Kind of important

ecchi · 2006-01-18, 01:36 PM

I was just updating my link list templates and came across a site that appeared to link to child pornography. Fortunately rather than just dump it I decided to look into it and report it. The link went to adultfriendfinder.com, and was one of those that used your IP to note the area they think you live in and throw up a "Find a Real SEX Partner in {your area} now" link with photos. One of these photos was a girl who looked about 12 with the caption "innocent lelia - pretty girl". Now I doubt if the webmaster is aware of this, but it is certainly not something I want to link to both because I consider this "wrong" and because nearly every link list has a "no cp or links to cp sites" rule and I would guess that if they followed this guy's recip they would not list my site (and possibly blacklist me).

You can see a screenshot of the site at http://www.traffic-club.info/stuff/screenshot.jpg but remember the site owner is probably unaware of the picture AFF are using so is not at fault (I think they just use random pics).

I am posting this so that people who use Adult Friend Finder as a sponsor or link/trade to sites that do, are aware of what they are going to be showing on their site and how it makes their site look.

P.S. I am not suggesting that AFF actually have members who are under 18, I doubt if they do. What I personally object to is the use of the promise of paedophilia to sell something. Why I am warning other members is that if this pic, or a similar one, comes up on your link to AFF (and it will from time to time) it is going to look like you are promoting child pornography, or worse, sex contacts with kids.

Greenguy · 2006-01-18, 02:14 PM

While I doubt very heavily that this is CP, it is yet another reason to host your own banners/ads (IMHO anyone that lets a 3rd party put something onto their pages is just asking for trouble)

Mr. Stiff · 2006-01-19, 03:09 AM

Look at those nipples on the second pic

SirMoby · 2006-01-19, 07:11 AM

It would be interesting to hear from AFF on this one. She looks young enough to disturb me.

GG is right. Everyone needs to take responsibility for thier own content and that means banners as well.

Toby · 2006-01-19, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirMoby

It would be interesting to hear from AFF on this one. She looks young enough to disturb me.

Agree, and it's doubly disturbing that AFF would choose to use that in a promo. It's enough of an issue that iFriends has a policy on not accepting camhosts that "appear to be under 18" even if they've provided complete proof they are of age.

Sagi_AFF · 2006-01-19, 01:15 PM

The models used in those particular GEO ads are StreamRay Cam girls who must submit two forms of ID in order to work with StreamRay.

SirMoby · 2006-01-19, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sagi_AFF

The models used in those particular GEO ads are StreamRay Cam girls who must submit two forms of ID in order to work with StreamRay.

I'm sure that she's over age but I don't like her looking so young. I know that's just my personal preference.

Are you saying that AFF does NOT have a copy of her IDs on file and that you're relying on a third party to verify the age of models in your promotional material?

Sagi_AFF · 2006-01-19, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirMoby

I'm sure that she's over age but I don't like her looking so young. I know that's just my personal preference.

Are you saying that AFF does NOT have a copy of her IDs on file and that you're relying on a third party to verify the age of models in your promotional material?

The images are hosted by StreamRay. You should also know that last year StreamRay and FriendFinder Inc merged and are now owned by the same parent company Various Inc. So essentially AFF does have a copy of all the IDs. I have sent an e-mail to 2257@streamray.com just to verify the age of this model.

Toby · 2006-01-19, 02:45 PM

I don't doubt that she's of age, but she certainly appears younger and based on the username seems to be using that attract viewers. Given the current scrutiny the industry is under I'd certainly be uncomfortable with that ad appearing on my sites, regardless of her true age.

SirMoby · 2006-01-19, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sagi_AFF

The images are hosted by StreamRay. You should also know that last year StreamRay and FriendFinder Inc merged and are now owned by the same parent company Various Inc. So essentially AFF does have a copy of all the IDs. I have sent an e-mail to 2257@streamray.com just to verify the age of this model.

That makes sense.

