LoginCreepy paedophile lists
Deleted user
Deleted
6 years, 7 months ago at Oct 10 21:53 - Can we crack down on these kind of lists please, I'm pretty sure Listal wasn't designed for creeps to share their interests in little girls (again).
Deleted user
Deleted
6 years, 6 months ago at Oct 12 9:48 - Just to attempt to reassert my point so something might actually be done about it, the lack of real moderation on this site is shocking!
Websters dictionary definition of Lolita:
"A sexually precocious girl.
Origin of Lolita
After Lolita , the heroine of Lolita, a novel by Vladimir Nabokov"
The term curiousheiress is almost certainly hindi in origin, it means 'bride to be', so basically this user is making a list of girls that look barely 7 or 8 (in the photos) to 13 year old "Lolita's" to be his bride. That's what the list is about.
I'm not sure if you're aware of this but paedophillia is illegal, having lists on the site that projects the idea that desiring little kids is normal is pretty damaging to Listal in general I would think. I mean I know the site is about generating as much traffic as possible, and that's fair enough, but c'mon what kind of an audience do you want to attract to the site and what kind of a reputation do you want it to have? It's already become a soft-core porn site, and again that's fair enough, that's what a majority of the users want it to be (at least the ones that are left, there's been a pretty big fall off consequently) and its legal and above board but I'm willing to bet most people don't want these kind of sicko paedophiles using the site to attempt to normalise their fantasies.
This isn't the first time these kind of lists have been complained about. Lists have been left up for years and most people just looked the other way (some even voted for them because of their bizarre obsession with accumulating points) it's blatantly obvious what kind of lists they are and what they're about. I think it's best these sort of lists are deleted immediately for everybody's sake.
Websters dictionary definition of Lolita:
"A sexually precocious girl.
Origin of Lolita
After Lolita , the heroine of Lolita, a novel by Vladimir Nabokov"
The term curiousheiress is almost certainly hindi in origin, it means 'bride to be', so basically this user is making a list of girls that look barely 7 or 8 (in the photos) to 13 year old "Lolita's" to be his bride. That's what the list is about.
I'm not sure if you're aware of this but paedophillia is illegal, having lists on the site that projects the idea that desiring little kids is normal is pretty damaging to Listal in general I would think. I mean I know the site is about generating as much traffic as possible, and that's fair enough, but c'mon what kind of an audience do you want to attract to the site and what kind of a reputation do you want it to have? It's already become a soft-core porn site, and again that's fair enough, that's what a majority of the users want it to be (at least the ones that are left, there's been a pretty big fall off consequently) and its legal and above board but I'm willing to bet most people don't want these kind of sicko paedophiles using the site to attempt to normalise their fantasies.
This isn't the first time these kind of lists have been complained about. Lists have been left up for years and most people just looked the other way (some even voted for them because of their bizarre obsession with accumulating points) it's blatantly obvious what kind of lists they are and what they're about. I think it's best these sort of lists are deleted immediately for everybody's sake.
Chani
6 years, 6 months ago at Oct 12 23:51 - As the moderators are nowhere to be seen lately .. anyone (decent users) visiting this thread should hit the 'report list' function under the list linked above. Presuming if enough people do it they'll take notice/action.
It is so true that way too many creepy f*ckers use this website.. but counting the $$ is more important hey.
It is so true that way too many creepy f*ckers use this website.. but counting the $$ is more important hey.
Moderator
TheUmbrellaMan
6 years, 6 months ago at Oct 13 7:07 - "As the moderators are nowhere to be seen lately"
I don't know how you come to that conclusion. But as has been pointed out by other Moderators, we do not have the option to delete lists/ban members, that privilege fall this sites Administrator, Tom.
I don't know how you come to that conclusion. But as has been pointed out by other Moderators, we do not have the option to delete lists/ban members, that privilege fall this sites Administrator, Tom.
