Less NC-17 stories!
Josh Liller
Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
post!
--
Josh Liller
jli...@mc.seflin.org
http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/6513
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arcade/7235
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/2133
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/9802
Joyce Harmon
In article <5inrcc$f...@nntp.seflin.org>, jli...@mc.seflin.org says...
>
>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>post!
Hey, who's forcing you to read them?
If you want more G or PG rated stories, you could: a) start writing, or, if
you lack the skill or desire to write fiction, you could b) write fan-mail
and encouragement to the writers of genfic that you liked.
Joyce
Victor W. Wong
Josh Liller (jli...@mc.seflin.org) writes:
> Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
> greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
> post!
If you are a believer in freedom of expression, you will understand
exactly why your post is offensive.
Unfortunately for you, this is a forum of free expression. Since not everyone
has access to a.s.c.erotica, the NC-17 fanfics inevitably show up here. And
they have a perfect right to be here.
Normally I don't read fanfic erotica (frankly, I don't WANT to know what
Sisko, Janeway, etc. do in bed :)), but because the postings usually indicate
NC-17 in the header I can skip over them. If their presence bothers you
that much, don't read them.
In order for the proportion of NC-17 fanfics to DECREASE, you have to have
an INCREASE in non-NC-17 fanfics. And I wonder what you yourself are doing
to INCREASE that number.
--
Copyright (C) 1997 Victor W. Wong. All rights reserved.
Atara Stein
In article <5ipcn2$fup$3...@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz>, Gareth Wilson
<gr...@student.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
> jli...@mc.seflin.org (Josh Liller) wrote:
> >Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
> >greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
> >post!
> There's a more general problem on this ng. Almost all the stories concern
> some kind of romantic relationship between the characters. There's
> nothing wrong with that, but is that the only type of fan fiction that
> can be written? Where's the weird aliens?
> --
My experience is that, if there's a story you really want written
(romantic or one with weird aliens), is that you gotta write it yourself.
atara
--
Atara Stein ____
\ /
\/
Playboy: What's Xena's vacation fantasy?
Lucy Lawless: A biennial sailing trip to Lesbos.
madmac
In article <5iobkh$s...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
ah...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Victor W. Wong) wrote:
> Josh Liller (jli...@mc.seflin.org) writes:
> > Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
> > greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
> > post!
>
> If you are a believer in freedom of expression, you will understand
> exactly why your post is offensive.
What *you* don't seem to understand is that restraint and rules are
necessary for society to function. Yes, you are free to express yourself
-- but within the limits of society -- or else you will have only chaos
and anarchy.
There *are* young people who visit this newsgroup. Kids don't need to be
reading this sex junk -- it belongs over on the other
startrek.creative.erotica newsgroup. Parents would not appreciate finding
out that explicit sex stories that are posted here. And the majority of
fans don't like the presence of the sex stories either.
> Unfortunately for you, this is a forum of free expression. Since not everyone
> has access to a.s.c.erotica, the NC-17 fanfics inevitably show up here. And
> they have a perfect right to be here.
Free expression, within limits -- and if you don't learn to reign yourself
in, then the government will step in and take care of it for you (and
that's probably what will happen to the internet). You should respect the
fact that this is supposed to be a general interst fanfic group. The sex
stories do NOT belong here. There is already a specific group for this.
If a person doesn't have access to the erotica groups, then THEY are FREE
to change service providers. The sex stories simply should not be
cluttering up this group.
And don't go labelling me as a Victorian prude -- I've got a very nice
porn collection, but I don't leave it laying about for kids or others (who
would be upset by it) to see.
> Normally I don't read fanfic erotica (frankly, I don't WANT to know what
> Sisko, Janeway, etc. do in bed :)),
It seems that the MAJORITY of people in fandom DON'T care what fictional
characters do in bed.
> but because the postings usually indicate
> NC-17 in the header I can skip over them. If their presence bothers you
> that much, don't read them.
It's the fact that the sex stories are here on a newsgroup that's commonly
available to teenagers and kids that is what bothers some people.
Brian Betty
Look, mommy, trolls!
: Josh Liller (jli...@mc.seflin.org) wrote:
: : Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
: : greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
: : post!
: : --
: : Josh Liller
: : jli...@mc.seflin.org
: : http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/6513
: : http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arcade/7235
: : http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/2133
: : http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/9802
--
***************
Brian Betty
Dunster House!!
Cthulhu fthagn!
***************
Keikimo
In article <5inrcc$f...@nntp.seflin.org>, jli...@mc.seflin.org (Josh Liller) says:
>
>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>post!
Hmmm...and who are you oh mighty one that you can tell US what we can
or cannot post on this newsgroup? It's a free world out here, as long
as it's a creative story, YOU shouldn't have a problem with it. If you
don't like smut, don't read it. If you think there's too much, write
some "General" fiction yourself.
Annoyed at being called Sex-crazed...
Keikimo
Aleph Press
: >greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
: >post!
: nothing wrong with that, but is that the only type of fan fiction that
: can be written? Where's the weird aliens?
Where's your fanfic with weird aliens?
Personally, I'd like to see more Q stories and fewr P/Cs or J/Cs myself.
But then, I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is and write an
occasional example of the The Kind Of Story I'd Like To See. If you want
weird aliens, write weird aliens.
People write what they feel like writing, and no one will change their
writing behavior just for you, or anyone. So if you want to see something
that isn't here, write it yourself, and if it appeals, you might inspire
others.
--
"These are only my opinions. If they were the gospel truth, your bushes
would be burning." -- Nancy Lebowitz button
"Freedom of religion includes freedom from religion." -- My favorite
bumper sticker
-- Alara Rogers, Aleph Press
al...@netcom.com
All Aleph Press stories are available at ftp.netcom.com /pub/al/aleph.
Joyce Harmon
In article <5ipcn2$fup$3...@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz>,
gr...@student.canterbury.ac.nz says...
>
>jli...@mc.seflin.org (Josh Liller) wrote:
>>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>>post!
>There's a more general problem on this ng. Almost all the stories concern
>some kind of romantic relationship between the characters. There's
>nothing wrong with that, but is that the only type of fan fiction that
>can be written? Where's the weird aliens?
Hey, the whole point of fanfic is that people write the sort of stories
they want to read. You want weird aliens? Then why not *write* some weird
aliens?
Joyce
Ruth Gifford
On 13 Apr 1997 01:25:54 GMT, Gareth Wilson wrote:
>
>jli...@mc.seflin.org (Josh Liller) wrote:
>>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>>post!
>There's a more general problem on this ng. Almost all the stories concern
>some kind of romantic relationship between the characters. There's
>nothing wrong with that, but is that the only type of fan fiction that
>can be written? Where's the weird aliens?
You can get weird aliens on actual episodes of Trek; it's one ofthe
thingsthey do well. Whereas they can't seem to handle relationships at all.
Then again some of us write NC-17 (adult) stories that involve wierd aliens.
Too each their own, or IDIC.
Ruth
--
***************************************************
* Ruth | FAQ Maintainer for *
* Gifford | alt.startrek.creative.erotica *
*-------------------------------------------------*
* Better living thru TrekSmut--see for yourself! *
* http://aviary.share.net/~alara/ *
***************************************************
"Allen Ginsberg is dying
It's in all the papers
It's on the evening news
A great poet is dying
But his voice
won't die
His voice is on the land."
Lawrence Ferlinghetti
"I hope wherever he is, there's plenty
of good-looking young guys."
Layna Andersen
Taffy
On Sun, 13 Apr 1997, Aleph Press wrote:
>: There's a more general problem on this ng. Almost all the stories concern
>: some kind of romantic relationship between the characters. There's
>: nothing wrong with that, but is that the only type of fan fiction that
>: can be written? Where's the weird aliens?
>
>Where's your fanfic with weird aliens?
<wince> Oooooh. No. It's simply not fair to say that someone can't talk
about fanfic if they're not going to write themselves. People do have
opinions and likes and dislikes regardless of whether or not they have any
talent for, or inclination towards writing.
I've seen this attitude towards non-writers quite a lot in this newsgroup:
"if you're not going to write something then sit down and shut up." And I
think I understand some of it, the writers on this group work very hard to
produce quality product and it is frustrating to see that effort belittled
by the opinions of those who don't write, and who seemingly do not
contribute to fandom.
But, while I do understand the attitude, I believe that it's elitist and
unfair. And, honestly, there are other ways to contribute to our little
community. (Hey Gareth, why don't you volunteer to start a "weird
aliens" mailing list? Just kidding. I think.)
>Personally, I'd like to see more Q stories and fewr P/Cs or J/Cs myself.
>But then, I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is and write an
>occasional example of the The Kind Of Story I'd Like To See. If you want
>weird aliens, write weird aliens.
>
>People write what they feel like writing, and no one will change their
>writing behavior just for you, or anyone.
Of course not. But who's to say that there aren't writers reading this
thread who have been wanting to post their "weird aliens" stories, but
didn't think there would be an audience for them? As I read Gareth's
post, he wasn't asking anyone to change their writing behavior, he was
simply making an appeal to any closeted "weird aliens" writers. Frankly,
if this newsgroup were overrun by "weird aliens" stories I might make a
similar appeal to lurking SlashWriters.
>So if you want to see something that isn't here, write it yourself, and
>if it appeals, you might inspire others.
*Or* you can try private correspondence with a few select writers. Once
you get to know them you're allowed to start nagging. It works. <thinks
back to a few particularly lovely stories><big smile>
Which isn't to say that the writers wouldn't have written them on their
own, or that they'll write anything for you that they don't want to write,
but a little encouragement can help the creative process. And you meet
some lovely people. <waves to the gang> You might even fall in love.
<blows kiss to my very own sweetheart>
Taffy
"Wouldn't *you* want want to be covered all over in Nestle chocolate?"
-- Raisinets commercial (Really, I promise.)
Gareth Wilson
jli...@mc.seflin.org (Josh Liller) wrote:
>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>post!
some kind of romantic relationship between the characters. There's
nothing wrong with that, but is that the only type of fan fiction that
can be written? Where's the weird aliens?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gareth Wilson
gr...@student.canterbury.ac.nz
Christchurch
New Zealand
"I take great comfort in the
injustice and cruelty of the Universe"
-Marcus, "Babylon 5"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A. C. Chapin
On 12 Apr 1997, madmac wrote:
> There *are* young people who visit this newsgroup. Kids don't need to be
> reading this sex junk -- it belongs over on the other
> startrek.creative.erotica newsgroup. Parents would not appreciate finding
> out that explicit sex stories that are posted here.
I find it more than a little insulting that you assume that parents aren't
raising their children well enough that they avoid stories that have clear
warnings on them. I find it more than a little insulting that you assume
that kids aren't bright enough to stop reading stories they find
upsetting. I find it *very* insulting that you are directing us to dumb
down this newsgroup to the lowest possible level because we are afraid
of somebody's parents, or some local government.
> And the majority of
> fans don't like the presence of the sex stories either.
I doubt that you could find a majority of fans that agree on *anything*.
If you want to prove the point, you might try backing it up with some
facts. It doesn't really matter though, whether a majority of readers is
against sex stories or not. Apparently (by the percentage of posted
stories) a majority of *writers* is all in favor.
The writers in this group are not being paid (or if they are, I'd like to
know how...) for what they post here. They do it out of the goodness
of their hearts. *You* are not paying them. That means you don't get a
say in what they write or post. Sorry.
There are two simple guidelines that I think you'll find helpful in
future: 1. If you want to see *more* of something, do some of
it, and encourage others to do so as well. 2. If you want to see *less*
of something, _dont_ _look_ _at_ _it_. Hope that makes it easier on you.
> If a person doesn't have access to the erotica groups, then THEY are FREE
> to change service providers.
You can email me privately to arrage your sending a check to me to arrange
this "FREE" change of providers. <g>
The idea of a alt.startrek.creative.for.kids newsgroup (possibly
moderated?) sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Posting complaints on this
newsgroup is just _complaining_. Working to set up another newsgroup that
you feel would be beneficial -- now that would be actually _doing_.
I'd just like to thank all the writers on this group, who put in such hard
work for so little reward. I'd like to assure you that some of us really
appreciate your stories, and hopefully most of us aren't as ungrateful as
this gentleman or the others of his ilk.
AC Chapin ac...@virginia.edu http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~acc2a
FoDly Cousin, UF, OKOK, unicorn, S'WOLF, DMOB, ALcoholic
"Learn the basics, have a nasty experience in a graveyard, they hand
you a trenchcoat and steal your razor. Like an assembly line, really."
Emma
In article <5ip3mn$j6$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>, bpb...@fas.harvard.edu
(Brian Betty) wrote:
> Look, mommy, trolls!
Heh. More like:
Mommy, what's a "cock-ring"?
--
Atara Stein
In article <mad3-12049...@wt-d4-216.wt.net>, ma...@wayne.netcom
(madmac) wrote:
> There *are* young people who visit this newsgroup. Kids don't need to be
> reading this sex junk -- it belongs over on the other
> startrek.creative.erotica newsgroup. Parents would not appreciate finding
> out that explicit sex stories that are posted here. And the majority of
> fans don't like the presence of the sex stories either.
First of all, kids have plenty of access to porn with or without the
Internet. When I was 13, long before PCs and the Internet, I read plenty
of smut. Some of it I found on my parents' bookshelves (where they didn't
seem too concerned about hiding it from me), and some of it was passed
around in my 8th grade class. As I recall, my response was usually both
curiosity and "Ewww!" and "Yuuck!" I liked reading about it, but I
certainly had *no* desire to actually try sex out for myself. Kids who
are sophisticated enough to find their way around the 'net are probably
already familiar with porn stories anyway.
Second of all, it's the parents' job to decide what is and is not
appropriate for their children to access. It's not that difficult to slap
a password on a computer or to monitor what kids are doing. It's not my
responsibility to censor what I write so some irresponsible parents' kids
don't see it.
Finally, I'd like to see your statistics for the "majority of fans." Do
you have any idea how long Star Trek fans have been writing slash
(K/Sers--help me out here)? Do you have any idea how many other fandoms
(from the X-files to Xena) have inspired sex stories? Do you have any
idea how many fan-written sex stories are out there on the net? Given how
many writers there are, and how many readers there are who don't write,
and how many writers read *other* writers' stories, there is a *huge*
Internet audience for R-rated and NC-17 rated stories. Even my stories
with the heaviest bdsm content have gotten fan mail. I don't think you
have any basis for speaking for the majority.
> And don't go labelling me as a Victorian prude -- I've got a very nice
> porn collection, but I don't leave it laying about for kids or others (who
> would be upset by it) to see.
How do you know kids would be upset by it? If they keep reading, despite
an NC-17 rating and a warning, then they're probably curious. If they're
not curious they won't keep reading.
> It seems that the MAJORITY of people in fandom DON'T care what fictional
> characters do in bed.
Then why do they keep reading our stories and writing to us praising them
and asking for more?
> It's the fact that the sex stories are here on a newsgroup that's commonly
> available to teenagers and kids that is what bothers some people.
Fine. If those people have kids of their own, then they should take steps
to stop them from reading material they find inappropriate.
