Wetlook World Forum

Current time: Thu 25/04/24 16:55:40 GMT

Translate page FROM -> TO

Translate page TO <- FROM

Message # 19249.3.1.1

Subject: my thoughts on these subjects

Date: Sun 13/11/05 02:53:03 GMT

Name: G.O.P.

Email:

Website:

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help
with running costs: (you can change amount)

I enjoy the candid webshots pictures very much, including the pictures of teenagers. I have responded many times to flamers who said that it is wrong to look at these pictures and that they may even constitute "child pornography" because of the supposed "intent of the viewer". Fully clothed pictures of teenagers swimming are not "child pornography" in any possible definition. I am tired of the Operation Mindcrime people who say that it is. I did flame a recent webshots series Rumpel posted, because the pictures were of junior high age girls. I did not mean to imply that these pictures are "wrong". I was expressing my opinion that those girls are too young to be of interest to me or most other users of this forum. I apologize if the way I expressed it in that message was offensive. Rumpel, I do appreciate the work you do in searching webshots for good pictures. As far as ISP banning, Desert Hawk made a great point previously about a video game site we are both on that banned the entire city of Las Vegas (now just Cox Cable high speed internet in Las Vegas) just to keep one problem poster off that message board, and how a few other legitimate users are now locked off that board. Broad ISP bans are not the way to go. It often results in innocent people being locked off a website, either current users or future potential users that would never discover the site.

In reply to Message (19249.3.1)

Re: Re: FAO Nigel - topic: anti-webshots troll

By MK - wamtec@compuserve.com Sat 12/11/05 18:04:12 GMT

Website:

now there's a whole new debate, Sopping....cos while what you say is true...i.e. that professional AND amateur models and websites do seek to turn the guys on....there is really no difference in the end result where Webshots media is concerned....i.e. the media is used for the same purposes....i.e. self-gratification.

The only difference is with that professional and amateur websites....the girls deliberately pander to our pecadillos....and with Webshots, the girls have no idea that their media is being used for fetish purposes.

Bottom line though.....whether you like the girls to pander you knowingly.....or whether you prefer the girls not to know that their media is being used unknowingly for fetish purposes.....thats a matter for each person's personal taste. All the guys on this forum are the same....i.e. "horny"....or else why would they be coming here every day.

In reply to Message (19249.3)

Re: FAO Nigel - topic: anti-webshots troll

By Sopping - katakai1@verizon.net Sat 12/11/05 13:03:22 GMT

Website:

I agree. I like the webshots. I like the unspoiled attractive girls who thoroughly seem to enjoy getting wet, being thrown into pools fountains and suc. Unlike the "professionals" posted here, whose obvious objective is to turn on horny males, the kids in the webshot display the true fun in wetlook. Long may they splash!

In reply to Message (19249)

FAO Nigel - topic: anti-webshots troll

By Greg - okmkm@wp.pl Sat 12/11/05 06:49:54 GMT

Website:

Nigel,

could you PLEASE ban the idiot that flames and critisezes every Webshots post, no matter waht it contains. Webshots, being the majority of candid wetlook, keep this forum alive (compare to the non-candid and very sleepy WetlookForum that doesn't allow Webshots) and 99% wetlookers appreciate them. And this stupid guy flames every Webshost contributor. Probobly some of them won't post again when they find something interesting. He is breaking many forum rules and making the forum a very unpleasnt place. It's been going on for many weeks (at least 20 posts, some with strong verbal abuse), and the idiot seems to above the forum laws. Many have been blocked for less, and he is still allowed here. This must stop. Why do you let the prick abuse some of our best contributors and a company, thanks to which we have a great amount of wetlook. I've been on the forum since 1998 (First the Bravenet forum...) and this is a really sad day for Wetlook, when such stupid prics can spoil it for all the normal wetlookers :-(

Greg.

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs: (you can change amount)