplore or can't bear to read about, then put him or her on your Ignore list. That way you have banned him or her from offending you again without stopping others from enjoying his or her work.