Carolyn Fulton
In <5inrcc$f...@nntp.seflin.org> jli...@mc.seflin.org (Josh Liller)
writes:
>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>post!
>
>
are not NC-17, the one way to guarantee it is to write them yourself
and post them.
But I don't think ANYONE should attack those people who have the guts
to put their work out for public inspection in a forum such as this! Be
it G, PG, PG-13, R, or NC-17!
Carolyn
Aleph Press
madmac (ma...@wayne.netcom) wrote:
: There *are* young people who visit this newsgroup. Kids don't need to be
: reading this sex junk -- it belongs over on the other
: startrek.creative.erotica newsgroup. Parents would not appreciate finding
: out that explicit sex stories that are posted here. And the majority of
: fans don't like the presence of the sex stories either.
Judging from the fact that there is a great deal of response to the sex
stories, and a great number of people are writing them, I would have to
say that the majority of posting fans, who are the only ones who have the
right to say anything, *do* like the presence of the sex stories here.
Lurkers who don't write, don't run archives, don't write FAQs, don't
offer critiques on what they like and don't participate in discussion
have no right to have their opinions considerd, since they didn't express
them in a public forum, they don't participate in making this group what
it is, and they are, basically, nothing but consumers taking in what
other people produce, without even paying for it.
Until "a majority of fans" who write, critique, run archives, or
otherwise participate in a valuable way in the life of
alt.startrek.creative.erotica speak up and *say* they want to change the
charter of the group to exclude NC-17 material, their opinion is
irrelevant. We don't know they exist until they speak. You cannot speak
for them. If they can't speak up for themselves, they have no right to talk.
: > Unfortunately for you, this is a forum of free expression. Since not everyone
: > has access to a.s.c.erotica, the NC-17 fanfics inevitably show up here. And
: > they have a perfect right to be here.
: Free expression, within limits -- and if you don't learn to reign yourself
: in, then the government will step in and take care of it for you (and
: that's probably what will happen to the internet). You should respect the
: fact that this is supposed to be a general interst fanfic group. The sex
: stories do NOT belong here. There is already a specific group for this.
Personally, I don't like to post erotica stories here, for that reason.
However, who draws the lines? I have a story which so far, at over 1 meg,
hasn't had a sex scene yet (though it did have frank discussion of sex
and a masturbation scene.) It will have an explicit sex scene or two
before I'm done with it. If this was a pro novel that was sold in
Waldenbooks, it would be in the sf section and kids could get it. Does
that mean I do or don't have the right to post it here?
: If a person doesn't have access to the erotica groups, then THEY are FREE
: to change service providers. The sex stories simply should not be
: cluttering up this group.
: And don't go labelling me as a Victorian prude -- I've got a very nice
: porn collection, but I don't leave it laying about for kids or others (who
: would be upset by it) to see.
Anyone who is upset by sex can skip anything thats fgot NC-17 in the
header. This is a specious argument. I can't stand J/C, and guess what?
don't read it.
The kids argument is a bit different. However, personally I think that
most of the sex portrayed in these stories are healthy and loving, and
better for kids to read than stories about people getting bloodily gunned
down, which they watch in the movies all the time.
USENET is not for children. Period. And teenagers will get stuff on sex
if they want it, regardless.
: > Normally I don't read fanfic erotica (frankly, I don't WANT to know what
: > Sisko, Janeway, etc. do in bed :)),
: It seems that the MAJORITY of people in fandom DON'T care what fictional
: characters do in bed.
But is this true of the majority of fanfic writers? The majority of
fandom does not write or read fanfic, and frankly, no one on this group
*should* give a shit what they think. Then there are te people who read
but don't write, who are an important part of this group, but if they
don't make their opinions known, they don't exist. You cannot say "a
majority of fans"-- I would have to see posts by a majority of fans, and
I'm not.
: > but because the postings usually indicate
: > NC-17 in the header I can skip over them. If their presence bothers you
: > that much, don't read them.
: It's the fact that the sex stories are here on a newsgroup that's commonly
: available to teenagers and kids that is what bothers some people.
Firstly, good filtration software can block stories on the basis of the
NC-17 in the header. If you are a concerned parent with no time to
supervise your kids on the net, you can get a good software package to
filter this.
Secondly, by the time teenagers are actually interested in sex stories,
rather than thinking sex is yucky and disgusting, sex is probably not bad
for them to read about. They will read everything they can get their
hands on, because they are biologically programmed to seek out
information about sex at that age, and frankly, I'd rather they come here
than dig out Dad's collection of porn, because the sex portrayed here is
almost always loving, consensual and non-exploitative. (There are, in my
opinion, some exceptions to this rule, but *most* mainstream pornography
is exploitative and unrealistic to a degree that ST porn tends not to be.)
Thirdly, small children who could be harmed by reading about sex don't
belong on USENET, period. Not without mommy or daddy watching over them,
anyway.
Aleph Press
Taffy (mtsa...@wam.umd.edu) wrote:
: On Sun, 13 Apr 1997, Aleph Press wrote:
: >: There's a more general problem on this ng. Almost all the stories concern
: >: some kind of romantic relationship between the characters. There's
: >: nothing wrong with that, but is that the only type of fan fiction that
: >: can be written? Where's the weird aliens?
: >
: >Where's your fanfic with weird aliens?
: <wince> Oooooh. No. It's simply not fair to say that someone can't talk
: about fanfic if they're not going to write themselves. People do have
: opinions and likes and dislikes regardless of whether or not they have any
: talent for, or inclination towards writing.
Mm, yeah, this is true. I'm just a little allergic to people who don't
participate in the group making these blanket statements-- it's rather
like saying "Write what *I* want to see."
I apologize if that was not the spirit intended by this request. In fact
I'd like to see more weird aliens too, *in* the context of a
character-driven story; a great example of this is "Raisins and Almonds",
where the alien culture is an important part of the story, but the
conflict between Maquis and Federation members of Voayger, and the
relaitonship between Janeway and Chakotay, is equally if not more
important. That's what I like; I'm an sf fan who wants character-driven
sf with interesting alien cutlures. But since I haven't written any neat
aliens myself, I don't really have the right to tell other authors what
to write.
Now, I *do* have the right to say "I prefer stories about weird aliens;
cn anyone recommend some to me?" or "I prefer stories about weird aliens;
a great one in this respect is(name of story.)" This makes my preference
clear and hopefully insppires, informs or encourages others who share my
interest to write more; saying "I don't see any of this kind of story,
why don't people write it?" sounds peremptory and rude to me.
: I've seen this attitude towards non-writers quite a lot in this newsgroup:
: "if you're not going to write something then sit down and shut up." And I
: think I understand some of it, the writers on this group work very hard to
: produce quality product and it is frustrating to see that effort belittled
: by the opinions of those who don't write, and who seemingly do not
: contribute to fandom.
But they do! I consider people who critique, review and even just give
two lines of feedback to be greatly important to fandom and this
newsgroup, and anyone can do that. But if you don't write praise to the
authors you like, or give assistance to those who need it, then I feel
you don't participate and then I do feel like you should sit down and
shut up. Unless you want to constructively participate in the newsgroup
by encouraging people and helping people, or by writing yourself, I don't
see why anyone should listen to uyou.
But perhaps it's a cultural difference. After all, I suppose if you view
this post from a certain perspective, the guy *was* trying to encourage
writers of weird alien stories. :-) I just think he did it in a rude
fashion; rather than encouraging the writers he'd already found, or
seeking out writers if he hadn't found any yet, he just assumed there was
no such thing and demanded that others write to his specifications. From
my point of view, anyway. That may not be what he intended.
: But, while I do understand the attitude, I believe that it's elitist and
: unfair. And, honestly, there are other ways to contribute to our little
: community. (Hey Gareth, why don't you volunteer to start a "weird
: aliens" mailing list? Just kidding. I think.)
Exactly. As long as you participate, you don't have to write. Writing is
participation, but it's not the only kind of participation there is.
: *Or* you can try private correspondence with a few select writers. Once
: you get to know them you're allowed to start nagging. It works. <thinks
: back to a few particularly lovely stories><big smile>
That too. :-)
Jessica Krucek
In <5ip3mn$j6$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu> bpb...@fas.harvard.edu (Brian>: : Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>: : greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>: : post!
>
I'm not one for NC-17, either, but better to get off your ass and
write what you'd like to see, since the guys you're flaming don't
really CARE about your complaint.
- Jessica
(Proud to have posted a PG-13 story to asce)
jwint...@aol.com
>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>post!
Look, there's a reason we put rating codes into our subject lines. When you see NC-17, that might be a hint not to read it if it offends you.
Now, if others reading it offends you, you can try moving to a more enlightened country like China, where they've dispensed with such silly notions as free thinking and this absurd thing called the
First Amendment.
J
Stephen Ratliff
Josh Liller (jli...@mc.seflin.org) wrote:
: Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
: greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
: post!
Kind sir, while there is an erotica group, not everyone can get it. I
can't get it and I'm ASC's FAQ Maintainer. So posting to ASC is
permitted. Now if everyone will remember to put the rating in the
subjectline in the format I ask for:
Postname Title of Story [RATING] (Series, Codes Type) 3/?
Then anyone who doesn't want to see NC-17 or or R stories can just put
[NC-17] and [R] in their Kill file and be done with it.
I'll also note that I've receive some e-mail indicating that some of our
authors have recieved mail insulting them for posting thier work.
I will not name names on either side, but I'd like people to refrain
from personal insults and pretending to act as a representive of the
whole. I'm particulary refering to a couple of people, who know who
they are, that sent letters to authors saying that the group is not
for thier type of writing.
This is the first time I've had to say this because people where not
posting what should be posted:
Alt.StarTrek.Creative is for the posting of Creative Star Trek fan works
(stories, poems, documentation) and discussion of those works, Star Trek
Fan works in general, and issues effecting those works.
This line is in the FAQ. Until it changes that is our purpose. Thier
are no exclusions based on any type of story, style of writing, or
series of writing.
I do not want to hear of such behavior again, but if it continues to
happen, AUTHORS LET ME KNOW. I will attempt to set any such person
straight, and if necessary contact thier ISP (After significate
discussion occurs of course)
I'm sorry I had to write this post, but I felt it had become necessary.
Stephen Ratliff, the FAQ Maintainer who was very disappointed when he
recieve those letters, and hope the authors in question will continue to
post.
--
Stephen Ratliff CS Major, Radford University.
srat...@runet.edu Radford, Virginia 24142-7496
rec.arts.tv.mst3k.misc's polite target. Marrissa Stories Author
http://www.cs.runet.edu/~sratliff/
FAQ Maintainer for alt.startrek.creative FAQs/
Index Maintainer as well index/
http://aviary.share.net/~alara/
"I wonder if you could do me a favor and not interview my parents."
"Note: contact subject's parents immediately."
-Doctors Bashir and Zimmerman DS9's "Doctor Bashir, I Presume"
Zepp
On 12 Apr 1997 17:48:53 GMT, ma...@wayne.netcom (madmac) wrote:
>In article <5iobkh$s...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
>ah...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Victor W. Wong) wrote:
>
>> Josh Liller (jli...@mc.seflin.org) writes:
>> > Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>> > greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>> > post!
>>
>> If you are a believer in freedom of expression, you will understand
>> exactly why your post is offensive.
>
>
>What *you* don't seem to understand is that restraint and rules are
>necessary for society to function. Yes, you are free to express yourself
>-- but within the limits of society -- or else you will have only chaos
>and anarchy.
Mind you, this isn't "society" -- whatever the hell *that* is! -- this
is the Internet. And it goes all over the entire world, and the only
real rule is, there ARE no systemwide rules. There are a few customs,
observed by more users than not. But there are NO hard and fast
"rules", and I for one hope that there never will be. We have handed
over far too much of our freedom to well-meaning moralistic prudes.
This NG, and the 'Net in general, are where I personally draw the
line. In case you hadn't noticed, the very essence of the 'Net is
decentralized chaos -- and for the most part it works really well.
>There *are* young people who visit this newsgroup. Kids don't need to be
>reading this sex junk -- it belongs over on the other
>startrek.creative.erotica newsgroup. Parents would not appreciate finding
>out that explicit sex stories that are posted here. And the majority of
>fans don't like the presence of the sex stories either.
The majority of fans don't like them? Ah, I see. I presume that
since you are such an authority on what the rest of us think <NOT!>
that you can produce detailed documentation to back up this ridiculous
claim? For if not, then you are simply pontificating. The
Constitution protects your right to do so, as do I. However I am
certainly not obliged to agree with you, and I do not, and I am also
not obliged to change my behaviour to please you -- and I *will* not.
God's codpiece, madmac -- relax, you might even enjoy life a little.
Kids have been finding and reading mom and dad's porno since forever,
and they grow up no worse than we did. Mean to tell me you never
sneaked a peek at a Playboy, or tripped out over the National
Geographic's titty pictures? Puh-LEEZ. Frankly I would much rather
my kid read a bit of nice healthy nookie, than log in and read a bunch
of Aryan Nation or Christian Coalition hate literature. IMHO, such
folks are a far worse danger to our "values" than any of the writers
in this NG.
Subtle Hint: If ya don't like the NC-17 stuff -- DON'T READ IT!
That was hard, wasn't it?
>> Unfortunately for you, this is a forum of free expression. Since not everyone
>> has access to a.s.c.erotica, the NC-17 fanfics inevitably show up here. And
>> they have a perfect right to be here.
>
>Free expression, within limits -- and if you don't learn to reign yourself
>in, then the government will step in and take care of it for you (and
>that's probably what will happen to the internet). You should respect the
>fact that this is supposed to be a general interst fanfic group. The sex
>stories do NOT belong here. There is already a specific group for this.
>
>If a person doesn't have access to the erotica groups, then THEY are FREE
>to change service providers. The sex stories simply should not be
>cluttering up this group.
Who died and made YOU the a.s.c. god? Hmmm? Don't recall us
advertising for a dictator lately, does anyone else? As for the
government, hey honey -- they already tried it. Remember the
communications decency act? Biggest load of tripe to come out of
Congress in 40 years. Also unconstitutional as all hell, already
struck down in court -- and the rest of the world laughed so hard at
us they damn near peed themselves. America doesn't own the 'Net, and
it never will -- and that's exactly the way things ought to be.
>And don't go labelling me as a Victorian prude -- I've got a very nice
>porn collection, but I don't leave it laying about for kids or others (who
>would be upset by it) to see.
Sorry dearie -- you ARE a Victorian prude. Deal with it, or change.
Either way, your offended sensibilities are not *my* problem. I take
it you've never heard of security software? Tsk, tsk. Go look it up,
why doncha, if what we're doing here is so terribly offensive.
>> Normally I don't read fanfic erotica (frankly, I don't WANT to know what
>> Sisko, Janeway, etc. do in bed :)),
>
>It seems that the MAJORITY of people in fandom DON'T care what fictional
>characters do in bed.
Again, unless you can document this claim, I consider it bullshit of
the purest ray serene.
>> but because the postings usually indicate
>> NC-17 in the header I can skip over them. If their presence bothers you
>> that much, don't read them.
