Afterthought

 as far as I know he broke the law at least by posting something that was probably child porn, if not by posting regualr porn at a place frequented by people under 18... so I don't think there can be any talk of overreacting...

And as for pornography in art, well, there's Henry Miller and there's BELVA. One was a controversial artist and the other is a law-breaking moron. And even though the boundaries between the two may be often blurred, this was not the case here. 

Belva's posts and reviews (rambling, paranoid, incoherent and offensive -- like his posts) have been deleted, his account cancelled, and his IP banned.

Like Blacksword, I am no prude, but it was Belva's repeated disgusting, hateful antics that prompted me to become a moderator. I will tolerate much here in the name of free speech/art, but I will do everything in my power to permanently remove graphic pornography and attacks upon the Archives and its membership, and the unhealthy individuals who thus seek to udermine/destroy our forum.

Free speech is one thing -- X-rated/grotesque images and accompanying hate-filled attacks on a public music forum is quite another, Alucard.

Lose one Belva, or lose 100 (or more) average, responsible forum members?

The choice was obvious.

All:

As you know, Prog Archives makes valiant attempts to create and maintain an "open" and free atmosphere, one in which the admin group's "benevolent dictator" status rarely gets put into action - and even then uses best efforts not to cross the line into totalitarianism or censorship.

That is why this site has only a handful of basic guidelines.  However, those guidelines were very carefully considered before being put into place.  For this reason, we do expect all members to honor those few guidelines.

Of all the guidelines, however, the one against pornography is probably the most critical.  After all, web sites must also conform to guidelines.  Were the site to be "monitored" at the wrong moment, and the monitor find pornography, the site could be forced to close down.  And we're pretty sure that none of you wants that to happen.  This is why it is absolutely critical that you carefully consider certain images before posting them.

As Peter notes, none of us are prudes (not even Maani the Minister...).  And many images are permitted to remain because they are not "pornographic."  However, when the admin group believes that an image could be considered pornographic by "the powers that be," it is removed, and the member is contacted by PM and warned to refrain from such postings.  If the member does not comply, they are ejected.

We do not want members to "walk around" paranoid.  We take freedom of speech and expression very seriously, and try to err on the side of freedom rather than the side of "caution" wherever we can.  However, "rules is rules."  And since there really are good reasons for those rules, we do expect compliance by our members.

Thanks to all of you for your continued contributions and participation.

Peace.