Missing Images? Please read

[keiffers]

Considering this is the first time i have ever seen the mods post a damn thing, i'm going to say again that they don't give a shit.

one day people around here will understand that the mods and owners don't have to tell anyone anything....it is a PRIVATE website, as such is going to be operated however the owners and/or mods want to....you should be thankful that lit has provided the space for everyone to post pictures as they wish up until recently...it is NOT the fault of the owners/mods of Lit that the US govt has changed the law regarding the posting of erotic pictures. You complain, but don't seem to understand it is fruitless to do so - yeah some pics are disappearing that shouldn't disappear (i feel for those that this affects) but Lit is NOT the only place online that you can view erotic pictures....as many people say "if you don't like it, then leave" geezus, have you nothing better to do than complain about every little thing that happens - there are many other hosting sites that you can put the pics onto and then link over here (it's called cut and paste!) but you must keep in mind that even if you leave here cause you don't like what you feel is Lit doing censorship, most any other website is going to be subject to the same rules (and technical problems) that lit is subject to....just wake up in the morning, enjoy the fact that you have life and things in front of you - geezus it could be alot worse than you think it is now - atleast you don't like in China and have the govt take down websites and such cause they don't meet the ideolgies of the leadership. Complain all ya want, but you really think that by complaining things will go back to how they were? HA! I'll just sit back and watch, and laugh......

the only reason everyone is upset is due to the fact that you've gotten so used to doing something without someone else saying otherwise - no one likes change, but get used to it....especially on the internet

 

[CyberDrive]

Here are the basic Forum Photo Guidelines:

- Legally, we can allow soft nudity, but under current United States law, photographs (does not apply to non-photographic images) posted on this site may not contain "sexually explicit conduct", which the government defines as:

ahahaha, how does porn sites get away with hardcore pics on their sites?

its all bullshit

 

[winback]

ahahaha, how does porn sites get away with hardcore pics on their sites?

its all bullshit

Porn sites get away with it by keeping photo ID of all their subjects. Actual graphic ID tagging their face to their ID card. If they don't, they're in violation of US laws and will be shut down.

Sad but true.

 

[Rime]

Slightly off topic

I just have two situations about the new regulations. First, does anybody know where I can find an online version of the piece of legislation that put these new regulations into place? Second, bitching at the mods about censoring the pics won't accomplish anything. I'd be interested in working to overturn these new regulations. Does anybody have any productive suggestions on how to do that?

 

[keiffers]

I just have two situations about the new regulations. First, does anybody know where I can find an online version of the piece of legislation that put these new regulations into place? Second, bitching at the mods about censoring the pics won't accomplish anything. I'd be interested in working to overturn these new regulations. Does anybody have any productive suggestions on how to do that?

why don't you try Congress - the home of 98% of all perverts (the other 2% are in the churches)

 

[zschachwitz]

why don't you try Congress - the home of 98% of all perverts (the other 2% are in the churches)

only 2%?

 

[keiffers]

only 2%?

well there is a +/- % worked in to both of those numbers for error

 

[Curvy_Brunette]

hmmm wondering how one would define lascivious display

www.dictionary.com says:

Given to or expressing lust; lecherous.
Exciting sexual desires; salacious.

lecherous: Given to, characterized by, or eliciting lechery.

salacious: Appealing to or stimulating sexual desire; lascivious.
Lustful; bawdy.

-------------

Based on the above, any pic with your dick out, your tits on display, showing your ass or even standing with a full bush of public hair, (don't mention shaved or waxed ones!!! Or laying down with your legs akimbo and waving around in the air ), could be considered as "lascivious" on the bases it induces a sexual response.

I've known of the Lit site for a while now, I've only recently bothered to look at the forums, and, based on what I've seen, this forum is all about sexual liberation.

If the subjects in the photographs are of consenting adults, I don't see what the problem is. After all, we all fuck and jerk off, so what's the problem in seeing someone else doing what we all do anyway?

To suggest the minors could have access to these open forums is valid but weak.

ALL of my children have a computer in their bedroom. All of them have access to the Internet but not one of them has the ability to access email, chat rooms, webcam servers or porn because of the filters and protection programs we've installed on our home server, a server that controls all the Internet access to ever computer in our home.

My husband and I have hundreds of hours of our own 'home porn' on DVD, video and our own computers hard drives. We don't allow our children access to local porn let alone Internet porn and this is the point I'm making.