>
>It's the fact that the sex stories are here on a newsgroup that's commonly
>available to teenagers and kids that is what bothers some people.
None of whom, I'm willing to bet, are teenagers. God's bodice, is
this the best you can do for a way to pass the time? You want real
obscenity, go check out the Aryan Nation homepage some time -- but you
better bring your hipwaders and a very good snorkel!
Greywolf the Wanderer, Defender of Free Speech, Oppressor and
Tormentor of Mrs. Grundy and all her spiritual descendants.
--Fuck censorship!!!!!!!
--borrowing Zepp's account.
--header munged to foil spambots; remove the extra "p"
Nir Levy
jwint...@aol.com saw fit to bestow on us:
>
>In article <5inrcc$f...@nntp.seflin.org>, jli...@mc.seflin.org (Josh Liller) writes:
>
>>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>>post!
>
>Look, there's a reason we put rating codes into our subject lines. When you see NC-17, that
>might be a hint not to read it if it offends you.
>
>Now, if others reading it offends you, you can try moving to a more enlightened country like
>China, where they've dispensed with such silly notions as free thinking and this absurd thing
>called the
>First Amendment.
>
>J
God, I hate Americans! you always think you are so godamn smart, don't you?
what's the american constitution got to do with the right to freely post/
publish stuff on the internet? FYI, the Internet is *not* gonverned by the
American Law. There is enough Free-Speech to go around even if you are not
in America (ever been to Copenhagen? Amsterdam? Paris? London?). I don't want
to get into the 'My country is better then yours' debate. But please, think
before you post: What the hell does the First Amendment have to do with
posting Adult Material to this newsgroup ?
(meanwhile, in the court-rooms of the Supream-Court of the USA, *your*
country is thinking whether to allow its citizens to publish explict
material on the net)
Oh, by the way, China does not restrict the use of the internet AFAIK.
/NL
---------------------------------
The above opinions are my own,
not my employer's. NL
---------------------------------
Aleph Press
Nir Levy (ni...@shaked.co.il) wrote:
: jwint...@aol.com saw fit to bestow on us:
: >
: >In article <5inrcc$f...@nntp.seflin.org>, jli...@mc.seflin.org (Josh Liller) writes:
: >
: >>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
: >>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
: >>post!
: >
: >Look, there's a reason we put rating codes into our subject lines. When you see NC-17, that
: >might be a hint not to read it if it offends you.
: >
: >Now, if others reading it offends you, you can try moving to a more enlightened country like
: >China, where they've dispensed with such silly notions as free thinking and this absurd thing
: >called the
: >First Amendment.
: >
: >J
: God, I hate Americans! you always think you are so godamn smart, don't you?
: what's the american constitution got to do with the right to freely post/
: publish stuff on the internet?
Has a hell of a lot to do with it, if you're American.
FYI, the Internet is *not* gonverned by the
: American Law.
True, but since we invented the Internet and comprise the majority of its
users still, it was specifically American ideals and American laws that
went into the formation of Internet society. While *now* the Internet is
a global (and increasingly commercial) phenomenon, it ws not for many,
many years.
Sure, Americans ccan be arrogant. On the other hand, please keep in mind
that if American engineers hadn't invented it, there would *be* no Internet.
There is enough Free-Speech to go around even if you are not
: in America (ever been to Copenhagen? Amsterdam? Paris? London?). I don't want
: to get into the 'My country is better then yours' debate. But please, think
: before you post: What the hell does the First Amendment have to do with
: posting Adult Material to this newsgroup ?
A lot, if you are an American, which most posters are.
: (meanwhile, in the court-rooms of the Supream-Court of the USA, *your*
: country is thinking whether to allow its citizens to publish explict
: material on the net)
Yes. Amusing, isn't it?
: Oh, by the way, China does not restrict the use of the internet AFAIK.
That isn't what I've read, but I can't cite a source, so until someone
can I guess we're both just whistling in the wind.
Lawrence Sparks
Atara Stein <ast...@cyberg8t.com> wrote in article
<astarte-1304...@host26.cyberg8t.com>...
> In article <mad3-12049...@wt-d4-216.wt.net>, ma...@wayne.netcom
> (madmac) wrote:
>
>
> > There *are* young people who visit this newsgroup. Kids don't need to
be
> > reading this sex junk -- it belongs over on the other
> > startrek.creative.erotica newsgroup. Parents would not appreciate
finding
> > out that explicit sex stories that are posted here. And the majority
of
> > fans don't like the presence of the sex stories either.
>
> First of all, kids have plenty of access to porn with or without the
> Internet. When I was 13, long before PCs and the Internet, I read plenty
> of smut. Some of it I found on my parents' bookshelves (where they
didn't
> seem too concerned about hiding it from me), and some of it was passed
> around in my 8th grade class. As I recall, my response was usually both
> curiosity and "Ewww!" and "Yuuck!" I liked reading about it, but I
> certainly had *no* desire to actually try sex out for myself. Kids who
> are sophisticated enough to find their way around the 'net are probably
> already familiar with porn stories anyway.
>
I found it in the school and public libraries. And "1984" was required
reading in English class in 1984.
I do not get asce and as for changing ISPs, NO WAY I am not going to pay
anybody over $10/hr to connect to the internet (that is what I was doing
with AOL and ATT Worldnet before a local ISP was installed)
People will find what they want, just like they find people they are
comfortable around. The authors here are very good about ratting the
stories, you will not find that in a bookstore or library. Children too
young to chose for themselves should not be turned loose in any place TV,
Books, or Internet
this is just MHO.
--
LMSparks ( lmsp...@nicoh.com)
come see my pad at http://www.nicoh.com/lmsparks
<the rest of the post was sniped>
Macedon
Gareth Wilson wrote:
>My point was that in fanfic you can do anything, tell any kind of story you
> want. It surprises me then that almost all the fiction on this ng is of
> the "boy meets girl" (or "person meets person") variety.
The group goes through phases. Stick around a while and you'll notice
that. :) Sometimes there are tons of Voyager stories, sometimes tons of
DS9. When I first got here, the place was full of Picard and Crusher,
now it's full of Janeway and Chakotay. Sometimes there are more action
stories than others. Sometimes everything is romance, sometimes it's
all action. It really depends on which writers are contributing, which
depends on "real world" considerations. Sometimes people drop out for a
while and come back. Sometimes a really active poster suddenly
disappears. (Speaking of which, anybody know what happened to Ny
Martin?)
So it varies quite a bit from semester to semester, even month to month
(much less year to year).
> I'm just trying to encourage people like the author of
> "Play Ball" (whose name escapes at the moment) to contribute a little
> more in the same vein. And, since everyone is asking for "weird alien"
> fanfic from me, I may consider writing it...
Do write it and post it. If you liked "Play Ball" find it in the
archive, drop the author a note and ask if s/he is planning to write
anything else. That both encourages the writer with feedback (feedback
is ALWAYS a good idea, as it's the only "pay" fanfic authors get.)
You might check out the archive, too. The archive itself doesn't have
summaries and author names, only titles. But there IS an index, started
a while back now by Matt S. You can go there for summaries of at least
some stories in the archive. I don't know what state the current
indexing project is in, although there are some folks actively working
at it. But I'm sure Stephen and Alara would LOVE to have more help.
(I can at least beat the bushes, even if I don't have time myself. <G>
Since I teach, among other things, it would come down to reading stories
and writing summaries or finishing the "Talking Stick-Circle" series.
But, if there are some readers out there who enjoy reading and would
like to contribute to the group, but don't feel able to write stories,
helping with the indexing would be an *excellent* way of getting
involved.)
We now return you to your scheduled programming...;>
So check out the archive, if you find some stories there you like, write
to the author (and hope the address is still current). Who knows?
Maybe you can convince that author to write more.
And, of course, posting some of your own stories is always welcome.
Most of the authors I know, of fanfic or profic, got started writing
because they couldn't find enough of the kind of stories they wanted to
read.
Macedon
Mary Jo Hurd
yms...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
> Boy, somebody sure opened up a can of worms, didn't they?
Otherwise known as flamebait.
Successful flamebait at that <grin>.
--
Mary Jo Hurd
Voyager/Janeway/Mulgrew fan
jwint...@aol.com
>>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>>post!
And I personally would like to object to any planned G rated stories on this newsgroup. This is alt.startrek.creative, not the Disney Channel. Please take any and all planned G rated stories to
alt.startrek.creative.syrupy-crap.
Thank you. I must go get my medication now.
J
(For those of you who agree with me: IT'S A JOKE, STUPID!!!)
yms...@ix.netcom.com
Brian Betty
madmac (ma...@wayne.netcom) wrote:
: What *you* don't seem to understand is that restraint and rules are
: necessary for society to function. Yes, you are free to express yourself
: -- but within the limits of society -- or else you will have only chaos
: and anarchy.
This is not _your_ world; that is _your_ opinion. I am not convinced, nor
do I have to be. We share this space; its rules are that you stick to the
format of the place. The format here, as has been pointed out, is ANY
STORIES ABOUT STAR TREK. I'm bloody well tired of hearing about everyone's
opinions. Opinions are irrelevant: the facts are important. The facts are
that ANYTHING IS PERMITTED, PROVIDED IT IS A FANFIC STORY. [Sorry
re:grammar]. So stop prattling. I'm not talking about MY ideals that only
early and regular smut exposure prevents my children from growing up
stunted freaks afraid of sex and guilty when they masturbate; unless you'd
prefer I start an ideological war, stop dragging in your Christian morals.
Yes, they _are_ Christian morals, even if you aren't Christian.
: There *are* young people who visit this newsgroup. Kids don't need to be
[yeah, yeah. you ARE a prude. rest snipped]
brian ant
Michael R. Belanger
Atara Stein wrote:
> > It's the fact that the sex stories are here on a newsgroup that's commonly
> > available to teenagers and kids that is what bothers some people.
>
> to stop them from reading material they find inappropriate.
I read an article in the New York Times that was in regards to the
Communication Decency Act of 1996. One of the opponents of the bill
commented that he wouldn't know enough about this case if he stood over
his child's shoulder every time he went online.
I think that it should be controlled. A book cover (or in this case "/"
) is not adequate to keep minors from reading it. Freedom of speech is
very important, however, this society, parents included, are not
equipped to train their youths to use it for what it was intended.
Which was to prevent the suppression of ideas - not to test the
limitations of human expression. There are no limits. But to
comprehend expressions of the more explicit nature, there needs to be a
level of education to interpret this in a healthy manner. Addiction to
pornography seems to come from a lack of a healthy and mature mind.
I don't have a solution for this, however, it is always a good practice
to listen to others opinions as you would want them to listen to yours.
(do unto others....) Hopefully, after being flamed a couple of times,
others will begin to do the same. Perhaps even understanding may
result. People don't listen when flaming occurs. It is just hatred,
not freedom. We don't have to agree, we just need to listen and
understand all of the sides of the issue.
Sorry for the preaching. I just get frustrated with flames from two
legitimate sides.
Peace be with you.
:->
--
\%/
==ooo@@ooo============================================
Michael R. Belanger
------------------------------------------------------
Please respond using the addresses below. The reply
is designed to repel spamming.
------------------------------------------------------
mail: mich...@info2000.net
web: http://www.info2000.net/~michaelb
======================================================
shanna...@pnx.com
> Josh Liller (jli...@mc.seflin.org) writes:
> > Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
> > greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
> > post!
The name of the group is alt.startrek.creative
Nothing is said in the name of the group about
it having to be for kiddies only. The majority
of those who write and lurk here are adults,
anyway, or older teens. Young children should
be supervised, as it has already been said, in
what they watch on television and what they
do on the Internet.
I at first felt as you did, until I realized the makeup
of most of the newsgroup frequenters and was
informed that not everyone can get a.s.c.e.
I may only enjoy a small portion of the adult
material posted. Some may not like any of it.
But, for the most part, it's all rated and labeled
according to type. A person can choose to read
or not.
And I, too, would like to see more adventure stories.
But I LIKE a bit of romance in my adventures. Gives
'em spice. I'd like to see more non-slash stories, but
the fact of the matter is, that slash is probably more
popular than gen.
If I'd get off my butt and get to work, I might just be
able to enter a gen story. ;) Got no one to blame but
myself.
IDIC and all that good stuff, my friends!
shan...@pnx.com (use this for replies)
Webmaster for ST: The Ultimate Fantasy (adults only)
http://www.serve.com/Shannara/index.html
Astarte
On 14 Apr 1997, Stephen Ratliff wrote:
> Kind sir, while there is an erotica group, not everyone can get it. I
> can't get it and I'm ASC's FAQ Maintainer. So posting to ASC is
> permitted.
Same here. I can't get asce on either of my services.
> I'll also note that I've receive some e-mail indicating that some of our
> authors have recieved mail insulting them for posting thier work.
I would just like to say to those folks who've sent authors insulting
mail: BUG OFF! You're not in charge here. While you are welcome to make
your feelings known in the _proper_ forum, sending insulting e-mail to the
authors is hardly civilized behavior.
I'd like to say to the authors, PLEASE continue to post ALL of your work
to this group. While it appears that there are a few facists around who
want to impose their morals upon us, they are FEW.
Parents, keep an eye on what your kids are doing. If you're afraid
they'll get into smut in Usenet then don't let them access Usenet. The
fact of the matter is that they'll get hold of smut one way or another. I
sure did when I was little and I was a very obedient child for the most
part. We certainly need to keep children from inappropriate material, but
we don't need to keep adults from it at the same time.
Thank you for taking the time to read my little rant. ;)
| Jesus to God: "Western civilization followed me home this morning. |
| Can I keep it?" God: "Certainly not boy. And put it down this minute.|
| You don't know where it's been." --Tom Robbins, "Another Roadside |
| Attraction" ***==-->Joni Waldrup, U of Montana: ta...@selway.umt.edu|
J.Juls
> what's the american constitution got to do with the right to freely post/
the
> American Law. There is enough Free-Speech to go around even if you are
not
> in America (ever been to Copenhagen? Amsterdam? Paris? London?).
Remember when Captain Kirk went to some planet and found out their religion
was the US constitution? (No, not the U.S.S. Constitution.) Man, that was
pretty funny!
Julie
jwint...@aol.com
>God, I hate Americans! you always think you are so godamn smart, don't you?
>what's the american constitution got to do with the right to freely post/
>publish stuff on the internet? FYI, the Internet is *not* gonverned by the
>American Law.
No, the net is not governed by American law, but the original protestor was from the US, and therefore gets whacked over the head with the First Amendment. Had he been British or French or German,
there's plenty precedent for a free speech argument there, too. So excuse me if I use my own country's laws to rail on someone from my own country.
Besides, I'm not going to get into a flame war over the Constitution with you. If you live in Europe or North America or anywhere else where saying what you want won't result in the jackboots
banging down your door, then you should be as outraged as I am when somebody jumps on the net and says, "Censor yourself or I'll get my government to do it."
Well, that's already been tried, both here and in Germany, and after net users got done laughing hysterically at such bone-headed attempts to control this medium, the offending laws were either
dropped (as in the US) or mostly ignored (Germany). Now when someone hops on this ng and starts telling us all that we can't post within rules that we already agreed upon, I am going to remind that
person of where we're at.
