Do we really have to put up with the sexual ramblings of some ***** teenager?

How does John A Lang going on and on about Trois cleavage fit into a family friendly website such as this is supost to be?

Does Phil ever monitor this website to make sure this kind of filth doesn't get posted??

I know I'll never again let my children on here to read stuff like this!

Edited by the moderator for language.

While I've made a couple of gags about JAL's affections for Sirtis, I do understand your point.

However, just to play Ardra's advocate, Phil himself has made several references to revealing costumes and cleavage in the guides.

In any case, I'd reckon that there are a large amount of posts relating to things I'd not want my children reading (if and when I do have children), and they aren't about JAL's affections. Several discussions in the movies boards, why even several of the movies themselves I'd never want my child seeing. Additionally, topics in the political musings boards probably have loads of inappropriate material.. in the Clinton boards specifically.

You've proven my point! How does that fit into Phils rules about a family friendly site?? You have banned people for far less than this!

And I don't recall Phil ever going on and on and on and on and on about anyones cleaveage in the Guides. Why? Because hes not some horny teenager that gets off on seeing alittle bit of skin.

I just think that this kind of stuff cheapens what this section of the website is supost to be about: nitpicking Star Trek The Next Generation. If someone wants to talk about cleaveage, they should open up a "Troi's Cleaveage Board"!

As I have no admin, nor any authority about what is in this site, I cannot say. I've never been responsible for the content posted here. I've never banned anyone. Regarding the rules about a family friendly site, well, I honestly don't know where those rules are. I only know that "Discus" programming doesn't allow certain words to go through.

As for Phil going on and on. Well, Phil's only written so many books, and doesn't post here often for me to know what if anything he's gone on and on about. At the same time, I suppose one should examine all the posts JAL has made here and find out what percentage of total posts contain comments about cleavage, and of those posts, how frequent they turn up.

And for your last paragraph, yes, it probably cheapens what this section is about. JAL adding in comments about his fantasies are not really nits.

I guess I can only say that when a board discussion turns into post after post of something I object to, I've stopped going to those boards. Is that the way it should work? Should I be "forced" to walk away from a board I would otherwise like to participate in because of the content? No, it shouldn't be that way. But since I don't have the time, nor the responsibility to protect the integrity of certain boards, sometimes walking away is the only option.

Im not sure where these "rules" are either, but anytime someone says something that someone doesn't like, or finds offencive, I've noticed that people cry "Its Against Phil's Rules". Im just wondering why continuous comments about Troi's cleaveage and such is never looked at on here as being against these rules. I find it to be offencive and to me has no place in a "family friendly site".

And as far as Phil going on and on, yea its true hes only written a few books and doesn't post here often. The point that I was trying to make was that although he has made comments about scantly clad females, as you pointed out, he is mature enough not to go on and on about it forever, like some honry little teeager that is seeing alittle bit of skin for the first time in his life!
When someone keeps doing stuff like this, I just want to shout: Hey kid: Go buy a Playboy! lol

But hey, thank you for your comments Mr. Polls Voice.

I do not go "on and on" about Troi's cleavage.
There are only 4 episodes (maybe 5) where I even mention it.

Nor am I a "horny teenager". I'm 45.

And if I did make a board about "Troi's cleavage", I'd get another wave of attacks from people like you.

Which is why I haven't made one or will ever make one.

Granted my remarks about Troi's cleavage are not nits...they're observations....which are perfectly legal on this site.

well as I said, I'm not in charge of this site, if there's a board exists that I object to too much, I just stop going to that board.

Its true that observations are legal on this board, I've never once said they weren't and I chalenge you to find anywhere where I did say that.

All I'm saying is that 100s of posts about Troi's cleavage shouldn't be legal if this were truly a "family friendly" board, which it is not.

And why should I have to stop coming to this board just because we have a horny "45 year old" that lusts after alittle skin being shown?

