Forum: Author Hangout

You need to rethink and rewrite that scene if you want to post it on SOL. A character describing sexual activity between one or more characters under the age of 14 violates SOL's age restrictions.

What's more, simply posting it on SOL threatens the very site, as federal Canadian prosecutors (?) won't stop to question whether Lazeez was involved in the decision or not. If someone decides to press charges, they'll shut down all three of his sites! Even worse, if you ever want to do something else with the story (say publish on Amazon, lulu or smashwords), no one will allow you to self-publish it since it violates so many various individual countries laws.

It's in all our interests to self-police these stories.

I agree whole heartedly, which is why I pointed out the issue to the OP.

I have no problem bringing a violation of this type to Lazeez's attention.

Its not just SOL's restrictions. Its a question of the laws in many countries. Especially Canada and the US. The site I believe is located in Canada so its laws has to be considered.

The U.S. still have pretty liberal "Freedom of Speech" laws (court readings of the Constitution, at least). However, many of the once-American companies (which are now multi-nationals) are adapting to the shifting laws around the globe, especially not wanting to piss off any of their customers, and are self-censoring themselves.

On the other hand, given the current divide in this country, I'm expecting the Trump White House to launch a new 'trial case' though the DOJ sometime in the future which challenges the U.S.'s long-standing Freedom of the Press. It may or may not happen, but it'll give Trump stuff to Tweet for months and win the evangelical Christians plenty of outrage when voters are pissed because Congress isn't accomplishing much.

On the other hand, given the current divide in this country, I'm expecting the Trump White House to launch a new 'trial case' though the DOJ sometime in the future which challenges the U.S.'s long-standing Freedom of the Press. It may or may not happen, but it'll give Trump stuff to Tweet for months and win the evangelical Christians plenty of outrage when voters are pissed because Congress isn't accomplishing much.

Which simply matches some on the 'left' looking for test cases to exempt 'hate speech' (loosely defined, of course) from First Amendment protection.

Which simply matches some on the 'left' looking for test cases to exempt 'hate speech' (loosely defined, of course) from First Amendment protection.

They can argue with what they think is 'proper' all they want, but the legal standards were established a long time ago, and baring a new interpretation by the many non-lawyer judges currently being nominated by the Trump administration, the arguments aren't likely to get far in the courts.

People are free to say whatever they want, unless it threatens people's safety. Thus citing violence can be limited, as can problematic public protests--though the latter cannot be banned outright.

The problem is that most recent alt-right marches are instigated purely to invoke violence in it's supporters, and the more people protest, the more justified they feel in instigating violence.

The long and short of the discussion: attempts to limit 'free speech' on college campuses is unlikely to succeed for long, while alt-right marches likely will be limited (aside from pressure from the administration to welcome them).

The problem is that most recent alt-right marches are instigated purely to invoke violence in it's supporters, and the more people protest, the more justified they feel in instigating violence.

More recently, especially on college campuses, it's when speech is deemed to invoke violence among it's opponents - but instead of condemning the violence they ban the provocations.

Its not just SOL's restrictions.

That goes without saying, since it is the why behind it being unacceptable to post that type of content to SOL.

I recall asking Lazeez this question soon after I started using the site. He explained that distinction was between statements that sexual activities by a minor and descriptions of activities happening. He went on to explain that sexual activities are not limited to physical contact. They include anything salacious or arousing, including simply watching others involved in sexual activities.

Mike-Kaye wasn't here when we had all these discussions previously, but any descriptions of sex between underaged characters is not allowed. Their direct participation in any way can get the entire site shut down.

What is allowed are simple statements (ex: "Yes, we had sex when I was still only twelve"). When the law first changed, I played around with this, purposely trying to see how far the law could be made to stretch. In doing so, I had a bunch of kids sitting outside the room, teasing the adults who were having sex as a way of making a point about the disparity between old and new standards (in a post-apocalyptic environment), but they never took part in the activities other than teasing the adults about them. That's about as far as you can stretch the limits.

Since the laws are still fairly new, everyone is still very touchy about the situation, and I'm sure there are prosecutors in several different countries just waiting for an 'ideal' test case to catapult the law into an international discussion (encouraging even more countries to jump on board). Self-publishing sites won't go anywhere near them. While they don't monitor each individual submission, if you do submit something to them, expect your account to be permanently blocked as a result (with Amazon keeping any money you may have earned from sales).

This is not a gray area. Instead, it's a clear violation.

Mike, if you want to discuss what you can and can't get away with, this is the place to do it, but I don't think you'll be able to get away with this one without changing how the story currently stands (i.e. get rid of descriptions of the kids having sex, however valid you feel they might be).

Kids are allowed to have sex with each other, but adults are not allowed to jerk-off to it, nor write about it so that other adults can fantasize about it.

Sorry if I sound testy, but we've detailed these same guidelines time and again, and most of us are tired of repeating them. Feel free to ask questions about how you can best make the story safe to publish, but be careful about endangering others in trying to 'test how serious' the law is about violations.

Kids are allowed to have sex with each other, but adults are not allowed to jerk-off to it, nor write about it so that other adults can fantasize about it.

Can it be mentioned in passing as an event in the past "Back when I was 12 I tried to give a kid a blow job, but the whole experience fucked me up for years" and then perhaps continue to talk about the consequences but not the event itself.

BTW one of the cable channels now runs mostly ER in syndication and my wife & daughter are watching all of them. There's an episode where several of the doctors are waiting in a snow storm for some guy to show up and to pass the time one of them starts a game where they each say how old they were when they lost their virginity. Finally Dr. Carter agrees to participate and shares that he was 11, 'doing it' with one of the maids who he thinks was 25. No further details.

Lazeez revewed my prior take on this. I removed it. But he approved the conversion in the car. Please read chapter one.

Good. That's the ideal solution to the problem. Now you know what flies and what won't. Though I don't normally encourage caution, in this case, it's better being safe than sorry.

http://www.mywildvacationdr com/

Make sure to say "Hi" to Bob Menendez!