website source

commit 00c00554231bcc73167bdcff288ab7a6c43ff296
parent a929095630889a601e869a13e862d2e860d2988d
Author: opal hart <>
Date:   Sat, 22 Feb 2020 07:04:20 +0000

clean up files/ dir

remove original UNCRC.eml message and replace with a notice

Mout/files/UNCRC.eml | 192++-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mout/files/UNCRC.txt | 5-----
Dout/files/backfromgab.txt | 142-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 335 deletions(-)

diff --git a/out/files/UNCRC.eml b/out/files/UNCRC.eml @@ -1,188 +1,4 @@ -AF: -NF:0 -PS:10 -SRH:1 -SFN: -DSR: -MID: -CFG: -PT:0 -RQ: -NSV: -SSH: -R:<> -MAID:1 -X-Claws-Privacy-System:pgpmime -X-Claws-Sign:1 -SCF:#imap/ -X-Claws-Auto-Wrapping:1 -X-Claws-Auto-Indent:1 -X-Claws-End-Special-Headers: 1 -Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 03:57:27 +0000 -From: opal hart <> -To: -Subject: Concerning UN CRC draft (child trafficking and fictional - pornography) -Message-ID: <20190226035727.664ef4ec@clamav.local> -Organization: Volatile -X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-alpine-linux-musl) -MIME-Version: 1.0 -Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; - boundary="Sig_/84UlIYH6Rb8h_NhZKzMl6qq"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" - ---Sig_/84UlIYH6Rb8h_NhZKzMl6qq -Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 -Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable - -[This document is in plain-text format. I do not have access to a word -processor compatible with Microsoft Word document formats. I hope my -input will still be considered. If I must, I can find someone to -convert and redistribute this into a doc, docx, odt, pdf, or any other -format suitable for the convention's consumption.] - - -My comment focuses on paragraph 63 in the "DRAFT Guidelines on the -implementation of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights -of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child -pornography", quoted below: - -> The Committee is of the view that =E2=80=9Csimulated explicit sexual -> activities=E2=80=9D should be interpreted as including any material, onli= -ne -> or offline, that depicts or otherwise represents any person appearing -> to be a child engaged in real or simulated sexually explicit conduct -> and realistic and/or virtual depictions of a child engaged in -> sexually explicit conduct. Such depictions contribute to normalising -> the sexualisation of children and fuels the demand of child sexual -> abuse material. - -While I appreciate the efforts to combat abusive behaviour on a global -scale, I am sceptical of some of the approaches that would be taken, as -described in this draft. I will bullet point my concerns below, as a -summary, and go into detail shortly thereafter. - -My concerns: - 1. I am troubled by the implications of treating "simulated explicit - sexual activities" equally to real acts of sexual abuse, - molestation, rape, manufacture of pornography involving - unconsenting human parties, and the like. - 2. Further, I would like to see this draft revised in order to promise - action against sexual abuse against parties of any age, not just - children. - - -To expand on my first concern, I realise there is a fear of negative -effect concerning society's exposure to simulated sexual content -involving fictional minors. I believe this fear is best addressed by -analogy: there are numerous fictional works addressing themes that are -unpleasant to many -- themes such as sex, violence, and any other -manner of activity that is seen as taboo if acted upon in a -nonfictional setting. While these themes are largely distasteful, they -serve purpose by being published in fictional works: - - Audiences can derive educational benefit from these works, as to - learn from history and "not repeat the past". Education is powerful - only when the student is exposed to all the sides of an issue, - including being exposed to the negative feelings associated with an - issue so one may understand just why an action is considered taboo. - - Audiences may channel their negative thoughts and emotions through - fictional works so as not to act on them in real life. I personally - find value in video games such as Grand Theft Auto that allow me to - explore the alluring aspects of a "thug life" without endangering - anyone in the real world. - - And for one counterpoint, of course audiences may derive outright - pleasure and wish to emulate the acts they see in fictional works. - However, this can be combated largely with education and medical - (psychological) assistance. These cases are generally isolated and - triggered by preexisting circumstances (e.g. a person who is - predisposed to be a criminal, loosely speaking). - -These three major purposes arise equally from any artistic or -pornographic work involving fictional minors. As I have said publicly -on my blog in 2018 [1], I am against rape and abuse toward any human or -other sentient being, but even then am I reluctant to believe that -fictional works have any overall negative effect on society. Works such -as Lolita are infamous for addressing themes of sexuality toward -minors, but such works are nonetheless held in deep regard for their -artistic value, and dare I say they are also respected for being brave -enough to cover subjects seen by many as "touchy". By proposing any -action against simulated explicit content, the world would be robbed of -these literary and artistic masterpieces, we would have a narrower view -of the world, a lesser understanding of taboos, and a greater -difficulty learning more about the human psyche and the motivations -people have for engaging in distasteful behaviour. - -As for simulated child pornography (including -- and perhaps whereupon -the largest debate lies on the Internet about