Jump to content
The Observer

RuneVillage - Removed as gold status because owner is a sex offender

Recommended Posts

I would just like how to point out how we're suppose to be living in post-Enlightment countries and yet the mainstream cultures, a long with many people here, have such childish notions of justice. Not only justice, but dehumanizing people that they perceive as evil as not human, a bit primitive.

Exactly. I'm sure some sex offenders are predators in the stereotypical sense. I'm also equally sure that some sex offenders are normal people who don't have the self-control to keep their sexual urges in check. And in a society that discourages self-control, I'm not at all surprised to see this happening frequently.

 

Blyaunte: I find it interesting that in your post you make it quite clear that you discourage your kids from applying a label of "black and white" to anything; and then you go on to do exactly that with your description of sex offenders.

 

Forgive me if this seems naive, but I'm more inclined to listen to the opinion of someone who's been abused rather than someone who's judging from an armchair.

 

Where did you get the idea that I've never been abused?


nyuseg.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess its time for Tip.it thought police to examine their own nice team.

 

Could be a future requirement to ask people to declare if they are on a sex offenders register.

That would be "none of your business" reply then.

 

Really, should we in the future proof our whole life, tell where we drink our beers at night. Show who your friends are, tell your hobbies?


First they came to fishing

and I didn't speak out because I wasn't fishing

 

Then they came to the yews

and I didn't speak out because I didn't cut yews

 

Then they came for the ores

and I didn't speak out because I didn't collect ores

 

Then they came for me

and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess its time for Tip.it thought police to examine their own nice team.

 

Could be a future requirement to ask people to declare if they are on a sex offenders register.

That would be "none of your business" reply then.

 

Really, should we in the future proof our whole life, tell where we drink our beers at night. Show who your friends are, tell your hobbies?

 

No you've taken it too far, but dont you agree someone convicted of a sex offence with relation to children has a obligation to inform any persons who may employ there paid or volunteer work when they are working within an area of trust where children are involved.

 

Because mods are a respected & looked upto figure for a lot if people.

 

Especially if it could affect the fansite on such a scale?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just like how to point out how we're suppose to be living in post-Enlightment countries and yet the mainstream cultures, a long with many people here, have such childish notions of justice. Not only justice, but dehumanizing people that they perceive as evil as not human, a bit primitive.

Exactly. I'm sure some sex offenders are predators in the stereotypical sense. I'm also equally sure that some sex offenders are normal people who don't have the self-control to keep their sexual urges in check. And in a society that discourages self-control, I'm not at all surprised to see this happening frequently.

 

Blyaunte: I find it interesting that in your post you make it quite clear that you discourage your kids from applying a label of "black and white" to anything; and then you go on to do exactly that with your description of sex offenders.

 

Forgive me if this seems naive, but I'm more inclined to listen to the opinion of someone who's been abused rather than someone who's judging from an armchair.

 

Where did you get the idea that I've never been abused?

Well, you didn't mention you had been, so I assumed you hadn't. Way to reply to my whole post btw ;)


polvCwJ.gif
"It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just like how to point out how we're suppose to be living in post-Enlightment countries and yet the mainstream cultures, a long with many people here, have such childish notions of justice. Not only justice, but dehumanizing people that they perceive as evil as not human, a bit primitive.

Exactly. I'm sure some sex offenders are predators in the stereotypical sense. I'm also equally sure that some sex offenders are normal people who don't have the self-control to keep their sexual urges in check. And in a society that discourages self-control, I'm not at all surprised to see this happening frequently.

 

Blyaunte: I find it interesting that in your post you make it quite clear that you discourage your kids from applying a label of "black and white" to anything; and then you go on to do exactly that with your description of sex offenders.

 

Forgive me if this seems naive, but I'm more inclined to listen to the opinion of someone who's been abused rather than someone who's judging from an armchair.

 

Where did you get the idea that I've never been abused?

