Register now to remove this ad.
PiratePony

Underage Dating/Pedophilia on MLP Forums

Recommended Posts

If it's illegal in the country where the site is hosted, I would think it needs to stay off the site. 

Edited by Total Lunar Eclipse
  • Brohoof 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Total Lunar Eclipse said:

If it's illegal in thr country where the site is hosted, I would think it needs to stay off the site. 

^This. This site is hosted in Canada, and the legal age is sixteen, same as the UK. So anyone under that age is a legal minor and therefore, any adult involved with an under sixteen year old should keep it off the site and if they don't, then action should be taken.

To all the people who say, "Well, nothing physical happened so it doesn't count", we count verbal abuse as being just as damaging as physical abuse, right? If a person on here constantly targeted another user with constant verbal abuse, it would count as a site violation and the offender would be dealt with. Many cases of grooming start with inappropriate emails and/or text messages, or chat. Many sex offenders who start with non physical abuse escalate. So we shouldn't ignore this.

Oh yeah, and saying, "He/she wanted it just as much as I did" is not a defence. The adult has the responsibility to be an adult and to not respond. The Roman Polanski case is a prime example of this.

  • Brohoof 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2018 at 7:42 PM, LadyMercury said:

Alright. I'm back at a computer for a little while so I might as well type this up while I'm here.

As I made it clear earlier we do take issues like this seriously, and I do my best to handle them on a case by case basis and gather enough information each time to make an educated decision and sometimes it's hard because it's not always what you'd expect from the people you've known or at least thought you knew well. 

The barest minimum that I'm going to have enforced is Canadian law. That's the jurisdiction that we fall under, and without any other information given (Say it's refused when someone on staff investigates) that is what will be enforced here, because without that other information we can't outright assume otherwise. Canadian law says 16, that's the lower limit here without taking into account close-in-age groups.

That's not really the interesting part, but it gives a good baseline of what to look out for. The law regarding the close age groups states that a relationship can be held by someone under the age of 16 (14-15) with someone less than 5 years older than themselves. The logical way of looking at this (by myself) is that if you could've been in high school together it's not really outside your age group. I do usually take into account making sure that the parties haven't been doing anything questionable and look out for predatory practices, but the bare minimum is the law. 

On top of this, if information is provided from the users upon questioning and they are from countries that allow somewhat large variances in age groups that people are allowed to have relationships in I will take this into consideration and probably not enact punitive measures onsite, however I will ask that they take discussion of their relationship elsewhere and keep it in a private setting as it wouldn't do them any good to continue talking about it in the public eye. 

I'm doing my best to abstract my own personal opinions from this and make sure there's an understanding of what we have to follow. If you do see something suspicious it doesn't hurt to report it and get it looked at, as long as you're not spamming the report system with them. 

One problem I have with this is in regards to turning a blind eye to those in countries where this is allowed. Basically you're saying to let it slide if they hush hush about it. The problem is now the older person, who would be slapped into a sex offender database in my country, can be free to stay on the site...and potentially target another child here.  

Except now they've been tipped off how to get away with it.

Once again, the same generation is not the issue, but the older adults who prey on children. And this statement does little to quell my fears about child safety here.

It took weeks after me starting this thread, plus toonkritics criminal activity to hit the news for a statement to be made. 

 

  • Brohoof 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, PiratePony said:

One problem I have with this is in regards to turning a blind eye to those in countries where this is allowed. Basically you're saying to let it slide if they hush hush about it. The problem is now the older person, who would be slapped into a sex offender database in my country, can be free to stay on the site...and potentially target another child here.  

Except now they've been tipped off how to get away with it.

Once again, the same generation is not the issue, but the older adults who prey on children. And this statement does little to quell my fears about child safety here.

It took weeks after me starting this thread, plus toonkritics criminal activity to hit the news for a statement to be made. 

Telling them to take it off of our site is perfectly legitimate. Punishing people for something that is legal and acceptable where they're from isn't what I'm here to do. I just don't want it happening on our website. They can go do whatever legal things they're allowed to do in their country while in their country and on whatever other services that allow it. I will just ask them not to take it here because we don't want it.

It's not a very fun subject to be on and I understand the concern. I do as careful of an investigation as I possibly can when looking into these reports, and I will make it quite clear that it's not OK to come here to prey on younger users. I was more referring to people who're in a relationship that started outside of this site and live in other countries where it's not wrong to be in a relationship with that sort of age gap (Both parties that is). That's the difference, and that's why I stated that case in the first place. If they're grooming people on this site, I don't want them on this site. But I want it to make it clear that if it's a relationship that's developed outside of the site and was here before before they got here they wouldn't be booted if they're not doing it on this site. I would just ask that they definitely keep any interactions involving their relationship off of our website.