And as for China, when they stop shooting people for telling the government that they suck (Remember Tianamen Square?), then I'll stop making light of their stellar track record in free expression.
J
err...@earthlink.com
In article <5ion4s$g9v$1...@nntp.cyberg8t.com>, eres...@cyberg8t.com (Ruth
Gifford) wrote:
> I'd really like to know *why* people have a problem with smut?
A better question might be >why< are some people so >obssessed< with
smut? It's all that >some< posters here ever talk about! It's like
listening to a bunch of tittering high-school-kids who've never been
laid. Surely mature people can find other topics to discuss other than
harp endlessly on which ST character is thereotically fucking who. Hasn't
the novelty worn off by now?
No one forces
> anybody to read it, and it's almost *always* clearly marked as such. If
> people don't want their kids reading it, they can monitor the ng before their
> kids go online.
Anyone who knows anything about kids and the internet knows that this is
easier said than done.
> If more people could access ASCE, I'd encourage all the people who post here
> to move there, but because many ISP's feel a need to insult their clients by
> imposing censorship, that is not a viable option.
Most ISPs can't carry all the newgroups because they simply don't have the
room on their servers - there's over 22,000 groups and more being added.
And in our litigious society, some ISPs are understandably reluctant to
carry the adult groups.
You can always change ISPs - it's a buyer's market right now. I've seen
ISP services offered for as low as $10 a month, unlimited time. Or you
can keep your old ISP and switch to a newsreader service - for $5 to $12 a
month more, you can have access to all 20,000 newsgroups. Just think of
all the smut you could access then!
> This is essentially a bookstore; you pay a small fee to walk in the door, but
> once you get in, the books are free. If TrekSmut offends you, don't pick
> that book up. the she;ves her have room for everything.
If the internet is a bookstore, then just remember that in most cities
there are zoning laws prohitibiting adult bookstores near schools. It
will be interesting to see that happens with the current case pending in
the Supreme Court.
errolls
DarenaPell
In article <5iron2$a...@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>,
ki...@ix.netcom.com(Carolyn Fulton) writes:
>>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
>>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
>>post!
Just a note here -- I most certainly did NOT say that! Watch those
automatic posting notes, folks!
Proud purveyor of sexually explicit material to ASC from another internet
account since ... since ... well, heck, since I got the damned service the
beginning of 1996!
Carolyn R. Fulton
ki...@ix.netcom.com
Zepp
On Tue, 15 Apr 1997 12:35:07 GMT, ni...@shaked.co.il (Nir Levy) wrote:
>jwint...@aol.com saw fit to bestow on us:
>
> >
> >In article <5inrcc$f...@nntp.seflin.org>, jli...@mc.seflin.org (Josh Liller) writes:
> >
> >>Will you sex-crazed people who visit this newsgroup
> >>greatly cut back on the number of NC-17 stories you
> >>post!
> >
> >Look, there's a reason we put rating codes into our subject lines. When you see NC-17, that
> >might be a hint not to read it if it offends you.
> >
> >Now, if others reading it offends you, you can try moving to a more enlightened country like
> >China, where they've dispensed with such silly notions as free thinking and this absurd thing
> >called the
> >First Amendment.
> >
> >J
>
>God, I hate Americans! you always think you are so godamn smart, don't you?
>what's the american constitution got to do with the right to freely post/
>publish stuff on the internet? FYI, the Internet is *not* gonverned by the
>American Law. There is enough Free-Speech to go around even if you are not
>in America (ever been to Copenhagen? Amsterdam? Paris? London?). I don't want
>to get into the 'My country is better then yours' debate. But please, think
>before you post: What the hell does the First Amendment have to do with
>posting Adult Material to this newsgroup ?
Simple, o ignorant one. The first amendment is the legal basis for
freedom of speech, in america, and some of us who live here still
respect that freedom. The point is, whatever damn country you're in,
it is NOT our responsibility to censor ourselves to protect your
children -- who probably don't even need protecting anyhow.
And yes, we know the 'Net is not subject to american law -- that's why
so many of us cheered loudly when the comm. decency act was struck
down in court the other day -- not only was it against our own law, it
made us the laughingstock of the world, as well it should. None of
that adds up to what you said -- I suggest you take a valium, or smoke
a join or something, and mellow out a bit. You're responding to an
imaginary attack that was never even made in the first place. Do you
have the faintest idea how silly that makes you look?
>(meanwhile, in the court-rooms of the Supream-Court of the USA, *your*
>country is thinking whether to allow its citizens to publish explict
>material on the net)
Not that it will do any good. The 'Net is worldwide, and I for one am
delighted that it is.
>Oh, by the way, China does not restrict the use of the internet AFAIK.
O yes they do -- it just doesn't work very well. Too many computers
already in the country, and too many folks who dare to think for
themselves.
Greywolf the Wanderer, who says "Fuck Censorship!!"
J.Juls
> Kind sir, while there is an erotica group, not everyone can get it. I
> can't get it and I'm ASC's FAQ Maintainer. So posting to ASC is
> permitted.
Good point. Let's see--Tipper-types don't like erotica stories, so ISPs
are chicken to have any newsgroup called "erotica." Then lots of people
aren't able to read asce. So, to get stories seen by a substantial number
of the people who might like them, we cross-post them here. Then, the
Tipper-types get outraged that the stories are in a "general" newsgroup.
Ya can't have it both ways, dorks!
Julie
Macedon
Carolyn Fulton wrote:
> I'm just curious, with the debate that's going on, how many people
> automatically see NC-17, think "Smut!" and either (a) pass on by, or
> (b) get really annoyed when what they end up reading doesn't feature a
> fuck on every page?
Carolyn - I can only speak from experience, but when J and I rated "Eye
of the Storm" [NC-17] originally, due to the fact the sex was between
two young men (even if rather vanilla), and was rather blunt in
description. Yet, we got a couple of polite, but rather baffled letters
asking us WHY we'd rated it as erotica since it 1) had a plot that had
nothing to do with sex, and 2) the actual sex occupied less than 10% of
the story.
So we decided to re-rate it [R] and just specify that the sexual content
was homoerotic; folks who didn't like that should avoid it. The sex is
still too graphic for tje comfort or taste of some, but slapping an
[NC-17] rating on it seemed to be misleading more people than it was
helping.
But, to muddy the waters further, when I rated "T'Kuht Rising" [R], I
did so for the *violence* in part 4, not for the rather allusional (and
brief) sex scene in part 2. So that's a good case of when [R] means
something besides sex. "Adult content" (to me) just means elements in
the plot which might disturb young readers and/or adult readers who are
sensitive to graphic content.
I guess I'd see [R] as a rating somewhere between [PG-13] (has some
sexual or violent content/discussion, but nothing graphic), and [NC-17]
(which seems to suggest at least to some readers that a large portion of
the story deals with sex or sexual themes).
Macedon
Aleph Press
NC-17 can refer to graphic violence or non-erotic rape (a lot of people
consider rape scenes to fall under the purview of "violence", not "sex".)
Before we decided to cast it as a possible pro novel, Mercutio and I were
writing a story where there is almost no sex, but there are some very
graphic scenes of torture and rape (presented as a Bad Thing, not as an
erotic turn-on.) We intended to rate the story NC-17 when it hit the
newsgroups, but it was not smut by any stretch of the imagination (it was
a story about a person recovering from torture, and the only sex scene
was with a hologram sex therapist trying to teach the person that sex
doesn't have to be painful, violent and degrading.)
Since we're hungry for publication credits and since the Trek connection
was rather tenuous, we've decided to rework it as a pro novel, so it will
not be posted to the Internet, ever, or at least not until we get about
twenty rejections. :-) But if by some miracle someone publishes it, we
will certainly let everyone here know about it. (It'll be pretty obvious
to you guys where we filed off the serial numbers.)
So no, NC-17 does not have to mean smut. Though NC-17 material that isn't
smut presents me with a problem in archiving-- people go to the "adult"
directory looking for smut. If a story is rated NC-17 for violence,
people are less likely to find it, and if they find it it won't be what
they expect and they'll be disappointed. Maybe I'll create a "nonsmut"
directory for NC-17 materials rated that way for violence or stuff like that.
Carolyn Fulton
Speaking as someone who has posted a number of NC-17 stories here, as
well as some R's and some PG's and PG-13's, I am curious: What DOES the
rating NC-17 indicate to most people? I've always used it to mean "the
sex is graphic but the story requires it, and yes, there really IS a
story!" (Okay, okay, so "Third Moon Rising" may have pushed it a bit.
:-D) But I also use it to differentiate between stories I've written
like "Dreams Into Waking" (which has LOTS of sex, but which I finally
rated R, after much soul-searching), and "Basilisk", which had no more
sex than "Dreams" did (less, proportionately speaking), but some
graphic violence, which I consider to be much more potentially
disturbing.
I'm just curious, with the debate that's going on, how many people
automatically see NC-17, think "Smut!" and either (a) pass on by, or
(b) get really annoyed when what they end up reading doesn't feature a
fuck on every page?
Any thoughts?
Carolyn
JWinterEsq
I have a rather simple solution to our problem, one that the MPAA
foolishly overlooked.
NC-17 is basically designed to let people know that there is extreme
sexual or violent content in a movie. The designation was intended to
accommodate Mirimax and other independent films, for which the only
options were either an X rating or an unacceptable amount of editing.
Because of this, several films, such as "Henry and June", were now able to
be viewed by critics without losing the storyline or having the stigma of
an X rating.
As we all know, X is actually proudly slapped onto porn movies by their
purveyors, and some even go to the point of putting "XXX" on them. (I've
heard. I would never go to such films. ;->) It doesn't help that X is
not copyrighted.
Since we are simply using the MPAA as a model, why not include "X" in our
rating system? I think most of the writers here are intelligent enough to
judge whether they're writing a story with some intense erotic material
included or just a horny romp through the Enterprise Annual Orgy.
True, there would be some grey area, but NC-17, I think, would give
readers ample warning that they might be offended by something within.
Besides, since we rate our own stories, one might do well to remember that
the ratings are subjective. For instance, the first "Alliance" story was
rated PG-13. Arguments can easily be made for both PG and R, but I was
the one who had to make the call. So it would be with X vs. NC-17. It
provides another level of information on content, and it beats the hell
out of censoring the group altogether.
Just a few thoughts. Now, please let me get my firefighter's gear on
before you flame me.
J
Jessica Krucek
In <alephE8...@netcom.com> al...@netcom.com (Aleph Press) writes:
>
>NC-17 can refer to graphic violence or non-erotic rape (a lot of
people
>consider rape scenes to fall under the purview of "violence", not
"sex".)
I've never written NC-17 material - "R," yes, definitely ("The First
Tile" barely made a PG-13 rating). And those "R's" are for VIOLENCE,
kiddies. Two loving, consentual adults not hurting anyone (at least not
anyone but themselves). No biggie by me. The most graphic I can get
right now is the PG-13 rated "Compatability Factor."
Some of the stuff might cross the line, though. Kit Montana's
"Heart and Soul" and Carolyn Fulton's "Baslisk" feature a bit of the
old hurt/comfort staple. Character gets creamed, beaten up, assaulted,
messed up, etc. - and another character steps in to offer comfort, love
and supprt (sometimes manifesting itself in the hurt character and
their comforter sharing a bed, but again - loving, consentual...fine by
me).
>writing a story where there is almost no sex, but there are some very
>graphic scenes of torture and rape (presented as a Bad Thing,
I wrote one Trek fan novel (now out of print) which did that. Lots
of nasty material. The sequel is in stasis right now.
>So no, NC-17 does not have to mean smut. Though NC-17 material that
isn't
>smut presents me with a problem in archiving-- people go to the
"adult"
>directory looking for smut.
I go there looking for stories. "Even Captains Have needs" by
Mercurtio is turning out to be helpful reference material for a story
I'm working on right now (different universe) because of the
descriptions of a post-torture Janeway and Paris. "Baslisk" also helped
me when I had to write a scene of sexual assault for another story.
- Jessica
Sean Newton
JWinterEsq wrote:
> Since we are simply using the MPAA as a model, why not include "X" in our
> rating system? I think most of the writers here are intelligent enough to
> judge whether they're writing a story with some intense erotic material
> included or just a horny romp through the Enterprise Annual Orgy.
> True, there would be some grey area, but NC-17, I think, would give
> readers ample warning that they might be offended by something within.
> Besides, since we rate our own stories, one might do well to remember that
> the ratings are subjective. For instance, the first "Alliance" story was
> rated PG-13. Arguments can easily be made for both PG and R, but I was
> the one who had to make the call. So it would be with X vs. NC-17. It
> provides another level of information on content, and it beats the hell
> out of censoring the group altogether.
I like this option. I really like it. Adopting this as part of the
rating system used on this group would help greatly in distinguishing
between writing which is just sex, and writings which are stories that
contain both a plot and sex and/or violence.
> Just a few thoughts. Now, please let me get my firefighter's gear on
> before you flame me.
Don't worry, I'm not going to flame you. What's that you say, I seem to
be holding a flamethrower.... Nahh, it's your imagination.... :)
===================================================================
Sean Newton "You've seen one fractal, you've seen them all."
sne...@eden.rutgers.edu
http://www-eden.rutgers.edu/~snewton/
Macedon
Aleph Press wrote:22
> Since we're hungry for publication credits and since the Trek connection
> was rather tenuous, we've decided to rework it as a pro novel,
You wouldn't be the first!
> so it will
> not be posted to the Internet, ever, or at least not until we get about
> twenty rejections. :-)
Oh, I'd give it at least 50 and/or 2 years. (That is, if you mean agent
rejections; there are only about 8 or 9 houses now publishing SF.) You
might seriously look at Tor, which published Barnes "Mother of Storms."
Best of luck to you both and if you sell it, you *better* let us all
know about it. :)
> So no, NC-17 does not have to mean smut. Though NC-17 material that isn't
> smut presents me with a problem in archiving-- people go to the "adult"
> directory looking for smut. If a story is rated NC-17 for violence,
> people are less likely to find it, and if they find it it won't be what
> they expect and they'll be disappointed. Maybe I'll create a "nonsmut"
> directory for NC-17 materials rated that way for violence or stuff like that.
A pretty good idea. Maybe it could be a category for [R] and (non-smut)
[NC-17] stories, since both are intended for an audience over 17 anyway,
but the different ratings could indicate the degree of graphic sexual
portrayal and/or violence--but the assumption being that it's not
"TrekSmut" <tm>? That way nobody gets a shock, either those looking for
their weekly dose of TrekSmut, or those who don't notice the little (R)
at the end of the story title and end up with a story from the regular
archive which is more than they bargained for? Might be a lot of work
for you, though, resorting, but for whatever it's worth, I kinda like
the idea.
Macedon
Ian Toldman
In message <5j7vha$s...@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> - ki...@ix.netcom.com(Carolyn
Fulton)18 Apr 1997 14:12:58 GMT writes:
:>
:>Speaking as someone who has posted a number of NC-17 stories here, as
My Feeling is NC-17 means just that. Not for children, even teen agers. This
presumes that 'Adults' are not children, a dubious thing in some cases. It
also does not address the fact that some 'Adult' individuals have restricted
or different value systems than the writers.