Well, you didn't mention you had been, so I assumed you hadn't. Way to reply to my whole post btw ;)

 

I'm sorry -- was there something else you wanted me to reply to? Your previously dismissive tone indicated to me that you had no interest in anything I had to say on the subject because you believed I had no first-hand experience on the subject matter -- about which you are mistaken -- and really, I am not inclined to get into another shouting match with a moderator who's inclined to ban me for talking out of turn the moment the conversation gets heated.

 

If there is there a double-entendre in my previous statement to which you feel the need to take issue, I certainly don't see it.


nyuseg.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just like how to point out how we're suppose to be living in post-Enlightment countries and yet the mainstream cultures, a long with many people here, have such childish notions of justice. Not only justice, but dehumanizing people that they perceive as evil as not human, a bit primitive.

Exactly. I'm sure some sex offenders are predators in the stereotypical sense. I'm also equally sure that some sex offenders are normal people who don't have the self-control to keep their sexual urges in check. And in a society that discourages self-control, I'm not at all surprised to see this happening frequently.

 

Blyaunte: I find it interesting that in your post you make it quite clear that you discourage your kids from applying a label of "black and white" to anything; and then you go on to do exactly that with your description of sex offenders.

 

Forgive me if this seems naive, but I'm more inclined to listen to the opinion of someone who's been abused rather than someone who's judging from an armchair.

 

Where did you get the idea that I've never been abused?

Well, you didn't mention you had been, so I assumed you hadn't. Way to reply to my whole post btw ;)

 

I'm sorry -- was there something else you wanted me to reply to? Your previously dismissive tone indicated to me that you had no interest in anything I had to say on the subject because you believed I had no first-hand experience on the subject matter -- about which you are mistaken -- and really, I am not inclined to get into another shouting match with a moderator who's inclined to ban me for talking out of turn the moment the conversation gets heated.

 

If there is there a double-entendre in my previous statement to which you feel the need to take issue, I certainly don't see it.

 

Once I ran into a black woman who was hostile and opinionated. I am going to go ahead and take your views as hostile an opinionated because every black woman must be. Just like every person who has been convicted of a sexual crime must not be humane.

 

Stereotyping is so much fun.


w4M8t.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just like how to point out how we're suppose to be living in post-Enlightment countries and yet the mainstream cultures, a long with many people here, have such childish notions of justice. Not only justice, but dehumanizing people that they perceive as evil as not human, a bit primitive.

Exactly. I'm sure some sex offenders are predators in the stereotypical sense. I'm also equally sure that some sex offenders are normal people who don't have the self-control to keep their sexual urges in check. And in a society that discourages self-control, I'm not at all surprised to see this happening frequently.

 

Blyaunte: I find it interesting that in your post you make it quite clear that you discourage your kids from applying a label of "black and white" to anything; and then you go on to do exactly that with your description of sex offenders.

 

Forgive me if this seems naive, but I'm more inclined to listen to the opinion of someone who's been abused rather than someone who's judging from an armchair.

 

Where did you get the idea that I've never been abused?

Well, you didn't mention you had been, so I assumed you hadn't. Way to reply to my whole post btw ;)

 

I'm sorry -- was there something else you wanted me to reply to? Your previously dismissive tone indicated to me that you had no interest in anything I had to say on the subject because you believed I had no first-hand experience on the subject matter -- about which you are mistaken -- and really, I am not inclined to get into another shouting match with a moderator who's inclined to ban me for talking out of turn the moment the conversation gets heated.

 

If there is there a double-entendre in my previous statement to which you feel the need to take issue, I certainly don't see it.

 

Once I ran into a black woman who was hostile and opinionated. I am going to go ahead and take your views as hostile an opinionated because every black woman must be. Just like every person who has been convicted of a sexual crime must not be humane.

 

Stereotyping is so much fun.