this draft -- lolicon and -shotacon), many of these pornographic works still hold artistic value. -Many people use this type of pornography as an outlet of sexual -frustration rather than a gateway to committing crimes against -real-life people. I believe if anyone wants to place the blame on -fictional child pornography for causing sexual crimes, that there -should be a study investigating whether fictional works are the cause -or the effect, because I am under the impression that few people -(including myself) actually know the answer to this. To me it seems -like a knee-jerk reaction to believe that fictional works are the -cause, and it is a fair reaction because this is such a heavy subject -to debate, but I believe it is one that must be debated fairly. - - -As for my second concern, I have also mentioned in my blog post (albeit -in casual and blunt terms; if I were to rewrite it today I would reword -and restructure some of what I said, but I believe the general point -carries) [1] that there should be no difference in severity of sexual -abuse cases, based on the age of the victim alone. Sexual abuse is a -scarring event no matter the victim's age. Furthermore, I do not -believe this fits well within the scope of the United Nations to -decide; individual nations have long had varying ages of consent. By no -means do people unanimously agree what objectively defines a child and -when that child becomes an adult. To me, the word "child" is only -brought into play so that it may convince more people to be on board -with this drafted legislation. It seems irrelevant to the core goal of -this draft, which -- to my interpretation -- is to address sexual abuse -and trafficking. - - -I hope I have brought up some useful considerations and opinions in -response to this draft, and that the Convention on the Rights of the -Child may take these points into consideration before arriving to a -conclusion. I hope to see this draft revised into something beneficial -for all and controversial to none, something that may be passed into -legislation easily if not unanimously. I am willing to continue -participating toward this issue in any manner I can, whether this -involves direct input or additional resources I can follow so that I -know the future status of this draft. - - -All parties involved have permission to redistribute my message, -verbatim, either with or without attribution. See the terms of the CC0 -licence [2] for full details. I have published a copy of this message -on my website [3] and would be happy to release any replies to this -message with the writer's permission. - -[1]<> -[2]<> -[3]<> - - -Thanks for your consideration, -opal hart --- -wowaname <> -Please use detailed subject lines and reply below quoted text -whenever possible. - ---Sig_/84UlIYH6Rb8h_NhZKzMl6qq -Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature - ------BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- - -iHUEARYIAB0WIQTKtVOWZDRJsK7bsTs29tgqTNgkBwUCXHS5JwAKCRA29tgqTNgk -B4sOAQC5gpD0sp/Sm4roTcPPHPcpNVekn0C3kA9QTuSsYu4c3AEA6Fv4SNwJ0V88 -IAVnKW6Roq2SX8aEYGR80R4ZI1Hc0g8= -=D8c0 ------END PGP SIGNATURE----- - ---Sig_/84UlIYH6Rb8h_NhZKzMl6qq-- +Apologies for taking down this file; the E-mail text can still be found +at <>. My webserver's file directory is +not where I wish to store E-mail bodies; I'll find another way to +publish mail discussions of public value. diff --git a/out/files/UNCRC.txt b/out/files/UNCRC.txt @@ -1,8 +1,3 @@ -Original, PGP-signed E-mail message can be found at -<>. This plaintext version below is for -convenience only. - - [This document is in plain-text format. I do not have access to a word processor compatible with Microsoft Word document formats. I hope my input will still be considered. If I must, I can find someone to diff --git a/out/files/backfromgab.txt b/out/files/backfromgab.txt @@ -1,142 +0,0 @@ -Hi, - -I am a user on the fediverse and a Pleroma instance administrator since -early 2018. I run, and due to the introduction of another -large commercial entity into the fediverse, naturally I have some -questions and concerns about this. I believe other users and instance -administrators share similar concerns, so with your permission I would -like to share with them the responses I receive here. Note that while -this is not the first large, commercial instance to call the fediverse -its home (Pawoo was one of the first, if not the first), it still has -new implications. I believe Pixiv's Pawoo was implemented atop Mastodon -from the very beginning, not requiring an entire community to migrate. - -I have seen the introduction to the idea from @gab [1] and browsed some -of the comments (including the official ones written from Torba), so I -have a general idea of what Gab is doing to make this happen. And, -although I am not a Gab user myself, I appreciate every move to -decentralisation, so I wish the Gab development team and community the -best of luck in its migration. Gab respects the word of the law, and as -a free-speech advocate myself, I can respect this. In fact, I was -initially a Twitter user up until 2016 where I was kicked off not for -saying something, but for retweeting someone else's post about -something, and at the time I did not receive so much as a warning -before I was banned. This ban prompted me first to leave social media -for a while, then I discovered the fediverse and haven't looked back. -Gab struck no interest to me at the time, since I was beginning to -self-host everything and didn't want to depend on any more large -services if I could help it. - -Enough about myself; hopefully this makes it clear that if Gab chooses -to federate with other instances (which to my understanding it will -attempt to do so), then I will not forbid users from my instance from -interacting with Gab