Wait a minute. This isn't censorship. Censorship is when a government tells you that you can't publish something, and threatens to punish you if you do.
Gandy isn't forcing you to stop taking pictures, or even to stop taking pictures in a public toilet, or even to stop publishing pictures taken in a public toilet. He's just said that HE won't be the publisher of such pictures, as is his privelege as the owner of this forum. If you took those photos to your local newspaper, and the editors declined to publish them, they wouldn't be guilty of censorship, they'd just be declining to publish your pictures, as is their right; they don't even owe you an explanation, of any kind, because a newspaper is a private business.
Gandy has exactly the same right to decline to publish them. We might like to pretend otherwise, but this forum is a private business, and has some legal responsibilities and liabilities. If some teen-ager takes an up-skirt shot or a privacy violating toilet photo, and his total assets amount to a skateboard and a P&S camera with a scratched lens, who do you think will get sued?
Do you really think you have the right to force somebody to publish your stuff? Would you have the right to take photos in a public toilet, print them, and post them, say, in the local McDonalds, without the McDonalds owner having the right to object? Hang them up in the local grade school? Would you even have the right to do that with simple, inoffensive landscapes? Of course not. But you can post anything you want in your business, or on your website. And take the full responsibility for it.
Some people may find some merit in your photos; I don't. Some people might publish them; I wouldn't. That's not censorship, it's called an expression of a personal taste, and perhaps some concern about a violation of somebody else's privacy, and maybe even a concern about legal aspects. I really don't think we need these photos; and if I'd been the moderator, I would have banned them, too.
JC
