I
agree with banning scat, but the more this is discussed, the fewer valid points are raised. For all I care, I'm for banning it because it is generally considered to be a taboo subject due to the cultural and general 'dirty' connotations of human excrement. However, we have to be careful about how we justify these decisions. The rule change has been arbitrary - that's fine, it's a privately run forum. The principle matters, because it will influence how future decisions are made.
bogbud wrote:- I believe the vast majority here has never thought about poo while sinking in deep bogs. Do you even know what peat is? That is decaying moss and other plants. Do you think about poo when you lie down on the grass at the park? Just think about all that poo the rabbits, birds, cats and stray-dogs leave behind.
- I believe the vast majority here is not interested in this kind of stuff at all. Was there any comment left under these stories from the user who started this storm that read something like "cool, the relieving herself was the best part"? No? Wow! There were very, very few comments at all and a lot of them were more kind of the opposite.
- The thing that is really annoying is the constant repeating of personal preferences in every story, lots of posts and the users-signature. I do remember a former user who did start every post with "As a gay dude i think...." (or something like that). After the 100th time it just gets annoying and you start to believe it's just trolling.
I wasn't sure what the first point was getting at, but I try not to think about it, just as much as I try not to think about where people's hands have been when I shake them. But scat
is a fetish, and by nature, fetishes are things that people often can't control or resist. I can't understand the triggers and turn-ons for things that I'm not inclined towards. For some people, seeing a pair of heels is a turn-on. Watching scenes where someone is drowning is a turn-on. Damsels being tied up - and hence the whole detective genre - is a turn-on. Some of these I get, others I don't. I do know that when I trip over something I do have an "interest" in, my brain activity is different to something I won't look over twice. And we're all weak to this. Just look at the way most people respond to the release of a new quicksand video. Jaws dropping, going ga-ga over how hot and sexy someone looks while rolling around in the clay pit or the peat bog. Do most people think of this when they see quicksand?
It's true that most stories written by the user had few responses. Bearing in mind that not all of his writing featured scat (I'm not counting, but a conservative estimate would be 50/50). The lack of comments reflects a few things: firstly, his stories in general were pretty bad, being short, repetitive and lacking anything really interesting; secondly, few threads in the stories forum get many responses in the first place. If we leave out PM2K's courtesy replies, the majority of story threads would be empty. I do believe there is a general deterrence from replying to threads, with the community being reluctant to be critical, combined with bizarrely specific interests in how we enjoy our quicksand. Does the lack of comments mean that certain artistic contributions are bad or disliked, or are we generally only responsive to certain themes?
We've got to be careful when justifying rules based on "majority rules". We haven't run a poll, but I would dare say that the majority of the forum enjoy women in quicksand. The majority are not interested, or at least indifferent, to men in quicksand. The majority are not interested in gay men in quicksand. This is mostly reflective of the current wider community. However, are we banning gay topics because the majority don't like it? We banned specific users whose behaviour crossed the line. The problem is that some users can't control themselves, and often they are bullied to the point where they have to behave aggressively, which then results in the ban and the rest of the community feeling good about themselves. Most of the time, this would have happened anyway, but the rule violations are clear. Troublemakers are dealt with based on their actions, not their interests.
I dispute the labeling of this user as an "obvious troll". His behaviour, to me, is more reflective of someone who has suppressed fetishes - some of which are acceptable, others are not - and therefore he denies his obsession even though he can't control it. In fairness, there are specific obsessions I have that I intuitively include in my work, but over time I've kept them balanced and unobstructive. Except for his signature, he has largely avoided shoving his scat fetish onto others forcefully. He doesn't go into other threads to start up shit, and his fixation is mostly kept to his stories - and because most readers know what to expect, they don't read them. He's been far more open about his fetish for rubber boots and chest waders. And to his credit, he has mostly made the effort to avoid breaking the rules. He didn't publicly promote his off-site work, the interactive threads that he runs have mostly been clean (though not always well organised). It seems, from my perspective, that he's being scapegoated for his interest in scat. We've had far more sinister and malicious trolls.
Mynock wrote:I think the poster who spawned this discussion is an obvious troll and you're all just feeding him.
Numbers wasn't even originally involved. Who spawned this discussion? Beast260 posted the link to a video he found containing minors and no scat. bogbud connected the video to Numbers. Ace brought up the scat fetish. I horrified the community by being involved in an "argument". You posted a meme of a pile of shit.
Who is the troll?