You said:

---

quote:

Its true that observations are legal on this board, I've never once said they weren't and I chalenge you to find anywhere where I did say that

---

---

quote:

Im just wondering why continuous comments about Troi's cleaveage and such is never looked at on here as being against these rules.

---

I said "continuous comments" about Troi's cleaveage, I said nothing about observations! Maybe you need to re-read what you copy and pasted from my posts!

OK, Crusher, you've stated your case. I have not removed John's posts because he does not cross over into descriptions of doing something with said cleavage. Taking notice of it, I don't find offensive. John's Troi fixation has always had a light hearted quality to it and I don't find it bothersome.
If you feel it necessary, e-mail Phil about the matter.

The continual sexual comments about Troi's cleavage from some horny little teenager isn't bothersome to you? I don't see it as light hearted at all! He does much more than "take notice of it"! What a joke!

Your opinion of whether or not the remarks are light hearted does not change mine. Your characterizing of John's remarks as filth does not make them so.
I have told you, if you feel it necessary, e-mail Phil about it. Continuing to complain about it here will not change anything. If I thought John's comments were over the line of what's acceptable here, I'd have removed them long ago.

If he can keep going on and on about Troi's cleavage, than i can keep complaining about it.

You're argument is akin to someone complaining that their afternoon picnic in the park was ruined because of rain even though the weather report said it'd be clear skies.

And if you complain on every board where Lang mentions Troi or cleavage, you're actually going to bring those boards into the "last Day" link and you'll have even more people reading it than would otherwise find it.

When there are dozens of posts in a discussion form on one board, people tend to get curious about it, even those who would normally not even read the TNG boards.

I don't see how my argument compairs to an afternoon picnic in the park.

This is supost to be a family friendly board, not a place for drooling over 5 seconds of Troi's cleaveage.

I realize that John A Lang has been allowed to do this for A LONG time now, I was just curious as to why, and was wondering why we still had to put up with it after years of drooling. Butch explaned this, but his explaniation still doesn't make it since, seeing how other converations of a far less sexual nature have been stopped, and others who have not followed the "rules" have been banned from this site.

This website was started by Phil, and Phil has always shown himself to be a church going person, who wants his website to be good natured and fan friendly. I don't see care how John A Langs sexual comments about Troi could be seen as good natured to Butch, and I feel that if Phil took a day to day interstest in this website, then John A Langs sexual comments wouldn't be allowed all over the Next Generation boards.

I don't see how my argument compairs to an afternoon picnic in the park

Your frustration that Nitcentral/Discus isn't following the "No sleaze" idea even though Nitcentral claims to prohibit it is similar to being frustrated with the fact that it's raining even though the weather forcast said it'd be clear skies. Darmok and Mr. Crusher. at TNG. Please note that I'm not saying you shouldn't be frustrated, just that removing any conversations that may deal with what you or someone else considers against the spirit of the boards is like filing a lawsuit against the weatherman because you made plans for a picnic in the park because the weatherman said it'd be clear, only it rained and ruined your picnic.

This website was started by Phil, and Phil has always shown himself to be a church going person, who wants his website to be good natured and fan friendly. I don't see care how John A Langs sexual comments about Troi could be seen as good natured to Butch, and I feel that if Phil took a day to day interstest in this website, then John A Langs sexual comments wouldn't be allowed all over the Next Generation boards.

While it's true that some of the initial topics of discussion from those who have been banned have been less offensive, the reason for they were banned was because the person was picking a fight.

For example, I could post that "TNG was the worst star trek series ever and that anyone who disagrees with me has sub-standard intelligence."

That post in itself won't get me banned, but if I were to post that, or variations of it, over and over and over again on several different boards. The reason for my post ceases to be an expression that TNG is the best, but that those who disagree with me are morons.

Suffice to say, I'd say most people are probably indifferent to JAL's Sirtis Obsession, and that some of those who aren't indifferent to it probably don't consider it objectionable compared to how you might.