Ah I see so, you'd like to sponsor the "hug-a-pedophile" week or something? Is that what you're saying? :rolleyes:


nyuseg.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to say a few more things. First of all I understand you might doubt my post was real, because I did create a throwaway new account to post because I don't want to talk about this on my normal posting account and have it out there, it's generally a very private thing. Second, the main thrust of my post was not that you were wrong to feel disgusted by the actions of people that prey on children but that these people can in all respects be human accept in that respect. Also, I want to make it clear that an abuse victim disagrees with your view not that all abuse victims would disagree, so no one should take my opinion as thee views of anyone but myself because I'm only speaking for me. Last, how I feel about people that are attracted to children is not that I view anyone that is attracted to children as evil or wrong, it's the actions that they take that determine if they are to be condemned and punished, what makes them wrong is when they act upon it and hurt those too young to legally and ethically consent. I refuse to condemn a person that as far as I can tell has done nothing in the last 15 years and may be trying to get his act together and keep it together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to say a few more things. First of all I understand you might doubt my post was real, because I did create a throwaway new account to post because I don't want to talk about this on my normal posting account and have it out there, it's generally a very private thing. Second, the main thrust of my post was not that you were wrong to feel disgusted by the actions of people that prey on children but that these people can in all respects be human accept in that respect. Also, I want to make it clear that an abuse victim disagrees with your view not that all abuse victims would disagree, so no one should take my opinion as thee views of anyone but myself because I'm only speaking for me. Last, how I feel about people that are attracted to children is not that I view anyone that is attracted to children as evil or wrong, it's the actions that they take that determine if they are to be condemned and punished, what makes them wrong is when they act upon it and hurt those too young to legally and ethically consent. I refuse to condemn a person that as far as I can tell has done nothing in the last 15 years and may be trying to get his act together and keep it together.

 

See this is where you and I are going to have to agree to disagree. You may think that person is "normal" but they're not.

 

There is NOTHING normal about someone who preys upon children and harms them physically, sexually and/or emotionally. You don't have to understand that but you need to appreciate it, in order to understand my point of view.

 

While these creatures may appear "normal", they're not. They "act" normal in other regards of their dialy routine, as a means of throwing off suspicion to their other activities goodness knows that if pedophiles spent their time running around chasing and harming children in public, it'd be a lot easier to find them but, believe me, they're not "normal" by any definition of the word.

 

THAT is where you and I are going to differentiate here. That is where I am going to differentiate with the other people here who want to hug a pedophile. There's this appearance of normalcy that so many people are willing to accept at face-value but, in the end, it's exactly like accepting that a serial killer is "normal", except when he kills people.

 

If not for the killing/harming/abusing aspect of their personalities -- tchyeah, they're totally "normal" ...


nyuseg.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is where I am going to differentiate with the other people here who want to hug a pedophile.

You really love to generalise, don't you?


6Ij0n.jpg

In real life MMO you don't get 99 smithing by making endless bronze daggers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have no idea what this man did, but are judging him based off of a conviction he received. He could be some douche bag child molester. On the other hand, he could be a guy who had pictures of 17 year old girls on his computer who claimed they were 18.

 

We all are going to have an opinion on this based on our experiences. The reason I hate the sex offender registry is because your name NEVER comes off it. This is something that can ruin peoples lives, and the system is easily abused. One of my very good friends in college (and high school) was convicted a crime that landed him on the sex offender registry. The only crime he was guilty of? Being in the wrong place with the wrong woman.

 

To keep the story short, my friend got involved with a girl who had a reputation for "being easy" one night at a party. My friend was a stellar athlete in high school and college, and he had a near 4.0 GPA his junior year. He was an attractive guy, and often hit it of well with woman. The next night, this same girl shows up another party we are at, and upon finding out that my friend was "talking" to a different girl that night, proceed to walk up to the new girl, and in private, told her that she was raped by my friend the previous night. The previous woman than decided to file a police report, the next morning.