Halfdeck · 2006-01-19, 05:37 PM

She does look underage to me, and I wouldn't use that banner. Still, there's nothing in the text "innocentleila" that implies she's underage. If AFF has her valid ID then that's good enough for me. It might still be a good idea to remove her from the ad and create a teen niche filter for webmasters that want to filter out portraits of youngish looking models.

Toby · 2006-01-19, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halfdeck

...Still, there's nothing in the text "innocentleila" that implies she's underage.

By itself no, but in combination with the youthful appearance...

Perhaps I go a little beyond the line on this topic. I don't even allow the words "teen" or "young" to be used on galleries submitted to my TGP's. I'd rather there not be any question about the content on my sites in regards to age of the models.

MrYum · 2006-01-19, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toby

By itself no, but in combination with the youthful appearance...

Perhaps I go a little beyond the line on this topic. I don't even allow the words "teen" or "young" to be used on galleries submitted to my TGP's. I'd rather there not be any question about the content on my sites in regards to age of the models.

Yup

I tend to scrutinize teen sites very carefully myself. None of the teddy bears and braces bullshit...and I wouldn't touch that banner with a ten foot pole.

ecchi · 2006-01-23, 01:51 PM

Quote:

there's nothing in the text "innocentleila" that implies she's underage

Actually there is. At a glance a surfer is very liable to see this as "innocent ******". (Edit- the board apparently automatically deletes the word I typed in bold, and replaces it by asterisks. If you have not yet guessed what the word is, think of the book by Vladimir Nabokov, or the film directed by Stanley Kubrick, that now is taken to refer to underage girls.) As I am assuming that the people at AFF are not idiots, I have to assume this is deliberate. Coupled with the pic, I can only see this as a deliberate attempt to grab customers who are after underage girls.

Quote:

If AFF has her valid ID then that's good enough for me.

Yes, fair enough, but the point I am making is that if you use that ad on TGP galleries, or free sites that rely on trades or LLs you are liable to get blacklisted because the other WM objects.

Quote:

I wouldn't use that banner

You don't get the choice to not include it. If you use the AFF code on your page that puts a geo specific message on your page it also puts a random selection of pictures from AFF on your page, with the text underneath them. As I said at the start, I doubt if the WM is even aware that this picture appears on his site. That is why I started this thread, so that WM's using the code could see the type of material that is put on their site sometimes if they use AFF's code.

DJilla · 2006-01-23, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toby

By itself no, but in combination with the youthful appearance...

Perhaps I go a little beyond the line on this topic. I don't even allow the words "teen" or "young" to be used on galleries submitted to my TGP's. I'd rather there not be any question about the content on my sites in regards to age of the models.

Toby/Mr Yum: I am not directing my comments to you personally but only use your post(s) to illustrate a common example of many other posts I've seen at many boards. I'm not trying to piss anybody off OR tell them how they should run their business.... just some food for thought that I'm sure is written in an overly harsh way because I just hate hypocrisy.

The above reflects a general trend that one can come across quite often and really deserves some thought. Everyone agrees that no one wants CP in any context. BUT its disingenuous to cry about political interference on the one hand and then say on the other ooooo, she "looks" too young. Cripes its not her fault and if she is legal and has appropriate documentation and is sponsored by a reputable site how is it that a WM can feel comfortable with "censoring" her from making an income? If one doesn't have the guts to stand up then one shouldn't be in the business. If you are helping to enforce the atmoshpere of fear by self regulating materials that might, maybe, could piss someone off or won't portray porn that is "seeming" to skate close to some edge (in your opinoin) regardless of it being legal then you need to question whether there is another biz that's better suited to your fearful, squimish, gutless, lazy, nature. Legal is legal. There are now a ton of solo girl sites that are legal and use the proverbial "teddy bear" props or coy "finger to the mouth" looks. If you self censor these sites you are falling right into the hands of what you are complaining about in some other post about government over reaching. Of course you can run your biz the way you want. But think about hypocrisy and what it means? Also, how 'bout this "due diligence", know who you are working with, verify the reputable natures of the paysites you sponsor, research, etc. Lazy bottom feeding is repugnant and if a WM is failing to support sites that they know have their shit together and are legal (I mean how much more solid can you get than AFF?) because "they don't want any trouble....

then IMHO they should just beat it out the door. When do people get it through their heads that this is a "trouble" business?