As an example, when I wrote "Their Two Scents Worth" which I originally labled
NC-17 for its sexual content. On reflection, I reposted it with an R rating
because it was relatively tame, had a fully consistent story line exclusive of
the sex and was certainly no different than a lot of what you see on TV and in
the
movies today.
NC-17 becomes, in my mind, XXX when the sexual or perversion content falls
outside of the story line or becomes blatenly gratouious (sp?) Having read
most of the stories in both the adult and regular sections, I would say that
probably half of the adult section are really fine stories leaning toward a
heavy 'R'. This includes the few slash stories I've read though they tend
to be truly NC-17 in both style and content.
Stephen Ratliff
Sean Newton (sne...@eden.rutgers.edu) wrote:
: madmac wrote:
: > There *are* young people who visit this newsgroup. Kids don't need to be
:
: Like they wouldn't just go and found it elsewhere?
:
: > it belongs over on the other
: > startrek.creative.erotica newsgroup. Parents would not appreciate finding
: > out that explicit sex stories that are posted here.
:
: > And the majority of
: > fans don't like the presence of the sex stories either.
: I wouldn't say that. Personally, I pretty much never read the NC-17
: stories. Bet that as it may, many fan writers seem to enjoy writing
: such, and may fans seem to want to be reading it, so I'd have to say
: that what you just said above is utterly baseless. Bring us back an
: impartially-conducted poll, and we might believe you-- though I doubt it
: would change anything at all.
:
For a little information, I'll list the top 5 pages in the Index that
get the most hits here at RU (I can't tell you about Aviary and Unicom)
and leaving out the main page
5672: 0.37%: /~sratliff/index/index9.html (Adult Page)
2090: 7.71%: /~sratliff/index/adult-tng.html
1799: 4.70%: /~sratliff/index/adult-voy.html
1454: 6.88%: /~sratliff/index/index3.html (TNG Stories)
1449: 2.55%: /~sratliff/index/index5.html (Voyager Stories)
: > The sex
: > stories do NOT belong here. There is already a specific group for this.
:
: Yes, but sex stories do fall under the stated reason for the existence
: of this group, as described in the group's FAQ. Find it and read it.
Confirmed.
: NC-17 stories are as welcome as G and PG stories. AS for
: Alt.Startrek.Creative.Erotica, that group is only for sex-related Star
: Trek stuff, but its got low propogation, and switching ISPs isn't
: exactly an option many people can freely execute. If its propogation
: was better, maybe the sex stories could be totally shifted to ASCE from
: ASC, but that would involve some sort of process... I think our FAQ
: maintainer, Stephen Ratliff, might know more about this...
I've discribed the process for doing this in the FAQ Maintainer's Notes
for this week, but I don't think we can do anything for it at this
point.
:
: > The sex stories simply should not be
: > cluttering up this group.
:
: This newsgroup doesn't discriminate against stories on the basis of
: content or rating. It's open to all (text-based) Star Trek related
: creative works: stories and poems, and I believe
: documentation-type-stuff, like data somebody creates on the cultures and
: the like. Somebody more knowledgeable correct me if I'm wrong here.
No correction necessay. Our purpose is:
Alt.StarTrek.Creative is for the posting of Creative Star Trek fan works
(stories, poems, documentation) and discussion of those works, Star Trek
Fan works in general, and issues effecting those works.
:
: > It's the fact that the sex stories are here on a newsgroup that's commonly
: > available to teenagers and kids that is what bothers some people.
:
: On another note...
:
: I discovered ASC about a year-and-a-half, two years ago, and thought
: that the stories here were pretty good. Though I also noticed Amagosa
: soon after its creation, I never bothered to take a look at it(damn, I
: wish I had taken a look earlier).
Ah, just about the time I took up full FAQ Maintainer's duties, back
when The Romulan Dawn Series was posting and Alara was just starting
Chapter Three of Only Human
Stephen
--
Stephen Ratliff CS Major, Radford University.
srat...@runet.edu Radford, Virginia 24142-7496
rec.arts.tv.mst3k.misc's polite target. Marrissa Stories Author
http://www.cs.runet.edu/~sratliff/
FAQ Maintainer for alt.startrek.creative FAQs/
Index Maintainer as well index/
http://aviary.share.net/~alara/
"I wonder if you could do me a favor and not interview my parents."
"Note: contact subject's parents immediately."
-Doctors Bashir and Zimmerman DS9's "Doctor Bashir, I Presume"
Stephen Ratliff
Macedon (mac...@geocities.com) wrote:
:
: >My point was that in fanfic you can do anything, tell any kind of story you
: > want. It surprises me then that almost all the fiction on this ng is of
: > the "boy meets girl" (or "person meets person") variety.
:
: The group goes through phases. Stick around a while and you'll notice
: that. :) Sometimes there are tons of Voyager stories, sometimes tons of
: DS9. When I first got here, the place was full of Picard and Crusher,
: now it's full of Janeway and Chakotay. Sometimes there are more action
: stories than others. Sometimes everything is romance, sometimes it's
: all action. It really depends on which writers are contributing, which
: depends on "real world" considerations. Sometimes people drop out for a
: while and come back. Sometimes a really active poster suddenly
: disappears. (Speaking of which, anybody know what happened to Ny
: Martin?)
When I got here back in the fall of '93 we actually were in a TOS phase
(which hasn't happened since.
:
: So it varies quite a bit from semester to semester, even month to month
: (much less year to year).
:
: > I'm just trying to encourage people like the author of
: > "Play Ball" (whose name escapes at the moment) to contribute a little
: > more in the same vein. And, since everyone is asking for "weird alien"
: > fanfic from me, I may consider writing it...
:
: Do write it and post it. If you liked "Play Ball" find it in the
: archive, drop the author a note and ask if s/he is planning to write
: anything else. That both encourages the writer with feedback (feedback
: is ALWAYS a good idea, as it's the only "pay" fanfic authors get.)
:
: You might check out the archive, too. The archive itself doesn't have
: summaries and author names, only titles. But there IS an index, started
: a while back now by Matt S. You can go there for summaries of at least
: some stories in the archive. I don't know what state the current
: indexing project is in, although there are some folks actively working
: at it. But I'm sure Stephen and Alara would LOVE to have more help.
I'm the new Index Maintainer, and I'd be greatful for any help.
:
: (I can at least beat the bushes, even if I don't have time myself. <G>
: Since I teach, among other things, it would come down to reading stories
: and writing summaries or finishing the "Talking Stick-Circle" series.
: But, if there are some readers out there who enjoy reading and would
: like to contribute to the group, but don't feel able to write stories,
: helping with the indexing would be an *excellent* way of getting
: involved.)
Motion seconded.
:
: We now return you to your scheduled programming...;>
:
: So check out the archive, if you find some stories there you like, write
: to the author (and hope the address is still current). Who knows?
: Maybe you can convince that author to write more.
:
: And, of course, posting some of your own stories is always welcome.
: Most of the authors I know, of fanfic or profic, got started writing
: because they couldn't find enough of the kind of stories they wanted to
: read.
Or had some weird idea like putting the kids in command of a starship :)
CmdrBevC
I WANTED to stay out of this...but those of you who want to keep the smut
here don't seem to see something vital: This is the type of stuff the
government wishes it could censor. This is the type of literature that
they do not want on the net. Sure, there are passwords or special
programs...thy'd lock out a.s.c.e because of the "erotica" part of it, but
not neccesarily a.s.c. I once led that sheltered, innocent life someone
once talked about. I'd still be leading it if I hadn't accidentally
accessed an NC-17 story that wasn't labeled. I'm probably old enough for
my parents not to worry, but, you see, not all of us are 15. I shudder to
think that my younger brother may one day read this stuff just by
accessing my AOL account and checking the unread alt.startrek.creative
messages. This is why alt.startrek.creative.erotica was formed.
For those of you who cannot access a.s.c.e., I suggest two things:
1) Create another newsgroup that would a) take the place of a.s.c.e. and
b) let everyone in.
2) Check Dejanews. http://www.dejanews.com. It's not that hard to do.
I don't want a response to this. I don't believe this needs a response.
This is the opinion of one of these innocents that the brave souls are
fighting for. Keep the smut here, and invite the wrath of that bothersome
body we call our federal government. Oh, and no parent comments. It's
not THEIR fault someone posted NC-17 to a specified G-R newsgroup. :-P
Munch on that little piece of broken glass.
CmdrBevC
Aleph Press
CmdrBevC (cmdr...@aol.com) wrote:
: I WANTED to stay out of this...but those of you who want to keep the smut
: here don't seem to see something vital: This is the type of stuff the
: government wishes it could censor. This is the type of literature that
: they do not want on the net.
which, from my perspective, is an excellent reason for us to want it here.
The essence of free speech is that dangerous speech, speech governments
don't like and don't want to see, is protected. It's easy to protect
speech that everyone likes.
Sure, there are passwords or special
: programs...thy'd lock out a.s.c.e because of the "erotica" part of it, but
: not neccesarily a.s.c.
True. The lockout is done on the basis of voluntary labeling.
I once led that sheltered, innocent life someone
: once talked about. I'd still be leading it if I hadn't accidentally
: accessed an NC-17 story that wasn't labeled.
And did it turn you into a raving sex fiend?
You see, I truly don't believe that children old enough to be interested
in sex stories, whose immediate reacion isn't "ooh ick" and going on to
something else, can be harmed by them. If you read the NC-17 story that
you had access to, what did you think? Did it disgust you? Intrigue you?
Make you curious? Make you want to vomit? Make you think sex is the most
horrible thing ever invented? I very much doubt that it significantly
transformed your life.
I'm probably old enough for
: my parents not to worry, but, you see, not all of us are 15. I shudder to
: think that my younger brother may one day read this stuff just by
: accessing my AOL account and checking the unread alt.startrek.creative
: messages.
Then why don't you set AOL so that it doesn't retain your password, and
keep your password a secret from your little brother?
I can't udnerstand people who say "but a kid could log onto my account."
Do you really *want* your little brother to have the ability to log onto
your account? Quite aside from him being able to read smut, if he's
anything like *my* little brother, he'll post something obnoxious under
your name so you get flamed, or he'll mess up your preferences, or he'll
do something else obnoxious. There is a reason your AOL account has a
password. Use it.
This is why alt.startrek.creative.erotica was formed.
I was there. That is *not* why we formed asce.
Alt.sex.fetsih startrek was formed years and eyars aago for discussion of
sex and Star Trek. Fiction didn't really get big on that group until
Christine Faltz wrote "Oh Captain My Captain!" Then asfs became a center
for smutfic. But it was not chartered or created as such, and OCMC was
also posted to asc (that's how I leanred about asfs, by reading OCMC here
on asc.) Then asfs started getting spammed to death. We wanted a group
outside of the alt.sex.* hierarchym, which wouldn't get spammed as much.
So we debated what we should call the new group, and decided that since
by that time we were mostly for creative works, we should call ourselves
alt.startrek.creative.erotica.
The group was *never* intended to be a place where smut should go in
place of asc. It was intended as a spam-free replacement for
alt.sex.fetish.startrek. It didn't work.
: For those of you who cannot access a.s.c.e., I suggest two things:
: 1) Create another newsgroup that would a) take the place of a.s.c.e. and
: b) let everyone in.
This is not possible. The reason many servers don't carry asce is twofold:
1. Poor alt propagation. All alt groups suffer this. Alt.fan.q isn't
carried by Delphi, for no better reason than it never propagated tghere.
The newer the alt group, the less chance it has of spreading.
2. Censorship. If we are responsible adults and name the group something
that makes its purpose obvious, so software can block it from kids like
you, many sites will refuse to carry it on the grouns apparently that
mature adults should be limited in what they can talk about to the level
of 12-year-old kids. (I say 12 because you, a 15-year-old, are not a
person *I* think needs to be protected from smut. I think you can protect
yourslf if you need protecting.)
: 2) Check Dejanews. http://www.dejanews.com. It's not that hard to do.
Yes it is! This is unbelievably ignorant. I use Dejanews all the time to
retrieve posts for the archive that I missed the first time, and it is
*hostile as hell*! It doesn't thread properly, you can't jump to a reply
after reading the first message or vice versa, it doesn't pick up new
messages for a week or so, there's no way to killfile it, it doesn't
remember what you personally have read so every time you check for new
messages you'd have to go throuigh all the old, it breaks up the messages
into itty bitty pieces... it's very obnoxious and hostile. I feel deeply
sorry for anyone restricted to using DejaNews as a newsserver.
Besides, not everyone can. DejaNews has a bug in it that blows up Lynx.
Anyone on a Unix shell acct (which many people whose providers are
restrcted have-- often people at .edu domains have free access and cannot
afford to change providers, are censored from asce, and are on Unix
accounts which use lynx to acces the web) *cannot* use DejaNews.
: I don't want a response to this. I don't believe this needs a response.
Too bad, you're wrong and you're getting a response. I'm not going to
insult you by implying that since you're 15 you ahve no right to speak
here or engage in a debate-- but I will say that your point of view is
rather naive. It is not our job to parent you, or your little brother. It
isn't the government's job, either. It is the job of your *parents*. And
if you're like I was toward my little borthers, you think it's your job
to parent them. Which is fine. But a 12-year-old should not be on the net
unsupervised. I let my little brother get on a BBS when he was 12, and he
promptly earned a ton of flame mail because he was too immature to handle
himself. So hide your password, watch your brother when he gets on, and
if you feel you need to be protected from smut, hit the skip key as soon
as you see a sex scene coming on.
: This is the opinion of one of these innocents that the brave souls are
: fighting for. Keep the smut here, and invite the wrath of that bothersome
: body we call our federal government.
Whose federal government? The internet is an international body. The CDA
has been struck down as unconstitutional by a Philly court, and there is
no reason to believe the Supreme Court will do differently. And if the US
*did* manage to be stupid enough to try to censor the net, an
unenforceable thing to do anyway, all we'd have to do is telnet to a
foreign country. The people who can't change ISPs would be burned, of
course, but then you're suggesting burning them anyway.
Oh, and no parent comments. It's
: not THEIR fault someone posted NC-17 to a specified G-R newsgroup. :-P
It's not a specieifed G-R newsgroup. If it *was*, you would have a point.
But it's not and it never has been.
The Internet is for adults. Instead of trying to restrict the adults to a
tiny corner of the net for the sake of kids, we should cocnentrate on
restricting the kids. mature kids like yourself who can engage in an
adult debate are mature enough to protect themselves, and the rest of
kid-dom are obnoxious little twerps who don't know how to use the
Internet anyway and shouldn't be allowed near it without adult
supervision.
shanna...@pnx.com
On 20 Apr 1997 01:41:52 GMT, cmdr...@aol.com (CmdrBevC) wrote:
>I WANTED to stay out of this...but those of you who want to keep the smut
>here don't seem to see something vital: This is the type of stuff the
>government wishes it could censor. This is the type of literature that
>they do not want on the net.
There isn't a lot the government can do to censor newsgroups.
And has been said, the Internet doesn't belong to the U.S.
