Just re-iterating the current standing rule on nudity and risque images.
The truly rooted censorship laws in Australia "prohibit" the transmission of content deemed "unsuitable" or "objectionable" to minors (ie people under 18). Who defines "objectionable" and "unsuitable"? Not us.
If we have these type of images, we have to get rid of all the under 18's on this forum by installing an adult verification system (ie, you enter a valid credit number and it's checked).
Basically, I don't want to do that as have several very active under 18's here and their contribution is much more valuable than the perceived benefits of having swaying breasts, penises under kilts, etc no matter how funny or well published on the front pages of English papers. This is why the regime is so rooted - 3 million Uk papers are printed with the images, but we can't have them displayed in Australia without risking the forum.
If you have a problem with this, the current federal communications minister is Helen Coonan. It seems she has less grasp of the Internet than her predecessors Alston and Williams. However, she is the minister responsible, and you need to speak to her, not me.
Expect risque images and avatars to have a short life span and moved with or without notice. (I have given notice to the one avatar I have replaced).
Andrew
vanderaj Administrator a suffusion of yellow
3,130 posts · joined Aug 2002 ·