Thank you for letting me get that off my chest...

SirMoby · 2006-01-23, 04:20 PM

Djilla, why so much anger and hostility?

I can’t find anyone here trying to censor the image but some of us are uncomfortable with the image. I can’t speak for everyone but my reason isn’t to run from trouble but it’s because it goes against my values.

I choose to not promote anything that looks too young or anything that seems abusive to women in any way. That includes many companies that I know are very reputable. While I choose to not support them I also believe that they have the right to exist and I don‘t see any statements here asking the world for censorship.

While legal is legal are you saying that legal is right? Aren’t we fighting for freedom so that everyone can choose what’s right for him or her?

Isn’t it being a little hypocritical to speak of freedoms and then tell people that they should believe the same as you?

If a woman is of legal age then I will fight for her right to create a website. If she attempts to play any role that goes against my own personal values then I will not promote her but I will still fight for her freedom to create that website.

Everyone has the right to say, “I will not use your product because it goes against my own values”. The problem comes when people tell others what their values should be and I only see one person in this thread doing that.

DJilla · 2006-01-23, 06:09 PM

Ya.. you know I'm sure I sounded hostile and I was passionate when I wrote it. I didn't even look at at the image and people are sensible here so I'm sure she probably looked really young.. I was working from from this point of view: that if we who are on the front line of the expression and censorship fight are folding left and right because of an intimidation factor that is present in the environment then I think that this is wrong and weak minded. If someone's personal tastes are involved that's cool that's no different than say "I only show brunette lesbians" this is the equivalent of "I don't want to show too young looking teens because of a personal marketing/moral/whatever position"...perfectly fine by me too.

BUT, I'm feeling like that's not the case in a lot of circumstances. Before the current political environment, tons of WM's were falling all over themselves to sell Little Summer or April or whatever her name is now and similar such sites. I think some people are being intimidated by the environment just to avoid trouble (which is in itself a legitimate business choice of course) which lets down everyone in the biz and draws back the line of which this industry will survive at all. Legal is legal. Again, should a young lady be censored by her peers because of her looks? When all are under attack shouldn't some MAYBE rally around the idea that she/they have the same rights and entitled to the same support that many of us cry about not getting from society at large? I recognize that this is a complicated, emotionally charged issue. I seem to draw some line with those that want to rake in some bucks on the easy stuff in a business that by its nature is confrontational. If its a sincere, personal choice I'm not critcizing that AT ALL. I'm having trouble with people that want to benefit and extract without risk of getting brusied and letting others take the hit. That's all.
The extreme example for illustration is the fight going on in the Muslim world over style of dress for example. Ya, a bullet or a beating is pretty intimidating for a women to think about when considering wearing a veil. Many women LIKE and PREFER the idea of modesty. This is wonderful. Many women believe they should have a choice and defy intimidation which is necessary to have that choice... that's courageous! Many women go along because they don't want trouble. In the porn biz its the same sort of think except I see an awful lot of WM's that are just going along on one hand and crying about their rights on the other? IMHO anybody making a heartfelt, personal choice on the issue of teen or too young looking porn is standing on solid ground. Anyone just folding because they're scared should go!

RawAlex · 2006-01-23, 06:29 PM

Let's add this to the discussion, shall we?

http://guest.epiccams.com/html/97972...20041021_17678

The model claims to be 21 years old.