users, and vice versa. But please note I am -treating Gab less as a "website" and more as yet another "instance", a -cog in the fediverse machine. - - -First real concern I have is moderation. I have several questions about -this I want to address: - -1. How is Gab going to handle instances whose rules do not agree with -Gab's own terms? On my instance's rules [2] I state that NSFW content -is allowed as long as it is legal. Coming from an imageboard -background, I am used to unmarked NSFW, so I treat my instance as an -explicit one, a "red board" as one would say on 4chan. This conflicts -with Gab's request to tag all NSFW images. How would Gab administration -deal with this -- would you block the instance in question, mark the -instance as NSFW (Mastodon has this capability), or something else -entirely? - -2. How is Gab going to handle cross-instance reports? Mastodon has a -reporting feature that allows users to flag not only posts on their own -instance, but on remote instances as well. And currently Pleroma (and -potentially GNU social and Misskey, two other popular AP/OStatus -softwares) does not have the most intuitive facility for handling -reports. Currently Pleroma instance admins have to set up SMTP support -in the server, in order to receive reports. And as of now this isn't a -fully-documented process, so many of us just do not respond to reports -delivered by Mastodon. Gab is going to have to consider this and -potentially work with developers of non-Mastodon instance software to -provide a reasonable, streamlined fix. I'm sure the developers would -appreciate Gab's input from a developmental perspective, seeing as Gab -has to deal with moderation at a large scale. If Gab believes it is -safe to ignore abuse coming from other instances, this is an option as -well. IANAL, so I cannot tell you anything except "be careful" that you -do not accidentally link to or re-host anything that could incriminate -the company. - - -Aside from moderation, there is also the concern of mobile apps. As we -all know, app stores such as Google Play and Apple's App Store are very -selective about what they allow, due mainly to potential "bad -publicity" against Google and Apple themselves. I do not agree with -this practice, but I voted with my feet instead of complaining much -and I use a FOSS alternative on Android, F-Droid. Of course not -everyone is going to be savvy enough to do this, but hopefully it's an -option that becomes more realistic as days move on. - -As you've seen already, app developers are already taking stance -against Gab's anticipated move to the fediverse. Correct me if I'm -wrong, but I believe it's no secret that Gab's primary reason for -migrating to Mastodon is to leech off the Mastodon API implementation -in several apps already in markets. As many app developers already have -strong opinions against not only Gab but any large commercial -"centralised" venture, they are quickly choosing to blacklist Gab -domains from being allowed to log in via their apps. They do this -because it is the easiest way out of app-store trouble and because it -aligns with their pro-censorship beliefs in general, as far as I -understand. Obviously this is stupid practice, much as it would be -stupid to blacklist Gab from the Chrome browser app, or something of -the like. - -My point being, what does Gab plan to do if all apps decide to block -Gab in order to remain included in their app stores, or if the apps -that take no action against Gab get suspended from the app stores for -"misconduct"? I see Gab plans to release its own FOSS app (good on -you! we need more FOSS adaptation) but I believe it to be similarly -doomed in app stores, if all other apps follow suit. - -Basically, it would be a shame for Gab's primary purpose of migration -to end up not working out. And I wonder, will Gab proceed to work with -ActivityPub technology if their primary reason for using it is gone? - -On a personal note, I wish to fork the Twidere app in my free time. I -used it back when I was allowed on Twitter, and nowadays I continue to -use it with its new support for Mastodon API, simply because I am -familiar with its interface. While I do not plan to block users from -logging into any instances, I only plan to release on F-Droid. However, -I welcome anyone to re-release my fork on Google Play, so I may -potentially be one of the apps that allows Gab, should the Play Store -have no objection to it. - - -As for features such as groups and editing, does Gab plan to work -upstream in order to provide standard, interoperable solutions to -these? There has been much talk at least in Pleroma dev about -implementing groups in a sane way; GNU social has had groups for a -while but these only work between other GNU social instances. As for -editing, I believe there are ideological debates about the potential -issues that could arise. For example, I could see harm in people -editing old posts, and depending on how much attention those posts -received, things such as favourites/retweets/replies may not be -representative of the edited version of the post. If Gab has some UI -proposal, potentially to show all revisions of a post or something, -then I could see it working; but so far it seems that -delete-and-redraft is the cleanest current solution (although by no -means clean, which is why I abstain from using it when I can). - - -I know this is a lot but I think it will be all my inquiries at -least for now. I hope that I am not asking too much at this early -a stage, but I believe the sooner we get some of these questions -out of the way, the easier the migration will be. Feel free to -share my questions verbatim with anyone you deem fit. Looking forward to -your reply, and to your eventual inclusion in the fediverse. - -[1]<> -[2]<> - -Thanks, --- -wowaname <>