 

My friend went to court of the whole situation, and the judge took the "better to be safe than sorry" route, and it ended up getting plead down to a lesser sexual offense. He graduated college summa [bleep] laude as a college level athlete, however he was rejected from med school, and instead now earns roughly half of what I make, regardless of the fact that he was a better student.

 

So that is my story for giving the man the benefit of the doubt. Now I don't expect you to share why you don't, as I understand it could be very traumatic, however I simply would like to point out that you really don't know any of the details to be saying this person isn't worthy of the title "human".


w4M8t.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[hide=Quote box]

That 16-18 law in the US is stupid always has been imo.

That law still exists in the UK, it's just almost never used unless the kid is in serious danger, in which case the police and social services would have a reason to get involved anyway. I'd agree if you'd have said the enforcement of that law is stupid and always has been.

[/hide]

No I'm pretty sure I am correct, it's only if the person over 18 is in a position of trust.

 

It's pretty significantly difference, and nothing like the law in the US.

Ahh right, that might be where I've got mixed up. I've worked at organisations which have under-16 groups and I'd been told that relationships between myself and them have to be strictly professional, not emotional or sexual (not that I was trying anyway, it was part of mandatory training). I mistook this as being because I'm over eighteen, not also because I'm in a position of trust.

 

There is NOTHING normal about someone who preys upon children and harms them physically, sexually and/or emotionally. You don't have to understand that but you need to appreciate it, in order to understand my point of view.

Oh, we have to change our opinion completely just to understand where you're coming from in the first place. Seems fair... :mellow:

 

While these creatures may appear "normal", they're not. They "act" normal in other regards of their dialy routine, as a means of throwing off suspicion to their other activities goodness knows that if pedophiles spent their time running around chasing and harming children in public, it'd be a lot easier to find them but, believe me, they're not "normal" by any definition of the word.

They're humans. They're not "creatures" in any context disimilar to how you and I are "creatures". I have a feeling that if this person only served fifteen months, it wasn't for anything as predatory as you seem to be implying. Nor does it explain why Jagex needed to air his dirty laundry in front of millions of people, leading to public humiliation as well the destruction of his livlihood, quite a few years after he'd already served his time.

 

If you have children and/or if you've ever been sexually/physically abused by another person you'd understand and appreciate just how incredibly vulnerable children really are. But you don't, you aren't and you haven't been. Yet.

Yes, it's the classic "You're not a mother so you don't understand" argument. It is of course well known that in the process of childbirth there occurs a process of divine intervention where some esoteric knowledge enters your brain, knowledge that no one else could possibly comprehend. Perhaps you want to lecture us on how you 'know' breastfeeding is better than doing it from formula, just like the rest of Mumsnet. In any case, stop using the fact that you're a mother as some kind of argument to suggest you know what's right, and what we think is wrong because of it. It's irrelevent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is turning into something that should go in Off Topic of the General Forums, not General Discussion of the Runescape Forums.

 

Anyway... the person in question said they knew that the people he sent pictures of were underage and that he figured that it was one of those "not so serious" crimes. As we now know, he was wrong. Now 15 years later (or was it 2 decades, can't remember exactly) he makes a fansite for a game he plays. There's nothing wrong in making a fansite; criminal history or not. From what I know, he hasn't done anything that violates the law in the same way as he had done 15 years previous.

 

Then again, I am one of those people who doesn't care if an ex-burglar is a bank security guard, a murderer as a roommate, or a sex-offender running a daycare (I will probably get bashed for saying that). As long as nothing happens it's just fine. So sue me if I like to give people second chances.


[hide=Drops]Dragon: Spear x1, Med helm x3, legs x2, pickaxe x1, skirt x3, scimitar x1

Barrows: DH helm x1, Verac Brassy x2, Karil Skirt x1, Ahrim Hood x2, Guthan Spear

GWD: Arma Helm x1

Other: Handcannon x4, Leaf Bladed Sword x3[/hide]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What even is "normal"?