Also this:

http://www.realcamgirl.com/p/cams/vi...=InnocentLeila

In some of these images, it is clear that she is well over 18... in others, it is much harder to tell (and I suspect she uses that as a marketing advantage)

Alex

furrygirl · 2006-01-23, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJilla

BUT its disingenuous to cry about political interference on the one hand and then say on the other ooooo, she "looks" too young. Cripes its not her fault and if she is legal and has appropriate documentation and is sponsored by a reputable site how is it that a WM can feel comfortable with "censoring" her from making an income? If one doesn't have the guts to stand up then one shouldn't be in the business.

Allow me to chime in on this one, since I am a relatively "young-looking" model. I'm 22 now, and I started when I was 18. I've always been fully aware that I look "young", probably because of the small boobs.

I don't like sites that play up pedo lust by making models look as young and possible and selling that angle in their text.

So, what's a "young-looking" gal who wants to make porn to do?

I never have used the words teen or young on my site. (I only mention my age once, on my bio page.) I don't do school girl or teddy bear sorts of shoots. I don't trade traffic with teen sites. My site does not look like a hearts-and-flowers-and-ponies teen site. (It was originally purple, gray, and pink, but I changed the design over to shades of blue, in part to look less "teen"-ish.) I am very quick to correct any viewer who asks in cam shows or email if I am a teen, and tell him I'm not into pedophilia (or hebephilia). I go out of my way to tell people I'm not a teen. If I get emails from affiliates asking about "teen Furry Girl", I tell them I do not run a teen site and I don't try to convert on teen traffic. It might not be perfect, but feel like I'm doing a pretty good job with not hyper-fetishing young g*rls.

And, I just handed down a rule for my affiliates that they are no longer allowed to sell me as "young" or on any sort of age angle. (It's something that's irritated me for ages, but since the webmasters selling me as a teen weren't even converting well/at all, I figured it wasn't worth my time policing.) I can't really blame affiliates who are all over the "young" thing, though, since as a whole, the entertainment/adult/fashion industries are all obsessed with sexy l*ttle girls, and Joe Schmoe affiliate is just following suit.

So, I do believe it is entirely possible to be a young-looking model and not be the next Little April. You don't have to wear pigtails and have stuffed animals on your bed. You don't have to use "teen" and "young" in your screen names and domains. It's a choice, and not all of us choose to portray ourselves as 14 year olds.

MrYum · 2006-01-23, 10:31 PM

Yep, maybe just a skosh hostile DJ...but gotta admit...you are passionate in your views

I'm much like Moby...my PERSONAL choices have nothing to do with a wish to censor anyone else. I will not promote nor do I list anything that 'I think' makes the girl look too young. And I don't promote or list anything that's overtly degrading or abusive to women. Those are my personal choices based on my own values.

Do I think some of those things are bad for the business and the appearance they portray of us to the mainstream...yes, I do. But, it's not my job to police what others do...it's my job to police my own actions based on who I want to see in the mirror in the morning

DJilla · 2006-01-24, 03:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrYum

Yep, maybe just a skosh hostile DJ...but gotta admit...you are passionate in your views

Re: Hostile sounding! Didn't mean to be hostle, was just pissed I didn't win that dumb contest!

Papa · 2006-01-24, 06:03 AM

Anything hosted remotely is like a time bomb.
Scripts, banners name it !

Hell even counters can screw you !