This website was started by Phil, and Phil has always shown himself to be a church going person, who wants his website to be good natured and fan friendly. I don't see care how John A Langs sexual comments about Troi could be seen as good natured to Butch, and I feel that if Phil took a day to day interstest in this website, then John A Langs sexual comments wouldn't be allowed all over the Next Generation boards.

If Phil were a regular, I'm sure there are plenty of things that he'd consider something he'd not want on his site; ranging from individual posts to actual boards.

------

Finally, you've made your points that:

1. Nitcentral doesn't follow the guidelines it claims to have.

2. That the criteria for who and what people have been banned for isn't consistent.

3. That Phil probably wouldn't like/allow some of the things that are posted.


Perhaps it's time that this discussion be concluded since there really isn't anything new that hasn't been brought up... well, at least I'm done...

Mr. Crusher, enjoy The Big Goodbye (TNG)

No, he's got Sirtism and Bogus heroesm on the brain!, like he wrote, Many Trek actors also was on HH., I like Dr. Crusher on the other hand...and I'm 48, me no teenager either.

my 22 cents worth here., for whats its worth.

All right. I've e-mailed Phil and asked him to look into this.
I ask that everyone refrain from any further discussion until I hear from Phil.

Greetings All!

I have given the comments above a quick read and I have a few thoughts. First, I have been extremely busy and I have been away for far too long but I don't recall that there is anything in the rules of conduct that dictate a "family-friendly" environment.

The problem with using the term "family-friendly" is that it is highly subjective. And it leads to discussions like the one above because what is friendly to one family is not friendly to another.

Instead the rules of conduct attempt to set forth an attitude of light-heartedness and good cheer. Frankly, I don't think John's comments fall outside of those boundaries. As Butch said above, if John started describing what he wanted to do with said cleavage...then I would recommend John tone it down because he would be drifting into "sleaze".

On the other hand, Wesley, your posts sound like you're shouting. I apologize that you feel the discussions here violate what you wish your children to read. (Frankly, I don't know that I would let children loose anywhere on the Internet.) You have every right to discontinue your association with this board if it doesn't meet your standards. And I would expect you to do so.

What I do not expect is for you to continue to make inflammatory remarks toward John just because he observes that Troi has nice cleavage--which happens to be a truthful observation. So, you're welcome to continue posting your nits and observations but please allow John to express his opinions as well.

My observaton is that nitcentral is nothing but a big joke, and that Phil is the biggest joke in this place!

If a place doesn't make all of its members follow its rules, then its no place that I want to be.

I'll bet 100 dollars that John A. Lang HATES this episode! Since theres no Troi anywhere in site, theres no Troi cleaveage anywhere in site either!! ROTFLMAO

You know, while I agree that excessive talk about cleavage in the TNG boards might cheapen a family friendly atmosphere; to start up a discusson about cleavage by mentioning it (or making people aware of it or the lack there of) in a board not already filled with the vocab is counter productive to any goals you may have about keeping boards free of cleavage.

I have no such goals because after visiting this board on and off for the last few years, I know that nothing that I could say or do is going to stop it.

My only goal in bringing it up in another board was to find out why it was being alowed to happen, when others have gotten banned from this website for posting content just as bad or worse.

No, not just as bad. The people that were banned were definitely worse.

In what way? Sure their actions lead to them being banned, but how is it any differant than haveing some ***** 45 year old always going on about Troi's cleavage.

I was a teenager when these episodes were new, and I admit that I too got ***** over her cleavage and such. But then I GREW UP, got over it, got married and now I have my wife's cleavage to look at. Maybe its time for some people in here to do the same.

Edited by the moderator for langauge.

In what way? They were sexually explicit, homophobic, racist, bigoted, and in one case, endlessly argumentative. That's how they were worse.
As I said elsewhere, your welcome to e-mail Phil and state your case.

