MC Banhammer Posted:

Just to let you know: Hobo’s ban was indeed done by a mod (me), but only after I consulted with someone who might go to jail. ET said to ban.

This isn’t a judgment call over something which doesn’t have legal ramifications, like the judgment calls we make on shock pics. So I left, and will continue to leave, those decisions to the people who could be affected by them. They’re not legal experts, so they err on the side of caution.

If YOU aren’t a legal expert on what constitutes child pornography in Canada, then your opinion doesn’t matter, because it’s just an opinion. Three hundred non-experts can say it’s okay, but that means nothing in the eyes of the law. So the poll is meaningless, and no amount of discussion should have any bearing on their decisions regarding this matter.

EDIT: Ninja’d by JB!

This is actually a very fuzzy area of the law that is under constant change.

(Note that I said ‘under constant change’, not ‘under constant development.’ )

So much so… That, as legal relations go, the opinions of NON-experts matter more than you might think, and the opinions of ACTUAL-experts matter less than you might think — and the ratio would vary considerably from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

Even so… With my law degree as my soapbox, I’ll say this.

FW Z hasn’t anything to worry about.

Even that picture that Wylin posted — a douche-move on his part — won’t have legal ramifications in any but the most warped courtrooms. (PRO-TIP: The judge and the district-attorney you get, and on what day, can have a large impact on the outcome of any given set of legal cirgreat timesstances.)

As for drawing the line… I have a suggestion.

http://www.filesavr.com/welcometoforumwarz

Most everyone’s seen that by now. I tend to unleash it on the new players for a quick laugh and pretty much every time I do, the newcomer gets a good chuckle and does feel welcomed.

Anyway, my suggestion is that the picture embedded in my link above? As a general matter, embrace it as one — possibly as many two — notches below what should be axed-on-sight. It’s a fuzzy guideline of course, but I think in practice it would work out well.

Even content that does go two or three more notches above that would not entail legal ramifications.

Above that level, I won’t say.

Profuse discussion aside, I think the Mod-team did a good job handling this ultimately. Log in to see images!