2006-01-18, 01:36 PM	#1
ecchi Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: About to be evicted!!!! Posts: 4,082	Kind of important I was just updating my link list templates and came across a site that appeared to link to child pornography. Fortunately rather than just dump it I decided to look into it and report it. The link went to adultfriendfinder.com, and was one of those that used your IP to note the area they think you live in and throw up a "Find a Real SEX Partner in {your area} now" link with photos. One of these photos was a girl who looked about 12 with the caption "innocent lelia - pretty girl". Now I doubt if the webmaster is aware of this, but it is certainly not something I want to link to both because I consider this "wrong" and because nearly every link list has a "no cp or links to cp sites" rule and I would guess that if they followed this guy's recip they would not list my site (and possibly blacklist me). You can see a screenshot of the site at http://www.traffic-club.info/stuff/screenshot.jpg but remember the site owner is probably unaware of the picture AFF are using so is not at fault (I think they just use random pics). I am posting this so that people who use Adult Friend Finder as a sponsor or link/trade to sites that do, are aware of what they are going to be showing on their site and how it makes their site look. P.S. I am not suggesting that AFF actually have members who are under 18, I doubt if they do. What I personally object to is the use of the promise of paedophilia to sell something. Why I am warning other members is that if this pic, or a similar one, comes up on your link to AFF (and it will from time to time) it is going to look like you are promoting child pornography, or worse, sex contacts with kids.

2006-01-18, 02:14 PM	#2
Greenguy The Original Greenguy (Est'd 1996) & AVN HOF Member - I Crop Pics For Thumbs In My Sleep Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Blasdell, NY (shithole suburb south of Buffalo) Posts: 41,775	While I doubt very heavily that this is CP, it is yet another reason to host your own banners/ads (IMHO anyone that lets a 3rd party put something onto their pages is just asking for trouble) __________________ Promote POV Porn Cash By Building & Submitting Galleries to the Porn Luv Network

2006-01-19, 03:09 AM	#3
Mr. Stiff Trying is the first step towards failure Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 120	Look at those nipples on the second pic __________________ Submit galleries/links \| Trade Hardlnks \| Free Forum Hosting \| Build your own search engine \| Sponsor scorecard

2006-01-19, 01:15 PM	#6
Sagi_AFF Rock stars ... is there anything they don't know? Join Date: May 2004 Location: Santa Clara, CA Posts: 18	The models used in those particular GEO ads are StreamRay Cam girls who must submit two forms of ID in order to work with StreamRay. __________________ Please Re-Read The Rules For Sig Files

2006-01-19, 02:45 PM	#9
Toby Lonewolf Internet Sales Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Houston Posts: 4,826	I don't doubt that she's of age, but she certainly appears younger and based on the username seems to be using that attract viewers. Given the current scrutiny the industry is under I'd certainly be uncomfortable with that ad appearing on my sites, regardless of her true age. __________________ Latex Vixens Babes In Boots Well Heeled Women Dressing For Sex Stocking Vixens

2006-01-19, 07:11 AM	#4
SirMoby Jim? I heard he's a dirty pornographer. Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 2,706	It would be interesting to hear from AFF on this one. She looks young enough to disturb me. GG is right. Everyone needs to take responsibility for thier own content and that means banners as well.

2006-01-19, 05:37 PM	#11
Halfdeck You can now put whatever you want in this space :) Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: New Haven, CT Posts: 985	She does look underage to me, and I wouldn't use that banner. Still, there's nothing in the text "innocentleila" that implies she's underage. If AFF has her valid ID then that's good enough for me. It might still be a good idea to remove her from the ad and create a teen niche filter for webmasters that want to filter out portraits of youngish looking models. __________________ Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiasm.

2006-01-23, 04:20 PM	#16
SirMoby Jim? I heard he's a dirty pornographer. Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 2,706	Djilla, why so much anger and hostility? I can’t find anyone here trying to censor the image but some of us are uncomfortable with the image. I can’t speak for everyone but my reason isn’t to run from trouble but it’s because it goes against my values. I choose to not promote anything that looks too young or anything that seems abusive to women in any way. That includes many companies that I know are very reputable. While I choose to not support them I also believe that they have the right to exist and I don‘t see any statements here asking the world for censorship. While legal is legal are you saying that legal is right? Aren’t we fighting for freedom so that everyone can choose what’s right for him or her? Isn’t it being a little hypocritical to speak of freedoms and then tell people that they should believe the same as you? If a woman is of legal age then I will fight for her right to create a website. If she attempts to play any role that goes against my own personal values then I will not promote her but I will still fight for her freedom to create that website. Everyone has the right to say, “I will not use your product because it goes against my own values”. The problem comes when people tell others what their values should be and I only see one person in this thread doing that.