 

You know that "little voice" in your head that tells you that something is morally objectionable to you, and you shouldn't do it because it will make you feel terrible for doing it later, so you listen to it, and don't do whatever it is that you would otherwise find morally objectionable?

 

That's "normal". That's what, in the end, makes you behave in a manner that is suitable and acceptable to the other members of your society. It's called a conscience.

 

It's not a matter of good or evil -- but it is the difference between human and animal-like behaviour. An animal has no conscience, it merely does what it does. A human has reason. A human has the ability to discern what, in the long run, is the best course of action for them, and the other people around them. They listen to that voice and do whatever needs to be done to consider the well-being of the whole.

 

Predators either don't hear that "voice", or refuse to listen to it, or don't feel terrible about it afterwards ... or all of the above. As such, they commit the unconscionable without dread or concern for others.

 

 

That is where I am going to differentiate with the other people here who want to hug a pedophile.

You really love to generalise, don't you?

 

I didn't say "all" the other people ... <_<


nyuseg.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What even is "normal"?

 

You know that "little voice" in your head that tells you that something is morally objectionable to you, and you shouldn't do it because it will make you feel terrible for doing it later, so you listen to it, and don't do whatever it is that you would otherwise find morally objectionable?

 

That's "normal". That's what, in the end, makes you behave in a manner that is suitable and acceptable to the other members of your society. It's called a conscience.

 

It's not a matter of good or evil -- but it is the difference between human and animal-like behaviour. An animal has no conscience, it merely does what it does. A human has reason. A human has the ability to discern what, in the long run, is the best course of action for them, and the other people around them. They listen to that voice and do whatever needs to be done to consider the well-being of the whole.

 

Predators either don't hear that "voice", or refuse to listen to it, or don't feel terrible about it afterwards ... or all of the above. As such, they commit the unconscionable without dread or concern for others.

 

Sorry, but I have to disagree. That assumes that EVERYONE has the same standards of morality, which is frankly a load of crap - you learn your morals from the society you grow up in, morals are not with us from birth, they are learned.

 

As an anecdote: In Formula 1 racing there's a huge scandal about bribery just now. A lot of the middle eastern parties involved are asking "What's the big deal, I paid him to do something I needed done" While other Western countries are up in arms about it. That's because in some countries bribery is seen as perfectly acceptable, in other countries, it's intolerable. That's different cultures.

 

There's also the case of the predator's that hear that voice, do that deed and then feel guilty about it afterwards. This man claims to have been convicted in the end for sending the pictures of a few teens, over a quarter of a century ago. He did his time and from his replies he clearly feels remorse and guilt about actions which at the time he THOUGHT were going to be minor or inconsequential. I don't know if you've ever made a mistake in your life, where you thought what you did was okay, but then all of a sudden someone turns around and hounds you like you've just committed a haenous crime; pretty suddenly it can feel like you against the world.

 

Personally think Jagex's handling of this siuation was poor. There was no need to humiliate a man for something that happened 25 years ago, it could just as easily have been taken care of quietly.


Look guys... I absolutely must be a mass baby-seal murderer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Predators either don't hear that "voice", or refuse to listen to it, or don't feel terrible about it afterwards ... or all of the above. As such, they commit the unconscionable without dread or concern for others.

 

You forget in your haste to explain what is "normal" those select people who are by nature deaf, or in a certain state of mind at a certain point in time unable by the forces guiding them and their actions to hear that little voice you presently formed. A woman who murders the rapist of her daughter can certainly be deemed immoral or "abnormal" by your definition, yet in the state of mind she was in at the time she grabbed that knife and stabbed the man in the chest after had done the horrible thing to her daughter, she was in no frame of mind to understand what she was doing. According to you, however, even this is deemed morally objectionable, thus not normal and even something - to put it in your terms - animalistic.