Chani
6 years, 6 months ago at Oct 13 20:12 - "As the moderators are nowhere to be seen lately" ... I posted a question to you all a few days ago which was viewed but not replied to until after I said this! Go figure.
How do you not have the power to delete lists? who keeps deleting images? I've mentioned in the past how my images get deleted (probably for stupid reasons too) yet endless lists of half-naked sexually posed images of women seem pass the standard.
We can see what kind of people are being lured to this site now. I can't say I was aware of the child-related stuff before because I tend to stick to checking out movie/book/tv-related lists and avoid the 'other' lists. It is disgraceful to say the least.
How do you not have the power to delete lists? who keeps deleting images? I've mentioned in the past how my images get deleted (probably for stupid reasons too) yet endless lists of half-naked sexually posed images of women seem pass the standard.
We can see what kind of people are being lured to this site now. I can't say I was aware of the child-related stuff before because I tend to stick to checking out movie/book/tv-related lists and avoid the 'other' lists. It is disgraceful to say the least.
Moderator TheUmbrellaMan
6 years, 6 months ago at Oct 13 21:11 - "As the moderators are nowhere to be seen lately" ... I posted a question to you all a few days ago which was viewed but not replied to until after I said this! Go figure.
Well this site sees a lot of traffic, and some times, things do slip through the cracks. There's no reason why you can't message one of a member of the moderator team, to bring something to our attention. Which brings me to...
How do you not have the power to delete lists? who keeps deleting images? I've mentioned in the past how my images get deleted (probably for stupid reasons too) yet endless lists of half-naked sexually posed images of women seem pass the standard.
We can see what kind of people are being lured to this site now. I can't say I was aware of the child-related stuff before because I tend to stick to checking out movie/book/tv-related lists and avoid the 'other' lists. It is disgraceful to say the least.
Why do we not have the power to delete lists? You will have to ask Tom that. Who keeps deleting images? That would be the moderator team. I do fully understand how you feel about the image rules, and have suggested something in the moderator area of the forums. I don't what to say anything yet, but hopefully Tom will approve. You also raise a valid point about the upturn of images of what is, or very near to suggestive images of children. But the rules come from top down, and any changes must be ok'd by Tom first.
Well this site sees a lot of traffic, and some times, things do slip through the cracks. There's no reason why you can't message one of a member of the moderator team, to bring something to our attention. Which brings me to...
How do you not have the power to delete lists? who keeps deleting images? I've mentioned in the past how my images get deleted (probably for stupid reasons too) yet endless lists of half-naked sexually posed images of women seem pass the standard.
We can see what kind of people are being lured to this site now. I can't say I was aware of the child-related stuff before because I tend to stick to checking out movie/book/tv-related lists and avoid the 'other' lists. It is disgraceful to say the least.
Why do we not have the power to delete lists? You will have to ask Tom that. Who keeps deleting images? That would be the moderator team. I do fully understand how you feel about the image rules, and have suggested something in the moderator area of the forums. I don't what to say anything yet, but hopefully Tom will approve. You also raise a valid point about the upturn of images of what is, or very near to suggestive images of children. But the rules come from top down, and any changes must be ok'd by Tom first.
Chani
6 years, 6 months ago at Oct 15 21:10 - Moderators should be allowed to 'suspend' users & their lists. If there is a way, removing from view but not completely deleting (if Tom wants to have the final say) - it may also alert him to the increasing problems with some users on this site, which he seems to be ignoring so far.
Suspension also protects the rest of the members from any overzealous moderation or wrongful reporting.
As for those posting anything suggestive about children, surely an obtained IP address (some are hidden I know but there are ways to locate still) passed onto relevant authorities is an option.
Tom .. If you're reading?? :-/
Suspension also protects the rest of the members from any overzealous moderation or wrongful reporting.
As for those posting anything suggestive about children, surely an obtained IP address (some are hidden I know but there are ways to locate still) passed onto relevant authorities is an option.
Tom .. If you're reading?? :-/