2006-01-23, 06:09 PM	#17
DJilla You can now put whatever you want in this space :) Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 525	Ya.. you know I'm sure I sounded hostile and I was passionate when I wrote it. I didn't even look at at the image and people are sensible here so I'm sure she probably looked really young.. I was working from from this point of view: that if we who are on the front line of the expression and censorship fight are folding left and right because of an intimidation factor that is present in the environment then I think that this is wrong and weak minded. If someone's personal tastes are involved that's cool that's no different than say "I only show brunette lesbians" this is the equivalent of "I don't want to show too young looking teens because of a personal marketing/moral/whatever position"...perfectly fine by me too. BUT, I'm feeling like that's not the case in a lot of circumstances. Before the current political environment, tons of WM's were falling all over themselves to sell Little Summer or April or whatever her name is now and similar such sites. I think some people are being intimidated by the environment just to avoid trouble (which is in itself a legitimate business choice of course) which lets down everyone in the biz and draws back the line of which this industry will survive at all. Legal is legal. Again, should a young lady be censored by her peers because of her looks? When all are under attack shouldn't some MAYBE rally around the idea that she/they have the same rights and entitled to the same support that many of us cry about not getting from society at large? I recognize that this is a complicated, emotionally charged issue. I seem to draw some line with those that want to rake in some bucks on the easy stuff in a business that by its nature is confrontational. If its a sincere, personal choice I'm not critcizing that AT ALL. I'm having trouble with people that want to benefit and extract without risk of getting brusied and letting others take the hit. That's all. The extreme example for illustration is the fight going on in the Muslim world over style of dress for example. Ya, a bullet or a beating is pretty intimidating for a women to think about when considering wearing a veil. Many women LIKE and PREFER the idea of modesty. This is wonderful. Many women believe they should have a choice and defy intimidation which is necessary to have that choice... that's courageous! Many women go along because they don't want trouble. In the porn biz its the same sort of think except I see an awful lot of WM's that are just going along on one hand and crying about their rights on the other? IMHO anybody making a heartfelt, personal choice on the issue of teen or too young looking porn is standing on solid ground. Anyone just folding because they're scared should go! __________________ Submit Free Sites, Blogs, Movies, TGP's, Triple XXX Info

2006-01-23, 06:29 PM	#18
RawAlex Took the hint. Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,597	Let's add this to the discussion, shall we? http://guest.epiccams.com/html/97972...20041021_17678 The model claims to be 21 years old. Also this: http://www.realcamgirl.com/p/cams/vi...=InnocentLeila In some of these images, it is clear that she is well over 18... in others, it is much harder to tell (and I suspect she uses that as a marketing advantage) Alex

2006-01-23, 10:31 PM	#20
MrYum Arghhhh...submit yer sites ya ruddy swabs! Join Date: May 2004 Location: Sunny Florida! Posts: 5,108	Yep, maybe just a skosh hostile DJ...but gotta admit...you are passionate in your views I'm much like Moby...my PERSONAL choices have nothing to do with a wish to censor anyone else. I will not promote nor do I list anything that 'I think' makes the girl look too young. And I don't promote or list anything that's overtly degrading or abusive to women. Those are my personal choices based on my own values. Do I think some of those things are bad for the business and the appearance they portray of us to the mainstream...yes, I do. But, it's not my job to police what others do...it's my job to police my own actions based on who I want to see in the mirror in the morning __________________ Porno Flixxx Submissions SOTI Site Submissions Free Porn Resource Submissions

2006-01-24, 06:03 AM	#22
Papa Kids are great, Appu. You can teach them to hate the things you hate and they practically raise themselves now-a-days, you know, with the internet and all Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 190	Anything hosted remotely is like a time bomb. Scripts, banners name it ! Hell even counters can screw you !