But then I GREW UP, got over it, got married and now I have my wife's cleavage to look at. Maybe its time for some people in here to do the same."

I really don't think you want JAL or anyone else looking at your wife's...

Im not going to email Phil, what good will that do?

That's how we handle disagreements with Moderator decisions here. Continuing to try and argue the matter here will not change anything. I have said that I do not find JAL's posts offensive and they will stay up unless Phil requires me to remove them.

All right. I've e-mailed Phil and asked him to look into this.
I ask that everyone refrain from any further discussion until I hear from Phil.

[copied from The Big Goodbye]

Greetings All!

I have given the comments above a quick read and I have a few thoughts. First, I have been extremely busy and I have been away for far too long but I don't recall that there is anything in the rules of conduct that dictate a "family-friendly" environment.

The problem with using the term "family-friendly" is that it is highly subjective. And it leads to discussions like the one above because what is friendly to one family is not friendly to another.

Instead the rules of conduct attempt to set forth an attitude of light-heartedness and good cheer. Frankly, I don't think John's comments fall outside of those boundaries. As Butch said above, if John started describing what he wanted to do with said cleavage...then I would recommend John tone it down because he would be drifting into "sleaze".

On the other hand, Wesley, your posts sound like you're shouting. I apologize that you feel the discussions here violate what you wish your children to read. (Frankly, I don't know that I would let children loose anywhere on the Internet.) You have every right to discontinue your association with this board if it doesn't meet your standards. And I would expect you to do so.

What I do not expect is for you to continue to make inflammatory remarks toward John just because he observes that Troi has nice cleavage--which happens to be a truthful observation. So, you're welcome to continue posting your nits and observations but please allow John to express his opinions as well.

[copied from The Big Goodbye]

My observaton is that nitcentral is nothing but a big joke, and that Phil is the biggest joke in this place!

If a place doesn't make all of its members follow its rules, then its no place that I want to be.

Whoa! Did you see all the cleavage in this episode? Not just Troi's but from all the women? hubba hubba hubba! One might even giggle and say "Yummy"!

okay Frank Grimes... you believe that... but I think the rest of us are just going to change the channel regarding your personal war.

Have fun

war is hell on the home front too

God only knows what a woman goes through

she still needs what a man thats gone can't do

I can't fight this fire alone

stay with me until it's gone

war is hell on the home front too

All right. I've e-mailed Phil and asked him to look into this.
I ask that everyone refrain from any further discussion until I hear from Phil.

[copied from The Big Goodbye]

Greetings All!

I have given the comments above a quick read and I have a few thoughts. First, I have been extremely busy and I have been away for far too long but I don't recall that there is anything in the rules of conduct that dictate a "family-friendly" environment.

The problem with using the term "family-friendly" is that it is highly subjective. And it leads to discussions like the one above because what is friendly to one family is not friendly to another.

Instead the rules of conduct attempt to set forth an attitude of light-heartedness and good cheer. Frankly, I don't think John's comments fall outside of those boundaries. As Butch said above, if John started describing what he wanted to do with said cleavage...then I would recommend John tone it down because he would be drifting into "sleaze".

On the other hand, Wesley, your posts sound like you're shouting. I apologize that you feel the discussions here violate what you wish your children to read. (Frankly, I don't know that I would let children loose anywhere on the Internet.) You have every right to discontinue your association with this board if it doesn't meet your standards. And I would expect you to do so.

What I do not expect is for you to continue to make inflammatory remarks toward John just because he observes that Troi has nice cleavage--which happens to be a truthful observation. So, you're welcome to continue posting your nits and observations but please allow John to express his opinions as well.

[copied from The Big Goodbye]

My observaton is that nitcentral is nothing but a big joke, and that Phil is the biggest joke in this place!

If a place doesn't make all of its members follow its rules, then its no place that I want to be.

Yea but did you see the cleaveage on the woman trying to seduce Riker? YUMMY!