We have taken an active role in ensuring our children are safe on the Internet by installing control programs to prevent porn server access. It's easy enough to do, even installing something like 'Net Nanny' helps.

It's not the Internet, the porn servers or sites like that that allow children to access adult images, that responsibility lays at the parents door. Parents who give a child a computer for their bedroom without any controls are, in my opinion, irresponsible.

Over here in the UK, a little girl was very recently abducted by a stranger from her BATH! Yes, that's right, someone walked into her home, into her bathroom, picked her up and carried her off.

Thankfully she was dumped about 20 minutes later even though she was naked and the weather here is horrible with driving, cold snow, (I was out in the car yesterday and my temp monitor said it was -9 (minus 9)).

There are some out there who are real nasty pieces of work. Would you feel safe with your child in a chat room possibly giving out your name and address details to someone as brazen as the above kidnapper?

If not, who's at fault here? You for not looking after your child properly or the Internet for being there after YOU had set YOUR child up with a computer and an Internet connection?

My point is this, as an adult I am now subject to restrictions I don't want to be subject to. If I want to post photographs of myself on a forum giving my husband a blow job, then that is MY choice. But I can't control who sees them, I can't control who has access to them, I can't be made responsible for a child seeing them.

So why are forums such as this blamed for letting children have access?

Why does the law persecute, restrict and sometimes prosecute sites like this for their content?

I know this is an adult site. I made the choice to come here. A child will read this is an adult site, if that child isn't supervised, then curiosity will get the better of them and they'll click "OK" to the "I am over 18" declaration.

How that can be the fault of anyone but the parent I have no idea.

 

[joej]

one day people around here will understand that the mods and owners don't have to tell anyone anything....it is a PRIVATE website, as such is going to be operated however the owners and/or mods want to....you should be thankful that lit has provided the space for everyone to post pictures as they wish up until recently...it is NOT the fault of the owners/mods of Lit that the US govt has changed the law regarding the posting of erotic pictures. You complain, but don't seem to understand it is fruitless to do so - yeah some pics are disappearing that shouldn't disappear (i feel for those that this affects) but Lit is NOT the only place online that you can view erotic pictures....as many people say "if you don't like it, then leave" geezus, have you nothing better to do than complain about every little thing that happens - there are many other hosting sites that you can put the pics onto and then link over here (it's called cut and paste!) but you must keep in mind that even if you leave here cause you don't like what you feel is Lit doing censorship, most any other website is going to be subject to the same rules (and technical problems) that lit is subject to....just wake up in the morning, enjoy the fact that you have life and things in front of you - geezus it could be alot worse than you think it is now - atleast you don't like in China and have the govt take down websites and such cause they don't meet the ideolgies of the leadership. Complain all ya want, but you really think that by complaining things will go back to how they were? HA! I'll just sit back and watch, and laugh......

the only reason everyone is upset is due to the fact that you've gotten so used to doing something without someone else saying otherwise - no one likes change, but get used to it....especially on the internet

Now that we actually have an answer, I have to agree with Keiffers.Nigel did respond and took the time to answer the pm's as well.Again, thanks Nigel. I read in another thread that the owners of Lit are already involved in a lawsuit regarding the new laws, if that is the case, then they really have to keep this site with in the law because lawsuites are public records, and every conservative, religious, anti-porn,,, the list is endless, will be watching this site and every site like Lit. to find something to use against the the owners. We all use this site for freedom of speech and expression. If you don't think its worth fighting for, go spend a couple of years in a police state where just making a statement like this could get you jailed. I have. Believe me its worth fighting for.
Lets stop the back-stabbing, name calling, etc. and support the owners and adm. of Lit and everyother site like Lit. They are the ones that are facing the fines, etc, not us.

 

[syndralinguini]

I think what bothers me is that it seems that the people trying to stay within the "letter of the law" often go to extremes that the law didn't necessarily mean to suggest. So what happens is that one period of sexual repression, which is by nature transitory if history is any guide, has long-term and often irreversible effects. The cultural archive that Lit reperesents will never be the same. (Hopefully there are backups that can be restored when this passes.)

Back in the day, I was in radio in South Texas, working for an underground station that had the most incredible library of virtually every rock and psychedelic album ever made through the entire mid-60s to early 70's period. This station was all over the road, so the music library was comprehensive. Management was never comfortable with the "underground" nature of the station, so they kept trying to change the format to something softer, but that wasn't why the audience came in so the numbers fell every time they tried.

