I guess it's the price we pay
 

All the porn spam on this NG is irritating. I filter everything I can, but
there's no way to make filters for all of it without blocking out good posts.
Nevertheless, in other on-line forums, especially nursing forums, I
consistently get banned by jealous managers who can't stand the fact that I
post engaging threads. I suppose this is the price I pay for free speech. I've
tried looking for Nursing NG in alt. but they have even worse porn than this
NG. Oh well, filtering is fun, I suppose.

I guess it's the price we pay
 

What, pray tell, are the 'good posts'?
S


"EdGordonRN" wrote in
message
...
: All the porn spam on this NG is irritating. I
filter everything I can, but
: there's no way to make filters for all of it
without blocking out good posts.
: Nevertheless, in other on-line forums,
especially nursing forums, I
: consistently get banned by jealous managers who
can't stand the fact that I
: post engaging threads. I suppose this is the
price I pay for free speech. I've
: tried looking for Nursing NG in alt. but they
have even worse porn than this
: NG. Oh well, filtering is fun, I suppose.

I guess it's the price we pay
 

EdGordonRN wrote:

All the porn spam on this NG is irritating.

Look into getting another news provider. Mine filters out all the
obvious spam so the only time I see spam is if someone is foolish enough
to reply to it.

They (rightly) leave it up to me to wade through the crap that remains.

--
//-Walt
//
// Sigs suck. Oh, the irony.

I guess it's the price we pay
 

Porn spam? Neal's back?

--
katysails
s/v Chanteuse
Kirie Elite 32
http://katysails.tripod.com

"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax
and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein

I guess it's the price we pay
 

katysails wrote:

Porn spam? Neal's back?

I don't know that I'd consider photographs of Neal's back to be
pornography, but whatever floats your [ob]boat...

--
// Walt
//
// There is no Volkl Conspiracy

I guess it's the price we pay - Saving the children
 

Porn is defined as anything appealing to prurient interest - i.e., something
that turns you on sexually.

Pavlov, et al, established that animals (us) can be conditioned to respond
to abstract stimuli - the most common example is his dog salivating at the
sight of an abstract shape because it had ONLY been displayed just before
the dog was fed.

Almost everybody has been conditioned to become sexually aroused by certain
sights, sounds and scents - things that we ONLY see, hear or smell just
before enjoying sex. Prudes refer to these things as "porn" but the fact is
that censors create all porn by forbidding the commonplace sight of things.
Healthy people do not get turned on by things they see all the time but
prudes are not healthy. If seeing a box of popcorn gets them excited they
want to ban popcorn.

Female breasts are a good example. Breasts had nothing to do with sex per se
until prudes demanded they be covered. Thus the only time US men see them is
before sex so most are conditioned to associate them with sex that they are
a fetish in America. Prudes have declared the organs God provided for
children to suckle dangerous to children ... and we're idiotic enough to
believe it. Want to protect children? Lynch a prude!!

I guess it's the price we pay - Saving the children
 

Vito wrote:

Want to protect children? Lynch a prude!!

Amen to that! Where do I sign up, and can we include religious fundamentalists?

"Never through zealotry should one mans morals become anothers laws.", who said that?

Cheers
Marty

I guess it's the price we pay - Saving the children
 

"Vito" wrote in message
...
Female breasts are a good example. Breasts had nothing to do with sex per
se
until prudes demanded they be covered. Thus the only time US men see them
is
before sex so most are conditioned to associate them with sex that they
are
a fetish in America.


So you think that all women should bare their breasts in public?

Have you thought of entering the Presidential contest?
You would present people with a very tough choice! Breasts or Bush!!


Regards


Donal
--

I guess it's the price we pay - Saving the children
 

On Tue, 18 May 2004 23:17:58 +0100, "Donal"
wrote:

So you think that all women should bare their breasts in public?

No, just the attractive ones.

I guess it's the price we pay - Saving the children
 

Donal wrote:

"Vito" wrote in message
...

Female breasts are a good example. Breasts had nothing to do with sex per

se

until prudes demanded they be covered. Thus the only time US men see them

is

before sex so most are conditioned to associate them with sex that they

are

a fetish in America.



So you think that all women should bare their breasts in public?

Have you thought of entering the Presidential contest?
You would present people with a very tough choice! Breasts or Bush!!


Are you saying he's not 'clean clean'?

Cheers