(anonymous) wrote:
> [...]
> while we're at it, is it fair to infer from Andrew's post above that media
> depicting 'a 16-year-old masturbating is not "real" child pornography, and
> is in fact legal..' is the foundation's official position? [...]
^^
I'm not a native speaker, but I'd think that you cannot omit
Andrew's qualification ", though explicit, in New South
Wales, Australia)" without changing his statement complete-
ly. And I have a hard time trying to align this act of omis-
sion with good faith.
Tim
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