Finally they figured they needed a real taskmaster to get this edgy little beast under control, so they hired a program director from the Texas bible belt (Lufkin, to be precise.) But for all his efforts, the "wrong tracks" kept being played. In what has to be one of the greatest displays of single-mindedness I've ever seen, he cooped himself up in the music library for months with a turntable and a razorblade, slashing every track he found "godless."

"Hmmm... Bob Dylan... Makes love just like a woman... slash... Lay Lady Lay... slash... Beatles.. She came in through the bathroom window... sounds dirty to me... slash (oops, there goes that entire side two suite)..." You get the idea.

By the time he left four months later, an irreplaceable cultural archive was devastated. And... as so many hits have sexal innuendo in them, the management had to spend a small fortune replacing enough of the library to be able to put even a completely "acceptable" non-edgy format on the air.

Lit will survive, but the YEARS worth of documentation of a community based in freedom of speech (verbal AND visual speech) will be lost.

Maybe Lit should remove that little "Free Speech, No Spam" tag from the tops of all the pages.

[rant off]

 

[bi-lover69]

Thank You Nigel!

 

[Cpttoesucker]

The pervert are everyware, government churches, right here. The fact is that pervert ruin it for everyone. If you are of age and and want to share in a non-dangerous or harming manner I don't see the problem. As I said before I am a conservative, yet I enjoy what is private and personal and what I share with others. What I do wish they would do is have some kind of age verification here. Give it time this law will be refind in the future. Things will not be as they were, but they can and will find a way to protect the children and let the adults play, it will just take time.

 

[obscured]

Hello All:

Upon returning from my holiday festivities, I found several PMs asking about missing pictures. I PM'd Laurel, asking if it was a Lit glitch, or if images were removed.

Images HAVE been removed that are in violation of Lit's posting guidelines. A reminder of those guidelines can be found here:

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=346199

The laws have changed, and Lit has had to change along with them, or risk being shut down for violating those laws. As those that run Lit do not want the site shut down (and I hope that you don't either), they have been removing pics as they find them. You can also help with this by a) not posting pics in violation of the guidelines, and b) reporting pics that are in violation as you see them.

Personally, I think it's a shame that the freedom that was had in posting previously (with SOME limitations) is no longer possible. However, if we want to avoid lawsuits, fines, imprisionment, etc. - as well as keep Literotica available to us, this is what we have to live with.

Thanks to all for your patience - I hope this answers your questions.

Thanks,

Nigel

As I recall from our first discussion of this topic back in June, the problem isn't necessarily congress but the Administration. Bush is way overstepping his bounds, as usual, with regulatory rules aimed at forcing porn off the Internet. He's told his Attorney General to make it a priority to go after adult web sites that have been traditionally considered legal. Yes, that means he's actually pulled FBI agents off of the hunt for terrorists and told them to bust people for dirty pictures. Not child porn, understand, but adult porn aimed at adults. He's trying to use the "local standards" part of the obscenity test, which has NEVER been used in the Internet age before. The test case is in Western PA.

As I said months ago, the sad part of this stupid rule is that it makes an outlaw out of Literotica and makes the slimy money-hoarding porn sites legitamate. It means that the surgically enhanced professional models are okay, but a beautiful housewife is now a lawbreaker for showing her natural charms. It's so odd, because the rule seams directly aimed at Lit. I mean, why did they come up with something that makes the "housewife" amature sites the ones that are illegal, but the "Silocne Valley" is okay? These people have some very odd priorities.

I agree, their next target will be the stories, if the "local standards" test goes their way. Written works will not have the 1st amd protection if Gonzalez wins the PA case in the Supreme Court, which I predict that he will (this court sides with the feds over the states 9 times out of 10, and if Alito joins, it will stay that way, and become even more puritan.)

-obs.

 

[joej]

As I recall from our first discussion of this topic back in June, the problem isn't necessarily congress but the Administration. Bush is way overstepping his bounds, as usual, with regulatory rules aimed at forcing porn off the Internet. He's told his Attorney General to make it a priority to go after adult web sites that have been traditionally considered legal. Yes, that means he's actually pulled FBI agents off of the hunt for terrorists and told them to bust people for dirty pictures. Not child porn, understand, but adult porn aimed at adults. He's trying to use the "local standards" part of the obscenity test, which has NEVER been used in the Internet age before. The test case is in Western PA.