If ratings are good enough for movies, they're good enough
for us on a.s.c.
Keikimo
Gee...more drivel from Keikimo...(Who sometimes wonders how she ever got
so loud-mouthed in the first place.) I'm warning you, I'm long winded,
usually hostile and sometimes don't make much sense, but don't hold that
against me! :)
In article <5jc3f3$e...@uwm.edu>, mk...@alpha3.csd.uwm.edu (Mary Kay Knasinski) says:
>However... it does seem, at times, as if ASC is too often devoted to story
>after story that do very little to explore any kind of Star Trek theme,
>character interaction (outside of the "bedroom," or even inside it,) or
>character development. I've gotten the distinct impression, at times, that
Ouches...someone who finally tells the truth. Anyone who writes this
kind of drivel, raise your hand. (Mine waving furiously in the air.)
Actually, (and as stupid as this may sound) I do agree with you on this,
there probably ARE too much "bedroom" stories out there. But hey,
unfortunately that's the kind of story I like to write and there are
probably many others like me.
>some of these stories could have been written in many different fandoms, and
>simply had the names changed... yet it's not my place to censor or restrict
>them, only to avoid them if I so choose. At the same time, the R and NC-17
Another good point. Finally, someone who doesn't like a type of story
but realizes that there is such a thing as DELETE...:)
>stories with a THEME, a PLOT, with real CHARACTERS, are among my very
>favorites, precisely because of the way they don't shy away from their
>subject matter, whatever that may be in the particular story. But I
Torch's P/K series is one of my favourites. And it's got a great plot
too... :)
<Segment cut for brevity...?>
>So perhaps we shouldn't be so defensive when the public protests the limited
>selection available, sometimes. We may not AGREE, but I have no problem
>with listening to people who want to say it.
Okay, now here's where I want to make MY point. Maybe we shouldn't be
so defensive about the selection available. But, in my personal opinion,
when you are called sex-crazed or that you are shoving this "stuff" down
others throats and forcing people to read it, you have a right to be
defensive. I wouldn't mind reading people's opinions that were somewhat
logical but I'm sorry, being insulted in a message just deserves the same.
Yes, there might be a lot of NC-17 stuff out there, but for people to
post that kind of a message might give newbies or lurkers, people who
don't really know the ins and outs of the group a bad idea of what we do
write. Yes I write NC-17, am I proud of it? You'd better believe it.
But for people to automatically call my writing trash without even giving
it a chance, just because some idiot wrote that all we, as NC-17 authors,
do is write about our personal fantasies and post them, is unfair and it
seems to tarnish my writing somehow. (Yes, that is possible for smut.)
Personally, I think we all need to cool down a bit, writers are aggravated,
(Just check out the header for Jealousy and you'll see my reaction) and
the posters of the original messages are either being flamed to death
or are defending themselves with the same poor taste they had before.
As a writer, I respect the rights of people to have their own opinions.
I also think that as a reader, you should respect my rights to have my
work posted.
Like I said before in an earlier message, if someone actually has a
logical solution to this whole debate, I, as a NC-17 writer would be
happy to listen to it to try and resolve this whole debate. Otherwise,
I think we just have to be a bit more flexable in our opinions.
Another long winded comment by...
Keikimo
Mary Kay Knasinski
Aleph Press (al...@netcom.com) wrote:
: CmdrBevC (cmdr...@aol.com) wrote:
:
: : For those of you who cannot access a.s.c.e., I suggest two things:
:
:
: : 2) Check Dejanews. http://www.dejanews.com. It's not that hard to do.
:
: Yes it is! This is unbelievably ignorant. I use Dejanews all the time to
: retrieve posts for the archive that I missed the first time, and it is
: *hostile as hell*! It doesn't thread properly, you can't jump to a reply
: after reading the first message or vice versa, it doesn't pick up new
: messages for a week or so, there's no way to killfile it, it doesn't
: remember what you personally have read so every time you check for new
: messages you'd have to go throuigh all the old, it breaks up the messages
: into itty bitty pieces... it's very obnoxious and hostile. I feel deeply
: sorry for anyone restricted to using DejaNews as a newsserver.
:
: Besides, not everyone can. DejaNews has a bug in it that blows up Lynx.
: Anyone on a Unix shell acct (which many people whose providers are
: restrcted have-- often people at .edu domains have free access and cannot
: afford to change providers, are censored from asce, and are on Unix
: accounts which use lynx to acces the web) *cannot* use DejaNews.
Okay, I know this is off topic, but I don't understand this paragraph - I'm
on a Unix shell account, am censored from asce, use Lynx to access the web,
and have no trouble whatsoever with Dejanews. (Well, aside from the very
strange way it breaks up and "labels" story sections, but it didn't take me
too long to figure it out.) What DID take me a while is learning of the
existence of Dejanews at all - once I did, it's been VERY helpful for
locating stories, as you say.
But, in terms of the subject of this thread - yes, I believe that, by and
large, the "adult" material in ASC is properly labelled and easy to screen,
and it's not the responsibility of the newsgroup to keep the stories out,
but of parents to keep their children out of the newsgroup.
However... it does seem, at times, as if ASC is too often devoted to story
after story that do very little to explore any kind of Star Trek theme,
character interaction (outside of the "bedroom," or even inside it,) or
character development. I've gotten the distinct impression, at times, that
some of these stories could have been written in many different fandoms, and
simply had the names changed... yet it's not my place to censor or restrict
them, only to avoid them if I so choose. At the same time, the R and NC-17
stories with a THEME, a PLOT, with real CHARACTERS, are among my very
favorites, precisely because of the way they don't shy away from their
subject matter, whatever that may be in the particular story. But I
sympathize with those who see post after post with [NC-17] tacked on, and
get a little tired of it - I may not happen to always agree with their
methods of protesting that fact, but I can sympathize. If there was only
one bookstore in town, and almost all it stocked was NC-17 material, I'd
protest! Sure, I may not be FORCED to patronize the store, or let children
inside the store, but I'd still protest, and the manager telling me to
"write my own non-NC-17 books, if I want to complain," wouldn't keep me from
complaining! As far as I can tell, ASC is the only major "Star Trek fanfic"
bookstore around - many web pages contain stories that already appear HERE.
So perhaps we shouldn't be so defensive when the public protests the limited
selection available, sometimes. We may not AGREE, but I have no problem
with listening to people who want to say it.
Mary
Webrunner
make an alt.startrek.creative.mature or alt.startrek.creative.nc17 or
something, so that spambots wont find that "erotic" in the title.
KaEnterkin
On 18 Apr 1997 15:08:54 GMT jwint...@aol.com wrote
>I have a rather simple solution to our problem, one that the MPAA
>foolishly overlooked.
>
>NC-17 is basically designed to let people know that there is extreme
>sexual or violent content in a movie. The designation was intended to
>accommodate Mirimax and other independent films, for which the only
>options were either an X rating or an unacceptable amount of editing.
I have been keeping up with this thread from the beginning. I think that
this is one of the simpler solutions offered. I have read several NC-17
stories that were not "smut," and several that were. I would like to see
the X rating used, to designate those that might be considered "smut."
This would allow people to skip any stories that they may not want to read
as well as making the NC-17 stories available to those persons who would
like to read a story that is not "smut."
--Katie E.
Sean Newton
Stephen Ratliff wrote:
>
> Or had some weird idea like putting the kids in command of a starship :)
Who would do such a thing? :P
> Stephen
> rec.arts.tv.mst3k.misc's polite target. Marrissa Stories Author
===================================================================
Ruth Gifford
On 18 Apr 1997 19:16:20 GMT, Emma wrote:
OK, I posted answering the first post in this thread and then saw the rest of
it. That'll larn me to talk first (then again, nothing else has).
>Here's some suggestions as to how people might consider rating stories.
>X - porn, or just plain, old fuck stories/vignettes
>NC-17 - erotica or stories were the sex is not the primary focus
>V - violence (stuff like graphic torture, not just punching someone in
>the nose)
>SV (can't use R) - rape or sexual violence (since some find this very
>disturbing)
I like the violence codes, but the sex codes are still tricky. I'm not sure
about where some of my stuff would be. I have a major plot line going along
in ACT with some themes about a) Romulan/Federation relations, b) the nature
of reality, and c) the future of Picard's career (a, b and c are all
connected, obviously). I also have very hot and heavy bdsm scenes that would
qualify as X rated if read out of context, even though eventually those
very scenes influence a b and c. So, NC-17 for story with sex, or X for two
guys engaging in "edge play" (bdsm term for situations that push people's
limits while remaining "safe, sane & consenual"?
OK not every one writes bdsm epics, but where does the heavy G/B stuff fall?
How 'bout Jeanita's A/U stories (sex, violence, and violent sex)? Do we say
a mild PWP is X?
How about this?
TrekSmut (wish I *could* trademark it, but Paramount wuld be all over me like
Shatner's toupe) writers write a seperate short content statement which they
post with an intro if they're like me and they like to blather, or spereately
when they post the story. This lets people knows what's up, and saves them
from downloading something they can't deal with.
>and continue indicating stuff like,
>m/m - obvious, but sexual orientation does make a difference to some folks
>f/f
>
>and, if there's any offbeat kinks, then keep labelling the story as such
>-- for example, BD/SM
>
Again from the ASCE FAQ:
Content Codes:
f/f female/female
m/m male/male
m/f male/female
non-cons Non consensual activities, specifically rape
D/S dominance and submission
B/D bondage and discipline
S/M sadism and masochism
BDSM (sometimes SMBD) This has become a catch all code that includes
elements of all three. The only thing that I feel is important is that if
there is actually consensual pain being inflicted in an erotic fashion, use
S/M or BDSM. A lot of people can deal with bondage, but have no interest in
reading about someone getting flogged. In your intro, you can go into more
detail if you think it's necessary.
h/c hurt/comfort This is a fine fan fic tradition, in which one character
is non-consensually hurt (physically or psychologically ) and is given
comfort that usually leads (in the ASCE context) to sex. If you're going to
be graphic about the non-consensual pain, mention it in your intro. This is
*very* important if your story involves rape.
Ruth again:
This covers some of the bases and included in a paragraph or two can save
people from reading something that squicks (freaks out) them. Think of the
subject line at the spine of the book, and the content paragraph as the back
of the book.
Am I making *any* sense here?
Ruth
--
***************************************************
* Ruth | FAQ Maintainer for *
* Gifford | alt.startrek.creative.erotica *
*-------------------------------------------------*
* Better living thru TrekSmut--see for yourself! *
* http://aviary.share.net/~alara/ *
***************************************************
"Literally, as soon as I made this decision, I lost
weight. My skin has cleared up. I don't have anything
to be scared of, which I think outweighs whatever else
happens in my career."
Ellen DeGeneres on being an out lesbian
(Time Magazine 04/14/97)
"Why didn't *my* skin clear up?"
Ruth on being an out lesbian
Ruth Gifford
On 18 Apr 1997 03:38:53 GMT, Yurik Hunt wrote:
>
>In article <astarte-1304...@host26.cyberg8t.com>,
>ast...@cyberg8t.com (Atara Stein) wrote:
>
><snipped>
>> Second of all, it's the parents' job to decide what is and is not
>> appropriate for their children to access. It's not that difficult to slap
>> a password on a computer or to monitor what kids are doing. It's not my
>> responsibility to censor what I write so some irresponsible parents' kids
>> don't see it.
>
><snipped>
>
>> Fine. If those people have kids of their own, then they should take steps
>> to stop them from reading material they find inappropriate.
>
>
>
>Just remember dear, that "it takes an entire village to raise a child."
And your point? That village has come up with answers, you know. Surf Watch
and other software is an example of the 'net village's answer to the kids and
netSmut problem. All most all of the posters out here mark their stories, so
that parents can use killfiles or do a quick preliminary scan of the ng to
see what's up. The "village" does its part, and expects the parents to do
theirs. I don;t ask that the gen story writers curtail the violence in their
stroies (if there is any; I don't much, if any gen fanfic, not enough time),
but if one of the kids wanted to read something they found here; I'd read it
first.
Ruth Gifford
On 18 Apr 1997 14:12:58 GMT, Carolyn Fulton wrote:
Most excellent question!
>I'm just curious, with the debate that's going on, how many people
>automatically see NC-17, think "Smut!" and either (a) pass on by, or
>(b) get really annoyed when what they end up reading doesn't feature a
>fuck on every page?
>Any thoughts?
From the ASCE FAQ (this part written by that pushy Ruth broad):
[G] General Audiences
[PG] not for children (mostly for language or mild violence)
[PG-13] not for pre-teens (medium violence, very mild sexual situations)
[R] restricted to adults (for "vanilla" type sex; things that minors
shouldn't read but that won't offend most adults)
[NC-17] of Adult Nature (use for anything that minors should not read and
that might offend adults of delicate sensibilities; this goes for slash,
threesomes where the sex is at all graphic, genderfucks, bdsm and the rest of
the kinky list. Put something in your intro if it's way out there,
otherwise, caveat emptor)
plain old Ruth again:
I don't think that some slash should be categorized as NC-17, but that's what
our archivist prefers. These days all I write is very much NC-17, and will
be marked as such. Where's the line? I don't know but as far as I'm
concerned, bdsm is on the Nc-17 side.
Ruth
back from LeatherFest and exhausted, happy, more in love with my strong,
brave, amazing girl than before, and inspired (writing-wise, as well as
personally).
Kattz
On Fri, 18 Apr 1997 11:43:09 -0400, Macedon <mac...@geocities.com>
wrote:
>Carolyn - I can only speak from experience, but when J and I rated "Eye
>of the Storm" [NC-17] originally, due to the fact the sex was between
>two young men (even if rather vanilla), and was rather blunt in
>description. Yet, we got a couple of polite, but rather baffled letters
>asking us WHY we'd rated it as erotica since it 1) had a plot that had
>nothing to do with sex, and 2) the actual sex occupied less than 10% of
>the story.
>
>So we decided to re-rate it [R] and just specify that the sexual content
>was homoerotic; folks who didn't like that should avoid it. The sex is
>still too graphic for tje comfort or taste of some, but slapping an
>[NC-17] rating on it seemed to be misleading more people than it was
>helping.
>
>But, to muddy the waters further, when I rated "T'Kuht Rising" [R], I
>did so for the *violence* in part 4, not for the rather allusional (and
>brief) sex scene in part 2. So that's a good case of when [R] means
>something besides sex. "Adult content" (to me) just means elements in
>the plot which might disturb young readers and/or adult readers who are
>sensitive to graphic content.
>
>I guess I'd see [R] as a rating somewhere between [PG-13] (has some
>sexual or violent content/discussion, but nothing graphic), and [NC-17]
>(which seems to suggest at least to some readers that a large portion of
>the story deals with sex or sexual themes).