 

  • Brohoof 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, LadyMercury said:

Punishing people for something that is legal and acceptable where they're from isn't what I'm here to do.

Unless it's illegal in the case where the other person is from. I know that both the US and Canada have extraterritorial jurisdiction laws (by nature) to combat sexual predation against children. One is actually specific to business travel, which is something some fans overseas may want to keep in mind if they come to US cons to vend. And yes, extradition requests do happen over sexual predation of minors. 

27 UST 983; TIAS 8237.
1853 UNTS 407
TIAS.

18 U.S. Code § 2422 - Coercion and enticement

Spoiler

U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 117 › § 2422

18 U.S. Code § 2422 - Coercion and enticement

US Code

Notes

prev | next

(a)

Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

(b)

Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life.

Internet communication applies to the above USC section b for general contact while section a focuses primarily on travel. 

The Protect Act § 503 of 1992 (seen sect. 18 U.S.C. § 2251 to 18 U.S.C. § 2260)

That little gem is what was going to be your heartburn if you even acted on launching an NSFW forum here. Basically, how it is used is to arrest individuals sharing porn online to minors, even if it is legal in their state and they are within the age of consent. That's the one you need to be careful of. That's the parental silver bullet. 

Funny enough, I learned this in my Masters thanks to International Business Law courses ... Particularly International Corporate Law and International Law and Economic Development. Was actually discussed in each class due to the increased use on the internet and the connection to corporate risk. 

Go figure it would apply on a internet fansite about a cartoon. 

  • Brohoof 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Jeric said:

Unless it's illegal in the case where the other person is from. I know that both the US and Canada have extraterritorial jurisdiction laws (by nature) to combat sexual predation against children. One is actually specific to business travel, which is something some fans overseas may want to keep in mind if they come to US cons to vend. And yes, extradition requests do happen over sexual predation of minors. 

If you read the second paragraph, you'll notice I said both parties in parenthesis. Not to try and sound snarky, but since you're making the comment it seems like you didn't read that I already understand this.

If you're clarifying for the rest of the thread I suppose that's understandable.

  • Brohoof 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LadyMercury said:

If you read the second paragraph, you'll notice I said both parties in parenthesis. Not to try and sound snarky, but since you're making the comment it seems like you didn't read that I already understand this.

If you're clarifying for the rest of the thread I suppose that's understandable.

'Both parties' was in a paragraph focused on clarifying that you were mostly discussing relationships that initiated off these servers. Readers will generally not parse or determine the distinction -- and most importantly -- start to process mental decisioning and judgements within the first paragraph. For the benefit of other readers, when I see something in a post's initial paragraph that requires specificity, I will provide it, as I did here. 

So, yes it was for the benefit of general clarity of the thread, as well as to remind everyone that the notion of one nation's law being the only binding arbiter, is a gross oversimplification. That is something I've heard far too often over the years here, from staff and users. I've addressed both civil and criminal culpability in this topic. Really, when it comes to this issue in general, both need to be considered. 

Remember, this isn't a hypothetical situation we are discussing. It has happened previously ... between a US and Canadian citizen. I was involved in questioning the minor. 

And no this isn't snark it's making sure that one opinion doesn't veer too far to one side or the other. As I mentioned to you, the policy you disclosed is acceptable as I don't want people banned for quick moral decisions, but it's important you all don't become too complacent and don't account for the severity of the legal implications. 

I'm pretty certain when I'm trying to be salty it comes across crystal clear. At the end of the day, I certainly believe you are genuinely concerned with the safety of minors here. That's the most important thing to me. But for those that have the ability to affect change ... they don't have the luxury of being wrapped in a warm blanket of comfort or feeling the issue is addressed. 

  • Brohoof 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jeric said:

So, yes it was for the benefit of general clarity of the thread, as well as to remind everyone that the notion of one nation's law being the only binding arbiter, is a gross oversimplification. That is something I've heard far too often over the years here, from staff and users. I've addressed both civil and criminal culpability in this topic. Really, when it comes to this issue in general, both need to be considered. 

Alright I was just making sure, I can appreciate that and that's why I edited my post to include that, so thank you. If there's anything else left unclear by either of my statements feel free to bring it up. I'm still sorry if I seem a little snippy or anything like that as it is quite unintended because I'm still more used to more direct chat such as Discord or IRC over trying to make forum posts.

  • Brohoof 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Join the herd!

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.