As I said months ago, the sad part of this stupid rule is that it makes an outlaw out of Literotica and makes the slimy money-hoarding porn sites legitamate. It means that the surgically enhanced professional models are okay, but a beautiful housewife is now a lawbreaker for showing her natural charms. It's so odd, because the rule seams directly aimed at Lit. I mean, why did they come up with something that makes the "housewife" amature sites the ones that are illegal, but the "Silocne Valley" is okay? These people have some very odd priorities.


-obs.

Here, Here. well said.

 

[Ember Faye]

Big Brothers been creeping up closer and closer for years now ... and now he's breathing down our necks

There were plenty that tried to warn of this happening, but as always, people continued to play sheep and close their eyes to it. Denying it.

Well, here it is now ... the NWO at your doorstep .. and now everyone finally is beginning to rub the sleep from their eyes and ask, "just what the hell is going on and what happened to my rights?"

Welcome to Orwellian country

 

[Guest]

It's bullocks

There is a bug on here as well

Those of us that have been here for a few years know that Lit has had probs in the past with pix either disappearing or getting switched to other threads.

It's not just the rules thing, because there are FAR too many pix that meet the regulations and they are being removed as well

Also, normally when a pic is removed by a mod, they give a reason for doing so.

Now, I know damn well the two owners of this site do not actually do the removing of images on here. It is the mods. And if the mods are saying they're not doing it, then it's pretty obvious that there is another bug on Lit.

This is something that really needs to be looked into in more depth. I know it's not just the "rules" thing that is going on here. And as I said in my thread, if it is a case of mods/owners removing pix because of the rules, then I'm done with Lit. Because it's BS to remove pix that are within regulations of the rules, AND THEN not tell the person why the pix were removed.

There is another site that I go to that has to follow the same rules, and on there, it is ok to show full nude shots. It is ok to show the vagina as long as it is not being spread, played with, or penetrated in any way. It is ok to be completely nude for both the female and males (in the male case, no hard cocks, masterbation or penetration of any kind)

I do hope the problem is resolved soon

I agree there is something going on beside censorship-too many things happening that don't follow any rules.

As far as the censorship I bet the law that is being referred to is the one regulating the games with violence, cop killing, etc. So with any excuse to censure, someone decided to put Lit right up there as a public hazard as big as some of the godawful, violent games.

Did you know that in a PG movie you can say 'F**k' four times if you are telling someone to go get f**ked. BUT if you say "I want to F**k you' as in intercourse, the movie gets an "R" rating. So, if you use the word to as invective it's okay to say it in front of kids but if you say it in a manner you would like to have sex with someone, it's bad.

And there is no limit to the number of times someone can say "I want to kill, maim, torture, dissect, etc"

Our Puritan heritage...

 

[Jaxon8474]

Ok so WHO that is coming to this website is OFFENDED by what is posted?? IF you are coming to this site, you are an ADULT that knows FULL well there are people posting pictures and videos of themselves in situations!! THAT IS WHY WE COME HERE!!! WE ENJOY IT!! NOT only that, you have to SIGN up, and understand the rules and regs of the site. FREEDOM of speech is a joke in this country. If it offends ONE person, they make the MAJORITY suffer. IT has been that way for a long time. ALL this political correct BULLSHIT is going to tear this country apart. I gave up my rights once, when i joined the military, to PROTECT the rights of this country. I do it now as a police officer, but for the fucking government to bend over backwards for those FEW assholes that think they can tell me that i cant look at porn, or smoke or drink in my house, then this is bullshit.

Ill get off my soapbox now.

 

[Cpttoesucker]

This is not about offending someone and it is not about Bush, Clinton did something almost the same. Further more it is only temporary, this law, for all its positive merrits is flawed and will be overturned because of the negitive aspects of it. Anyone who profits from 'porn' should have to keep records and that is a good thing that the law reinforces, but instead of making it illegal to do what we do here at lit we should be required to prove our age. Lit should be required to make sure we are old enough to be here, but they and we should be protected by law for our privacy.

1) We should have to provide proof of age

2) We should be protected, our privacy, by law.

3) Parents that do not protect their children from going to sites like this should be jailled.

4) in order to protect the children, those who sexualy use or abuse them should be killed.

If all of this would happen then our children would be safer and I could show my errect penis to the 1.75 people that want to see it.