>
>Macedon
I think the ratings should be expanded a bit
[R-X] for stories with graphic sexual manipulation descriptions
like 'Eye of the Storm' has
The Kattz Meow
http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Marina/1278/
mailto:ka...@geocities.com
Aleph Press
Ruth Gifford (eres...@cyberg8t.com) wrote:
: [NC-17] of Adult Nature (use for anything that minors should not read and
: that might offend adults of delicate sensibilities; this goes for slash,
: threesomes where the sex is at all graphic, genderfucks, bdsm and the rest of
: the kinky list. Put something in your intro if it's way out there,
: otherwise, caveat emptor)
: plain old Ruth again:
: I don't think that some slash should be categorized as NC-17, but that's what
: our archivist prefers. These days all I write is very much NC-17, and will
: be marked as such. Where's the line? I don't know but as far as I'm
: concerned, bdsm is on the Nc-17 side.
Huh?
Any slash which does not contain sex is supposed to get a PG-13
rating (or no rating, which is assumed PG-13. All ratings are assumed
PG-13 unless they state otherwise.)
Any slash which contains non-explicit sex (ie, some hot and heavy
petting, and then a general description of what happens next without
going into blow-by-blow) gets an R rating, same as a het pairing. Or,
slash in the middle of a much longer work which is otherwise not erotica
gets an R as well.
I have, so far as I remember, never stated that slash should be treated
any differently than het. In fact, I recommended that Jeanita's stories
"The Q Who Fell To Earth" and "The Valley of the Shadow", both of which
are long works that happen to contain two scenes of men having sex, but
are definitely not erotica stories, get R ratings instead of NC-17.
So whch archivist do you mean, Ruth? :-)
Aleph Press
We're getting silly.
The rating system is intended as a very general guideline, which tells me
where to archive the thing. Any further detail should be given in a
disclaimer inside the story. I can't keep track of a bazillion ratings
and neither cn most authors, I'd assume.
I like the idea of X for pure smut (of the PWP-- plot? what plot?--
variety), NC-17 for material that may be smut or may be violent or
whatever, but has a plot, and R for stuff that is milder than NC-17.
However, SV for sexual violence? R-X for R with sex? C'mon, folks. That's
what the disclaimer is for.
R is usually R because there is either non-explicit sex in it, or there
is graphic sex but only one or two scenes in the midst of a much longer
work that is not about sex. (Some stories, such as His Beloved Pet, have
a plot, but the plot is more or less about sex and romatic love.)
Occasionally we might have an R for violence. If so, it should *say* so
in the disclaimer. The R keeps the kiddies out, but for finer gradations,
responsible adults should read the disclaimer. (All R-rated stories
should get a diclaimer but I think they pretty much all do.)
I vote that the rating system should be kept simple and functional.
Distinguishing between X and NC-17 is a reasonably good idea.
Distinguishing between 18 different shades of NC-17 and R is not.
Sean Newton
Aleph Press wrote:
>
> We're getting silly.
Really? <grin> I hadn't noticed. <snicker>
> I vote that the rating system should be kept simple and functional.
> Distinguishing between X and NC-17 is a reasonably good idea.
> Distinguishing between 18 different shades of NC-17 and R is not.
I certainly agree.
Zepp
On 20 Apr 1997 01:41:52 GMT, cmdr...@aol.com (CmdrBevC) wrote:
>I WANTED to stay out of this...but those of you who want to keep the smut
>here don't seem to see something vital: This is the type of stuff the
>government wishes it could censor. This is the type of literature that
>they do not want on the net. Sure, there are passwords or special
>programs...thy'd lock out a.s.c.e because of the "erotica" part of it, but
>not neccesarily a.s.c. I once led that sheltered, innocent life someone
>once talked about. I'd still be leading it if I hadn't accidentally
>accessed an NC-17 story that wasn't labeled. I'm probably old enough for
>my parents not to worry, but, you see, not all of us are 15. I shudder to
>think that my younger brother may one day read this stuff just by
>accessing my AOL account and checking the unread alt.startrek.creative
>messages. This is why alt.startrek.creative.erotica was formed.
Except that as.s.c specifically does NOT limit itself to polite
fiction -- lots of people have confirmed this, I am surprised you did
not hear of it. Second of all, let me get this straight -- because
censorship is evil and nasty, we should censor ourselves? Huh?
It may have escaped your notice, dear, but there's this little thing
called the First Amendment to the Constitution, that *protects* our
right of free speech, in the US. The government can wish to censor us
-- but the courts disagree, as senator Exon <hack, spit> found out
when his idiotic attempt to censor the 'Net was thrown out of court as
uncontitutional.
And if you're so worried about your kid brother, why don't you
password protect your access? It's not like it's hard to do, or
anything. I'm sorry for you, but your kid brother is not *our*
problem. And I'll wager a helluva lot of latinum that he knows a lot
more than you like to think he does -- kids *see* things, no matter
how hard adults try to pretend they don't. It's life. Deal with it.
>For those of you who cannot access a.s.c.e., I suggest two things:
>
>1) Create another newsgroup that would a) take the place of a.s.c.e. and
>b) let everyone in.
>2) Check Dejanews. http://www.dejanews.com. It's not that hard to do.
Not hard, perhaps -- but it is a massive pain in the ass, and one for
which there is no need.
>I don't want a response to this. I don't believe this needs a response.
>This is the opinion of one of these innocents that the brave souls are
>fighting for. Keep the smut here, and invite the wrath of that bothersome
>body we call our federal government. Oh, and no parent comments. It's
>not THEIR fault someone posted NC-17 to a specified G-R newsgroup. :-P
Well, since you aren't my boss, you're getting a response anyway. I
could not let such idiocy pass uncommented upon. I have always
enjoyed your stories; I am sad to see that when it comes to the real
world, you are such a naif.
>Munch on that little piece of broken glass.
No thanks. Why don't you munch on it; you're the prude, not me.
>CmdrBevC
Greywolf the Wanderer
!Fuck censorship!!!
--borrowing Zepp's account.
--header munged to foil spambots; remove the extra "p"
Astarte
On 21 Apr 1997, Ruth Gifford wrote:
> And your point? That village has come up with answers, you know. Surf Watch
> and other software is an example of the 'net village's answer to the kids and
> netSmut problem. All most all of the posters out here mark their stories, so
> that parents can use killfiles or do a quick preliminary scan of the ng to
> see what's up. The "village" does its part, and expects the parents to do
> theirs. I don;t ask that the gen story writers curtail the violence in their
> stroies (if there is any; I don't much, if any gen fanfic, not enough time),
> but if one of the kids wanted to read something they found here; I'd read it
> first.
I'd just like to applaud you on your grasp of reality. ;) It may help a
lot to have your "village" involved in the raising of your child, but no
matter how large and loving that village is, if the parents don't do their
part the village is useless.
Parents, take care of your kids. Password your computer, use the netnanny
and other software, and keep an eye on what they're getting into.
Smut it NOT the only thing on Usenet that could be harmful to children.
What about all of the racism, pointless bickering over any and all
subjects, name calling, scams, etc?
As someone said in another post on this topic, the internet is NOT
Disneyland, it's an extension of the big, bad world. Parents need to
realize that and act accordingly.
| Jesus to God: "Western civilization followed me home this morning. |
| Can I keep it?" God: "Certainly not boy. And put it down this minute.|
| You don't know where it's been." --Tom Robbins, "Another Roadside |
| Attraction" ***==-->Joni Waldrup, U of Montana: ta...@selway.umt.edu|
Sean Newton
JWinterEsq wrote:
>
> In article <335B09...@eden.rutgers.edu>, Sean Newton
> <sne...@eden.rutgers.edu> writes:
>
> >> Or had some weird idea like putting the kids in command of a starship
> :)
> >
> >Who would do such a thing? :P
>
> thread. (A welcome relief from the attempted Puritan takeover on this ng.
> <G>)
Which makes me think that Stephen should write some more. Seeing his
[G] (or, at worst, [PG]) stuff might convince some that sex isn't the
only thing on this group.
> Friday, at a writers' symposium, Tom Clancy gave the final word on the
> Ratliff vs. Clancy thread (though I'm sure he didn't know that. <G>)
>
> When some in the audience complained about the way Jack Ryan was elevated
> to the presidency, Mr. Clancy politely reminded the person that "none of
> this is real. It's a story."
Stephen Ratliff, please write more stories. I want more Marissa
stories!!! I realized sometime early this morning that with the number
of stories being posted so low, we need more. I'd actually be grateful
to read Ratliff right now.
Aleph Press
Sean Newton (sne...@eden.rutgers.edu) wrote:
: Stephen Ratliff, please write more stories. I want more Marissa
: stories!!! I realized sometime early this morning that with the number
: of stories being posted so low, we need more. I'd actually be grateful
: to read Ratliff right now.
Low? You're jokin, right? There are so many stories on my server, I can
barely keep up with saving them all for the archive. And most are PG-13
or under.
People see what they want to see.
ky...@accessin.com.au
In article <335E6D...@eden.rutgers.edu>,
sne...@eden.rutgers.edu wrote:
>
> Stephen Ratliff, please write more stories. I want more Marissa
> stories!!! I realized sometime early this morning that with the number
> of stories being posted so low, we need more. I'd actually be grateful
> to read Ratliff right now.
Hear hear, we have all been told, several times in fact, the correct
process by which changes can be made to the ng - it is obvious ( to me at
any rate) that no one on either side of the debate is interested in doing
this( or they wouldn't have wasted all this lovely debating - it would
have been a part of the month long discussion!) Time to move on.
I have to agree - we need more stories - of all types - G through to
NC-17! (pretty please)
K
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
ka...@geocities.com
In article <alephE9...@netcom.com>,
al...@netcom.com (Aleph Press) wrote:
>
> I like the idea of X for pure smut (of the PWP-- plot? what plot?--
> variety), NC-17 for material that may be smut or may be violent or
> whatever, but has a plot, and R for stuff that is milder than NC-17.
> However, SV for sexual violence? R-X for R with sex? C'mon, folks. That's
> what the disclaimer is for.
>
When I first started reading this newsgroup I was under the impression
that XX-rated stuff would be labled XX-rated and I had a very nasty
surprise when I decided to read the only part of a story that arrived in
my newsreader. Oh, there was a disclaimer at the top but all it said was
that the disclaimer was in the first part.
> I vote that the rating system should be kept simple and functional.
> Distinguishing between X and NC-17 is a reasonably good idea.
> Distinguishing between 18 different shades of NC-17 and R is not.
I agree the rating system should be simple and that's why graphic sex
should not be under the R rating (even if it's just a small part of the
story). I believe that a rating system that's simple to understand and
doesn't require disclaimers is crucial so here one is:
G = general
R = some violence and
.......sensuous thinking, talk or behavior
.......(no body manipulation descriptions allowed)
X = story with sexual content or gory violence
XX = story with a lot of sexual content or sexual violence
XXX = all graphic sex with no story
Aleph Press
ka...@geocities.com wrote:
: When I first started reading this newsgroup I was under the impression
: that XX-rated stuff would be labled XX-rated and I had a very nasty
: surprise when I decided to read the only part of a story that arrived in
: my newsreader. Oh, there was a disclaimer at the top but all it said was
: that the disclaimer was in the first part.
The moral of the story: If the story is rated R or NC-17, and it says
"read the disclaimer first", read the disclaimer first.
: I agree the rating system should be simple and that's why graphic sex
: should not be under the R rating (even if it's just a small part of the
: story). I believe that a rating system that's simple to understand and
: doesn't require disclaimers is crucial so here one is:
That's just plain dumb. My "Only Human", which so far has 134,000 words
without a sex scene, is going to have some graphic sex scenes. Does this
mean it gets an X? When it's gone 134,000 words without one? Even giving
it an NC-17 rating is absurd. (I *might* give chp. 4 all by itself an
NC-17; we'll see.)
: G = general
: R = some violence and
: .......sensuous thinking, talk or behavior
: .......(no body manipulation descriptions allowed)
: X = story with sexual content or gory violence
: XX = story with a lot of sexual content or sexual violence
: XXX = all graphic sex with no story
I don't like X for anything but sex. In America, where most posters live,
X means sexual pornography. It implies "no plot, no meaning, no value,
just sex." NC-17 means "this material is unsuitable for children due to
graphic sex or violence", but definitely does *not* imply no plot, no
meaning, no value. I continue to recommend X for PWP (plot? what plot?)
sex stories, NC-17 for anything containing a great deal of potentially
offensive material that does not fall under X, R for anything containing
a small amount of offensive material (determned by relative proportion,
not by actual length) or "explicit hinting", and nonrated/PG-13 for
anything under.
ka...@geocities.com
>
> : When I first started reading this newsgroup I was under the impression
> : that XX-rated stuff would be labled XX-rated and I had a very nasty
> : surprise when I decided to read the only part of a story that arrived in
> : my newsreader. Oh, there was a disclaimer at the top but all it said was
> : that the disclaimer was in the first part.
>
> The moral of the story: If the story is rated R or NC-17, and it says
> "read the disclaimer first", read the disclaimer first.
I couldn't read the disclaimer because I didn't have the part that had
the disclaimer (that was before I knew about using Dejaview to locate
missing story parts).
>
> : I agree the rating system should be simple and that's why graphic sex
> : should not be under the R rating (even if it's just a small part of the
> : story). I believe that a rating system that's simple to understand and
> : doesn't require disclaimers is crucial so here one is:
>
> That's just plain dumb. My "Only Human", which so far has 134,000 words
> without a sex scene, is going to have some graphic sex scenes. Does this
> mean it gets an X? When it's gone 134,000 words without one? Even giving
> it an NC-17 rating is absurd. (I *might* give chp. 4 all by itself an
> NC-17; we'll see.)
That's exactly what it means. Graphic sex is graphic sex and should have
the label of X.
>
> : G = general
> : R = some violence and
> : .......sensuous thinking, talk or behavior
> : .......(no body manipulation descriptions allowed)
>
> : X = story with sexual content or gory violence
> : XX = story with a lot of sexual content or sexual violence
> : XXX = all graphic sex with no story
>
> I don't like X for anything but sex. In America, where most posters live,
> X means sexual pornography. It implies "no plot, no meaning, no value,
> just sex." NC-17 means "this material is unsuitable for children due to
> graphic sex or violence", but definitely does *not* imply no plot, no
> meaning, no value.
correction -- that's what the label XXX is for.
> I continue to recommend X for PWP (plot? what plot?)
> sex stories, NC-17 for anything containing a great deal of potentially
> offensive material that does not fall under X, R for anything containing
> a small amount of offensive material (determned by relative proportion,
> not by actual length) or "explicit hinting", and nonrated/PG-13 for
> anything under.
In America where I live X means a story has graphic sex and that label is
necessary for people like me who don't like to see it or read about it.
The problem with putting stories with small amounts of graphic sex under
the rating of R is that rating is also used for stories that only have
violence or other stuff that might be wrong for children. It should not
be necessary to hunt down part of a story to read a disclaimer just to
find out it is a story that I wouldn't want to read in the first place.
Aleph Press
ka...@geocities.com wrote:
: In article <alephE9...@netcom.com>,
: al...@netcom.com (Aleph Press) wrote:
: > The moral of the story: If the story is rated R or NC-17, and it says
: > "read the disclaimer first", read the disclaimer first.
: I couldn't read the disclaimer because I didn't have the part that had
: the disclaimer (that was before I knew about using Dejaview to locate
: missing story parts).
What I meant was, if a story says "disclaimer in the first part", and you
don't have the first part, don't read the story.