 

Granted, the woman I described was not a sexual offender, but like him, she was not normal. However, you could say that she was born that way. It was inherent in her to defend her offspring; the love for her daughter brought her to that state of mind which justified even the worst and most extreme action imaginable: taking the life of another human being.

 

It has been proven over the past years by neurologists and psychologists that we do have dispositions in which we are incapable of controlling our decision-making process rationally. Scholars of jurisprudence acknowledge this. It is "normal" for us to do things in a certain way, we are born with this "normality". It may be that the things which to us are at a certain point "normal" are not justifiable, as in this case, but it doesn't change the fact that they are a part of who we are. I don't mean to say what this person did was in any way right, nor do I support it. What he did was a criminal act, it was dispicable and he was punished by a court of law.

 

But so many things people do are criminal - take a cleptomaniac, for example, or a drunkard, a child abuser, and so forth - the list is seemling endless. Many of these things can be treated, and have explanations for their nature of which we cannot know until we delve deeper into the human psyche than just judging things from the outside: by generalising, and "assuming" to know what is.

 

The most abnormal thing one can do is to assume to know what is normal. Normality is a fallacy, a mere creation, subjective and subject to change with time. People with the acumen of an ant take their own opinions and claim them to be "normal" and "truths," when, truly and normally, they are nothing more than opinions. I am reminded of the Holocaust.

 

I agree, this person did make a mistake. He has repented and regretted, and he will live with his mistake forever. WE don't have to make it any worse for him than it already is. We have to show acceptance, and stretch out that hand, give him another chance and tell him that yes, he did do something that we don't think is right or morally correct, but we still want to make out of him a decent human being. By spitting on him and labelling him abnormal, we will only intensify his anger and perhaps even his willingness to again commit a crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, this person did make a mistake. He has repented and regretted, and he will live with his mistake forever. WE don't have to make it any worse for him than it already is. We have to show acceptance, and stretch out that hand, give him another chance and tell him that yes, he did do something that we don't think is right or morally correct, but we still want to make out of him a decent human being. By spitting on him and labelling him abnormal, we will only intensify his anger and perhaps even his willingness to again commit a crime.

+1


[hide=Drops]Dragon: Spear x1, Med helm x3, legs x2, pickaxe x1, skirt x3, scimitar x1

Barrows: DH helm x1, Verac Brassy x2, Karil Skirt x1, Ahrim Hood x2, Guthan Spear

GWD: Arma Helm x1

Other: Handcannon x4, Leaf Bladed Sword x3[/hide]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I care, but isn't this thread leaving him open to more and more criticism?


Fabled_Foe.png

26M Crafting XP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EDIT: As sonic would have said: I'm too slow. :x

 

The fact is, certain psychologists would also argue that there is a definition of normalcy - defined entirely by social norms of a society one lives in. This is by no means the only correct definition, but it is one in which many societies - including America - adhere to. It is neither fallacy nor creation as it remains a cornerstone of modern civilization.

 

Secondly, to suggest that things are uncontrollable by nature (at least, that is the gist of what I'm getting from your post, Lensare, so I apologize if I've misread your intent) is grossly cutting off half of modern psychology. There is a difference between genetics and what psychologists would define as "instinct", which is an example that you cited earlier with the mother-defending-her-daughter's-honor. You seem to suggest that she had no control over her actions at the time, and I disagree. So long as a counterexample could be presented - for instance, the woman calling the police to arrest the rapist of her daughter (a realistic possibility), then her action is her choice, and she would have to put into a court of law to face the consequences of her actions. This train of thought, in fact, is what makes rape an issue, as many men erroneously believe that there is a point of no return where they must continue with their action regardless of the consequences.

 

Playing upon audience sympathy is a persuasive argument on the internet, but it seldom upholds itself in a court of law. Justice implies a degree of fairness, and as most of you know, two wrongs don't make a right.