The truth is that the law the way it is written does nothing to truly protect the nations children. It just make people who don't know anything about it think that their children are safer. Too tell you the truth I would be happy to stop doing this if it would stop other from hurting kids, but that is just not the case. I would guess that 99.9999% of the people that hang out here love children and would never hurt them.

Disjointed but passionate rant complete.

 

[keiffers]

This is not about offending someone and it is not about Bush, Clinton did something almost the same. Further more it is only temporary, this law, for all its positive merrits is flawed and will be overturned because of the negitive aspects of it. Anyone who profits from 'porn' should have to keep records and that is a good thing that the law reinforces, but instead of making it illegal to do what we do here at lit we should be required to prove our age. Lit should be required to make sure we are old enough to be here, but they and we should be protected by law for our privacy.

1) We should have to provide proof of age

2) We should be protected, our privacy, by law.

3) Parents that do not protect their children from going to sites like this should be jailled.

4) in order to protect the children, those who sexualy use or abuse them should be killed.

If all of this would happen then our children would be safer and I could show my errect penis to the 1.75 people that want to see it.

The truth is that the law the way it is written does nothing to truly protect the nations children. It just make people who don't know anything about it think that their children are safer. Too tell you the truth I would be happy to stop doing this if it would stop other from hurting kids, but that is just not the case. I would guess that 99.9999% of the people that hang out here love children and would never hurt them.

Disjointed but passionate rant complete.

In a roundabout way, that's exactly what I've been trying to tell people - it's not Bush doing it cause he wants to censor what people can and cannot see in the privacy of their own homes

Regardless of what ANYONE says, it IS the parents that let their kids have free reign on the family computer because...

1. in their eyes, their little baby child would NEVER goto a porn site

2. they don't believe they should have to install a filter on their computer

in turn because of this, they find their kid on a porn site and get so pissed off that the govt isn't doing enough to keep these sites out of the reach of kids and lobby the ever living crap out of of their congressional representative to police the internet so that those of us that do enjoy visiting these types of website cannot view the material in the privacy of our own homes. congressional representatives can (and will) attach a resolution to the bottom of a LARGE bill (look at the drilling in the Arctic - it was attached to the bottom of a defense spending bill by Ted Stevens (Mr I want a BRIDGE TO NOWHERE for $250mil) but the bill stalled just because of that Arctic resolution) and most of the time the bill gets passed and 3/4 of the congressional representatives that voted for it never EVER knew it was even there until after the approval had been given - it happens more often than most of us even realize...how do you think people like Tom Delay, Trent Lott and Dennis Hassert, Diane Fienstein and other high profile congressional representatives get projects funneled to their home states.

bottom line, even with protections (whether you think it is censorship or not) kids will ALWAYS find a way to get around it.....if they can't get to them on their home computers, there will ALWAYS be a friend that has the knowledge to find and access to view porn (probably because he found his dads password file to visit porn sites and wants to show it off to his little 13yr old pals - either that or found their dads stash on the hard drive).

If you wanna go gripe at someone for taking away the ability to view stuff like that on lit (or any other amateur web site), go find the parents that feel it is their responsibility to tell their neighbors what they can and cannot view in their own home. Those are the people that are forcing the controls to be put in place, not Bush.

 

[Ember Faye]

when you get right down to it, it really has nothing to do at all with child porn or children watching porn

it comes down to the religious right wanting to take control and deem what is right and wrong for us all as a whole .. they use the child porn thing as an excuse to put a tighter hold on porn overall

this does not have anything to do with violence as the one poster suggested
it's 2257 .. and that law has been in place for quite a while...they just revamped it some to make it more strict

and don't give me bullshit about it's ALL the parents fault for kids finding porn
kids are not stupid ... if they want to find something, they will find a way to do so
I know I sure as hell did (of course, I didn't have internet access when I found porn)

this is not something new peeps
read a lil bit
educate yourselves
as I said, our rights have been being stripped slowly away for years now
and this whole censorship with the pix is not new either .. it was being talked about several months ago

amazes me when people are completely clueless as to what's going on around them .. dig a bit .. research a bit .. it's right there for you to find out about

and I still stand my ground that the disappearence of pix on Lit is not just the "rules" thing, but that there is a bug as well ... it wouldn't be the first time that such a thing happened on Lit

 