: > That's just plain dumb. My "Only Human", which so far has 134,000 words
: > without a sex scene, is going to have some graphic sex scenes. Does this
: > mean it gets an X? When it's gone 134,000 words without one? Even giving
: > it an NC-17 rating is absurd. (I *might* give chp. 4 all by itself an
: > NC-17; we'll see.)
: That's exactly what it means. Graphic sex is graphic sex and should have
: the label of X.
X means "pornography." I don't know about you, but when I read a long
science fiction novel that has one or two sex scenes which are necessary
to the plot, I do not automatically assume the entire book is
pornography.
: > I don't like X for anything but sex. In America, where most posters live,
: > X means sexual pornography. It implies "no plot, no meaning, no value,
: > just sex." NC-17 means "this material is unsuitable for children due to
: > graphic sex or violence", but definitely does *not* imply no plot, no
: > meaning, no value.
: correction -- that's what the label XXX is for.
That is not how X is used in America. X and XXX are interchangeable terms
meaning "porn." "R" means "contains heavy sexual innuendo, a certain
degree of sex scene with no frontal nudity, or violence." NC-17 means
"contains graphic sex but also has a plot, or has extreme violence, or
frontal nuditty, or other things the MPAA thinks kids should never see
even with parental permission." I do not agree that an explicit sex scene
which is required to advance the plot of a *book* should be kept out of
*all* children's hands.
: In America where I live X means a story has graphic sex and that label is
In America where you live X means a story is pornography and is basically
all abou sex, whereas NC-17 or R mean a story has varying degrees of sex
that advance the plot. And books are always censored less tightly than
movies.
: necessary for people like me who don't like to see it or read about it.
: The problem with putting stories with small amounts of graphic sex under
: the rating of R is that rating is also used for stories that only have
: violence or other stuff that might be wrong for children. It should not
: be necessary to hunt down part of a story to read a disclaimer just to
: find out it is a story that I wouldn't want to read in the first place.
That's what the point of a disclaimer *is*. Personally, I put a
disclaimer on every part of a multi-part story, but if a story is rated R
or NC-17, and it says "dislaimer in the first part", and you don't have
the first part.... here on asc R and NC-17 *usually* mean sex. We're not
very violent people. :-) So in that case don't read the story.
I think everyone *should* include a disclaimer on each part, even if it's
a short one. But I am totally against the use of X for anything other
than "plot what plot" sex stories, because of the fact that in America, X
or XXX mean "pornography with no other reason to exist than sex." Using X
to mean something it does not mean in "real" life will only confuse people.
(BTW, R can get pretty damn graphic in movies. Just because you can't see
the genitals doesn't mean you don't know *exactly* what's going on.)
Joyce Harmon
In article <8619583...@dejanews.com>, ka...@geocities.com says...
>
<snip>
>I couldn't read the disclaimer because I didn't have the part that had
>the disclaimer (that was before I knew about using Dejaview to locate
>missing story parts).
<snip>
>In America where I live X means a story has graphic sex and that label is
>necessary for people like me who don't like to see it or read about it.
>The problem with putting stories with small amounts of graphic sex under
>the rating of R is that rating is also used for stories that only have
>violence or other stuff that might be wrong for children. It should not
>be necessary to hunt down part of a story to read a disclaimer just to
>find out it is a story that I wouldn't want to read in the first place.
?????
Well, in America where *I* live, most people don't start reading a story in
the middle....
But be that as it may - the rating system *in America* has changed, so that
NC-17 means for mature audiences. X, XX, and XXX are only used these days
by pornographers. (I suppose you will consider anyone that includes a sex
scene in a story a pornographer, but most people would disagree with you.)
All stories posted to a.s.c. are rated, every part of them. The disclaimer,
*in the first section, which MOST people read FIRST*, gives the details of
why the story received the rating that it did.
And yet again, the censor-minded of a.s.c. are demanding more detailed
markings than are provided in general fiction that may be found in the
bookstore or the library. Any ten-year-old can buy a paperback of Clan of
the Cave Bear, or check it out from the library, if they want to read an
interesting story about cave people thousands of years ago. And nowhere on
the jacket copy or spine will you read a disclaimer that the book contains
scenes of graphic sex, including rape. If the book were a piece of fanfic
posted to Usenet, it would be appropriately marked, and the disclaimer would
tell people why it received the rating it did... that is, *if* people would
bother to start the story at the beginning.
Joyce
ka...@geocities.com
>
> What I meant was, if a story says "disclaimer in the first part", and you
> don't have the first part, don't read the story.
If I had done that--since the only time I get a complete story is when
it's all in one posting--I wouldn't have had any stories to read for
months until I found out about the Archives and Deja News, and the
stories were the reason I decided to read this group in the first place.
Part of a story was better than no story.
(snip)
>
> X means "pornography." I don't know about you, but when I read a long
> science fiction novel that has one or two sex scenes which are necessary
> to the plot, I do not automatically assume the entire book is
> pornography.
Neither do I. X is not pornography. X is a warning that the story has
some graphic sex.
>
> : > I don't like X for anything but sex. In America, where most posters live,
> : > X means sexual pornography. It implies "no plot, no meaning, no value,
> : > just sex." NC-17 means "this material is unsuitable for children due to
> : > graphic sex or violence", but definitely does *not* imply no plot, no
> : > meaning, no value.
>
> : correction -- that's what the label XXX is for.
>
> That is not how X is used in America. X and XXX are interchangeable terms
> meaning "porn."
Wrong. XXX means heavy hard-core porn as in all sex, no story, no plot.
> "R" means "contains heavy sexual innuendo, a certain
> degree of sex scene with no frontal nudity, or violence."
So why are so many stories with graphic sex descriptions being posted
under the label of "R" if it's only supposed to be innuendo. "Eye of the
Storm" is not innuendo, it has graphic sex descriptions and should not be
under the label of "R" even though the sex scenes are only a small part
of the story. It should have the label of X.
(snip)
> (BTW, R can get pretty damn graphic in movies. Just because you can't see
> the genitals doesn't mean you don't know *exactly* what's going on.)
I don't try to imagine stuff I don't see with my eyes.
Lasher
ka...@geocities.com wrote in article <8620526...@dejanews.com>...
> In article <alephE9...@netcom.com>,
> al...@netcom.com (Aleph Press) wrote:
> >
> (snip)
> >
> > What I meant was, if a story says "disclaimer in the first part", and
you
> > don't have the first part, don't read the story.
>
> If I had done that--since the only time I get a complete story is when
> it's all in one posting--I wouldn't have had any stories to read for
> months until I found out about the Archives and Deja News, and the
> stories were the reason I decided to read this group in the first place.
> Part of a story was better than no story.
Pardon me, "months"? Nary a week goes by when Alara or Stephen posts the
archive location for someone who asks; this, in addition to the FAQ that is
posted regularly. Not everyone reads the FAQ, unfortunately, so open
requests for archive locations are posted on asc practically on a weekly
basis. The title in the posting headers are far from nebulous, with titles
like, "Archive Location", or "Where Is The Archive".
Clearly, you haven't read any of those posts (and they do pop up *a lot*),
you didn't read the FAQ during those terrible few months of yours, and you
didn't e-mail the authors for the missing parts to the stories you were
reading. You put exactly zero effort into getting a complete story, and
you were willing to read a story "blindly" without seeking out the
disclaimer to determine whether what you were about to read might offend
you or not (even though the rating in the subject header should have sent a
warning signal). So you know what? I have no sympathy for you at all.
If you didn't want to inconvience yourself, that's your decision of
course, but if that approach leads you to a story you find offensive, you
have no right to complain. Writers, regardless of their subject matter,
put an incredible amount of work into each and every story they write, but
catering to the squeamish and the lazy isn't in the job description.
> >
> > That is not how X is used in America. X and XXX are interchangeable
terms
> > meaning "porn."
>
> Wrong. XXX means heavy hard-core porn as in all sex, no story, no plot.
Wrong. Aleph is correct here. XXX is not an official MPAA rating. XXX
is just hyperbole; something the X-rated moviemakers slap on a movie to
suggest to potential viewers that the subject matter is "just busting out
all over with sex". The official ratings for those movies in America are
all the same: X.
> > (BTW, R can get pretty damn graphic in movies. Just because you can't
see
> > the genitals doesn't mean you don't know *exactly* what's going on.)
>
> I don't try to imagine stuff I don't see with my eyes.
? Isn't that what reading is all about?
--
Lasher >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
/====================================================\
is signature has been modified. It has been reformatted to fit your
scre
\====================================================/
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< las...@maui.netwave.net
Thomas Rando
Paul Gadzikowski (scar...@iglou.com) wrote...
:<shameless plug>
:Try the story I'm posting, "The Legacy of Kirk", a TNG followup (not
:a crossover) to the Project Genesis arc. I posted parts 3a-3c (of 7)
:just now. If you missed any, the story to date is on my website at
:the URL below.
:</shameless plug>
I'll shamelussly plug myself too... for those of you looking for non
NC-17 stuff, try my Infinity story lines. The story I posted this
week is sorta a season finale/season premiere/cliffhanger thing, being
that it's written in four parts. If you're interested in finding out
how to get the other parts to the story before I post them, or if
you're looking for some of my earlier stories, come to
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridir/9434
I think that's it for MY shameless plug. ;-) Charlie
(ctr9...@uconnvm.uconn.edu)
JWinterEsq
>In America where I live X means a story has graphic sex and that label is
>necessary for people like me who don't like to see it or read about it.
>The problem with putting stories with small amounts of graphic sex under
>the rating of R is that rating is also used for stories that only have
>violence or other stuff that might be wrong for children.
Wrong, my dear. In America where *I* also live, there is no longer an
X-rating. This only shows up the most banal films containing erotic (to
be polite) material. NC-17 is used now to determine how graphic violence
or sexual content is. The X rating does not officially exist. And yes,
my dear, there ARE R rated movies so designated for sexual content, and
yes, Jimmy Carter has not been president for sixteen years and the Soviet
Union has ceased to exist. Make sure you know what decade it is before
you state your facts.
J,
just a little sick of this debate, even if all he writes is PG-13.
Sean Newton
Mary Jo Hurd wrote:
>
> Thomas Rando wrote:
> > http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridir/9434
> >
> > I think that's it for MY shameless plug. ;-) Charlie
> > (ctr9...@uconnvm.uconn.edu)
>
That's because corridor was mis-spelled above. <rolls eyes>
Mary Jo Hurd
Thomas Rando wrote:
>
> Paul Gadzikowski (scar...@iglou.com) wrote...
> :<shameless plug>
>
> :Try the story I'm posting, "The Legacy of Kirk", a TNG followup (not
> :a crossover) to the Project Genesis arc. I posted parts 3a-3c (of 7)
> :just now. If you missed any, the story to date is on my website at
> :the URL below.
>
> :</shameless plug>
>
> I'll shamelussly plug myself too... for those of you looking for non
> NC-17 stuff, try my Infinity story lines. The story I posted this
> week is sorta a season finale/season premiere/cliffhanger thing, being
> that it's written in four parts. If you're interested in finding out
> how to get the other parts to the story before I post them, or if
> you're looking for some of my earlier stories, come to
>
> I think that's it for MY shameless plug. ;-) Charlie
> (ctr9...@uconnvm.uconn.edu)
That URL didn't work.........
--
Mary Jo Hurd
Voyager/Janeway/Mulgrew fan
ka...@geocities.com
In article <01bc525c$b243fc00$5b84...@lasher.netwave.net>,
"Lasher" <las...@maui.netwave.net> wrote:
>
(snip)
>
> Pardon me, "months"? Nary a week goes by when Alara or Stephen posts the
> archive location for someone who asks; this, in addition to the FAQ that is
> posted regularly. Not everyone reads the FAQ, unfortunately, so open
> requests for archive locations are posted on asc practically on a weekly
> basis. The title in the posting headers are far from nebulous, with titles
> like, "Archive Location", or "Where Is The Archive".
>
I remember seeing the question a few times but never any answers. In the
whole time that I have been reading this newsgroup I have seen exactly 2
FAQ's. That was how I found out about the Archives though it was a
couple of weeks before I got a response so I could go there.
I am only able to check this newsgroup once at night. Each time there
are about 15 new posts. Of this entire thread which I can see with Deja
News, except for the original one I responded to, only my posts have
appeared in my newsreader.
> Clearly, you haven't read any of those posts (and they do pop up *a lot*),
> you didn't read the FAQ during those terrible few months of yours, and you
> didn't e-mail the authors for the missing parts to the stories you were
> reading.
I read the very first FAQ that I saw. Since so many people have limited
connect time I didn't think the authors would appreciate unsolicited
requests.
> You put exactly zero effort into getting a complete story, and
> you were willing to read a story "blindly" without seeking out the
> disclaimer to determine whether what you were about to read might offend
> you or not (even though the rating in the subject header should have sent a
> warning signal). So you know what? I have no sympathy for you at all.
Since I didn't know that the people in this group think that [R] is a
license to post stories with graphic sex the rating didn't send any
warning signals and by graphic sex I mean descriptions of what is being
rubbed or licked around the genital area on the other persons body.
(snip)
It may not be official but XXX is an effective way of describing the
contents of a story. I wonder why you people are so resistent to the
subject line showing exactly what kind of story has been posted. Instead
of a nebulous [R] why not use a definitive [R with graphic sex].
Aleph Press
ka...@geocities.com wrote:
: It may not be official but XXX is an effective way of describing the
: contents of a story. I wonder why you people are so resistent to the
: subject line showing exactly what kind of story has been posted. Instead
: of a nebulous [R] why not use a definitive [R with graphic sex].
Belongs in th disclaimer, because a header that long won't be visible to
most readers anyway. However, I believe a brief disclaimer belongs on all
parts, not just a "disclaimer in part 1."
XXX is a fine way to describe a plot what plot-style sex romp. It doesn't
belong on most stories rated R. But I'm not really against more
descriptive subject lines, it's just that subject lines are already so
damn long I can't see what part anything is when I go to archive it. I'd
rather see the information in a disclaimer on each part.
Ruth Gifford
On Tue, 29 Apr 1997 05:21:17 -0600, ka...@geocities.com wrote:
>It may not be official but XXX is an effective way of describing the
>contents of a story. I wonder why you people are so resistent to the
>subject line showing exactly what kind of story has been posted. Instead
>of a nebulous [R] why not use a definitive [R with graphic sex].
Hang on here. Which "you people" are you referring to? I mark all my
stories NC-17 or R (NC-17 for the bdsm and/or slash, R for the vanilla
and/or het), and make note of anything more than that in my subject header.
So do many of the other TrekSmut writers who post here. If the author thinks
it's an R, then that's what that author will use. We don't have a asc/asce
rater who reads all our stories first and rates them. Alara makes the
occasional judgement call when archiving things, but that's as far as it
goes.
I will not use the XXX designation because I don't like it. There's an
implication that X or XXX indicate stories that are all sex with no plot (PWP
or plot? what plot?), and although my stuff may be rough, I've got emotional
subtext in all of them and plot in most of them.
Ruth
reminding everyone to watch "Ellen" tomorrow night.