kent_tolley2 Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Yann - probably more appropriate on the Philosophy of Photography forum too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yann_r. Posted May 11, 2006 Author Share Posted May 11, 2006 Yes, of course... I only used it once and I forgot it exists. Thanks to recall it to me, looks very interesting.<br> Hope you (all) don't mind I only use it as a "reader-only" for a while? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yann_r. Posted May 11, 2006 Author Share Posted May 11, 2006 I see that my english is really not good... I wrote you: "I think you're over-estimating", I meant "under-estimating". Well, looks like it's too late. bye : ) (more I say, more confused I appear) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_tolley2 Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Yann - your English is MUCH better than my French. I think the subject you raised is an interesting one and will get more response on the Philosophy forum. This forum is pretty much considerations for Brian and the site and there is no action for Brian in your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oceanphysics Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 To have an interesting debate, you need to have (at least) two sides. The problem is that nobody reasonable thinks this should be censored. That an act is objectionable does not necessarily make a photo of that act objectionable. It just doesn't logically follow. The Sturges photos were removed because they violated a site policy designed to keep photo.net out of legal trouble. Even assuming the photos in question weren't much of a liability (books containing them are sold at just about every Barnes and Noble in the country, even in the bible belt) allowing violations of the policy would likely lead to posts of material that would be questionable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yann_r. Posted May 12, 2006 Author Share Posted May 12, 2006 Looks obvious that I was a bit too fast (maybe a bit impulsive? a typical French feature? *smile*) to launch this thread. At least, I'm learning.<br> If you can, please receive this as my <i>mea culpa</i>. I shouldn't have mixed censorship and neo-Nazism with the previous debate about porn censorship. I understand that the subject and impact about PN's liability is different. Brian, it wasn't trolling.<br> I won't forget how many differents forums are available on PN, be sure of that.<br> What else? I still believe that Mickael's folder is an interesting photojournalism about the disturbing neo-Nazism ideology. I just can't stand such a political/mind aberration. <i>passion and reason...</i><br> Cheers and thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now