[keiffers]

and don't give me bullshit about it's ALL the parents fault for kids finding porn
kids are not stupid ... if they want to find something, they will find a way to do so
I know I sure as hell did (of course, I didn't have internet access when I found porn)

as much as you think otherwise it IS the parents fault, as I've said multiple times - yeah if kids want something, they will find a way to do it regardless, but it is the parents responsibility to put the filters on their home computers (that the PARENTS paid for) to keep the kids from finding the porn, no different than parents needing to mak sure their kids are strapped into to their car seats, that their kids are clothed and fed in the morning before leaving for school/day care, etc (the list goes on) - believe it or not those filters do actually work, the parents just have to buy the software. If they don't buy the software and make sure it is installed and working correctly, then it IS the parents fault no matter what ANYONE says. That's part of being a parent...being responsible for ANYTHING their kids do until their children are of legal age.

 

[juan tractor]

Isn't it funny...

when you get right down to it, it really has nothing to do at all with child porn or children watching porn

it comes down to the religious right wanting to take control and deem what is right and wrong for us all as a whole .. they use the child porn thing as an excuse to put a tighter hold on porn overall

this does not have anything to do with violence as the one poster suggested
it's 2257 .. and that law has been in place for quite a while...they just revamped it some to make it more strict

and don't give me bullshit about it's ALL the parents fault for kids finding porn
kids are not stupid ... if they want to find something, they will find a way to do so
I know I sure as hell did (of course, I didn't have internet access when I found porn)

this is not something new peeps
read a lil bit
educate yourselves
as I said, our rights have been being stripped slowly away for years now
and this whole censorship with the pix is not new either .. it was being talked about several months ago

amazes me when people are completely clueless as to what's going on around them .. dig a bit .. research a bit .. it's right there for you to find out about

and I still stand my ground that the disappearence of pix on Lit is not just the "rules" thing, but that there is a bug as well ... it wouldn't be the first time that such a thing happened on Lit

...how the abstract ideologies behind this are of the very same philosophy we're fighting in Iraq to... well, whatever it is that's supposed to happen.

 

[Cpttoesucker]

For someone to be a member of a group they do not have to accept all of that groups views. I am a member of the Religious Right and I come here. I only partake of what I feel comfortable partaking in. most of the Christians I know do not agree with sites like this, but none of them would force them out of the law. Now when I say that I reffer to the ones I know personaly. Manny on the right feel that porn is a gateway to other sins or the like. Hell everything is a gateway, are you going to go through it?

It is not censorship for lit to remove pics, it is however for the government to stop you from 'playing' in a legal forum. Once again, the 2257 law is effective in stopping lagal child porn, but the reason there is child porn is because these asses are working outside the law.

Oh and i am sure not all the pics are missing because of the law, there is a bug, because there is no rime nor reason for some of them to be missing.

 

[red_flame]

when you get right down to it, it really has nothing to do at all with child porn or children watching porn

it comes down to the religious right wanting to take control and deem what is right and wrong for us all as a whole .. they use the child porn thing as an excuse to put a tighter hold on porn overall

this does not have anything to do with violence as the one poster suggested
it's 2257 .. and that law has been in place for quite a while...they just revamped it some to make it more strict

and don't give me bullshit about it's ALL the parents fault for kids finding porn
kids are not stupid ... if they want to find something, they will find a way to do so
I know I sure as hell did (of course, I didn't have internet access when I found porn)

this is not something new peeps
read a lil bit
educate yourselves
as I said, our rights have been being stripped slowly away for years now
and this whole censorship with the pix is not new either .. it was being talked about several months ago

amazes me when people are completely clueless as to what's going on around them .. dig a bit .. research a bit .. it's right there for you to find out about

and I still stand my ground that the disappearence of pix on Lit is not just the "rules" thing, but that there is a bug as well ... it wouldn't be the first time that such a thing happened on Lit

wasnt that the whole excuse to why msn shut down the chat room unless you pay........ohh of course peadophiles never pay do they............i really do think this is bad timeing new rules come in plus lit having some sort of glitch
if it was just becuse of the rules the less raunchy( good word huh) pics would stay and the more in your face pics would go

lmao i had a pic go where i was compltetly covered ..i hope the glitch will pass cos im damn sure its not lits fault

happy new year to you all

 

[dirtywhiteboy]

My opinion is that this law is not very enforceable......too much room for interpretation of "lascivious" and such.


What is ironic is that the law allows Lit to post stories that are graphic beyond any pics here....even incest stories. Go figure.