 

I wouldn't judge the individual in question. I understand Jagex's perspective. It is better that they took action rather than an irate parent, who has the possibility to do a lot more damage to both the man and Runescape as a whole. I don't sympathize with him either. He made his choices. He's responsible for them. Those who know him will stand by him. Those who wish to condemn him are free to do so as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your view, dear Sona!

 

However, you take up a sociological point of view - which, I might add, is totally correct - and I didn't argue from that point of view when commenting on Blyaunte's (what I interpreted as being a *psychological*) view of normalcy. I concur that society does indeed create the norms and values to which we - "normally" - adhere. It is what we percieve as being right and wrong, brought forth to us by (moral) education and justice. It is through this that we are able to objectively judge others - and, by extent, ourselves. In saying this I am inspired by Adam Smith who wrote of the "impartial spectator" - a neutral, informed spectator who is simultaneously a part of everything and yet a mere observer. Through him we judge ourselves and are able to refine our previous positions, impressions, feelings and create a moral(ly acceptable) sentiment.

 

What I was getting at is that, at times, this is not possible for some people. The impartial spectator, to stick to that image, is asleep so to speak. Yet these people are no less normal that we ("we" is already a generalisation perhaps not applicable to "us") are. This is what Blyaunte was implying and I am adamantly against this thought. We are all normal - doing something that is wrong, doing something that goes against our principles, that is im- or amoral doesn't make us any less human. Surely, we should be regarded in a different light because of it. I agree, it is something that deserves consequences. I am also of the opinion that the person who works against humanity should be subjected to our resentment and condemned most severely.

 

The person might be deaf (as Blayaunte suggested, or, in fact, I added to his metaphor of "the voice") but we who take away the humanity of the person are in turn blind! We fail to see that we are harming him as he harmed others. We must understand that people can and do change. Those are my last, optimistic, words on this subject. Thank you :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm Permanently Banned there now for posting "Hide Your Kids" :o

 

 

:thumbup: Wish I had thought of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have no idea what this man did, but are judging him based off of a conviction he received. He could be some douche bag child molester. On the other hand, he could be a guy who had pictures of 17 year old girls on his computer who claimed they were 18.

 

Actually we have a pretty good idea of what landed him on the SOR.

 

03/30/1995 TRANS VISUAL DEPICTIONS BY MAIL OF MI

02/15/1995 TRANS VISUAL DEPICTIONS BY COMPUTER OF MINORS ENGAGING IN SEXUALLY EXPLICIT CONDUCT

 

He is a guy who transmitted child porn both by electronic means and by postal mail (ref: http://www.tbi.state...x?htid=00411395) POSTAL MAIL. This is not some bad accident or "being in the wrong place at the wrong time."

 

Do you people actually accidentally print off porn and somehow unintentionally slip it into an envelope and mail it? Do you find that sort of excuse to be credible?

 

At this point in the discussion, I seriously wonder if some of you are playing devils advocate, simply trolling or just so damned groomed yourselves that you can't see straight.


PvP is not for me

In the 3rd Year of the Boycott
Real-world money saved since FT/W: Hundreds of Dollars
Real-world time saved since FT/W: Thousands of Hours

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is turning into something that should go in Off Topic of the General Forums, not General Discussion of the Runescape Forums.

 

Anyway... the person in question said they knew that the people he sent pictures of were underage and that he figured that it was one of those "not so serious" crimes. As we now know, he was wrong. Now 15 years later (or was it 2 decades, can't remember exactly) he makes a fansite for a game he plays. There's nothing wrong in making a fansite; criminal history or not. From what I know, he hasn't done anything that violates the law in the same way as he had done 15 years previous.

 

Then again, I am one of those people who doesn't care if an ex-burglar is a bank security guard, a murderer as a roommate, or a sex-offender running a daycare (I will probably get bashed for saying that). As long as nothing happens it's just fine. So sue me if I like to give people second chances.

 

This.


buzz_knight.png


buzz_knight.png


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.