Diseased Sanctioned Suicide - "Kill yourself" but unironically with sodium nitrite. Higher death count than the Farms. Targeted by parents, legislators, and journalists looking to alter Section 230.

[muffin123]

I’m not talking about kiwi farms I’m talking about SS. That’s the whole point of this thread isn’t it. You know I have the issue with SS it was there where my son was advised and encouraged how to kill himself.

Judging by a lot of the comments in this thread they don’t have that same judgement that you have left it in good hands. They have all given their view on how she lets specific members get away with a lot where as others get banned.

Didn’t you also say you didn’t agree with the derogatory comments towards the parents. This still happens and has got worse, and one of the worse offenders is rain and sadness.

I understand that since SS is where your son found out about various methods that you feel strongly about this, but you should also realise that other websites have guides on how to take your own life as well. I’d think that those sites would equally be as upsetting to you since those are the sites that desperate people will go to if SS ever gets taken down. The problem won’t go away.

I’m not the biggest fan of Rain anymore, but I was not a part of the site when Rain took over. Maybe they were a good and strong leader at some point, I have no idea. I did not see any real issues with Rain or these specific individuals until very recently, it was not like this originally if I recall correctly. I cannot judge Afounder for his desicion, as I don’t know what other options he had to choose from at the time in terms of who to hand the site to. He did what he thought was best in the moment it seems.

I’ve heard a lot about the rumours of these messages between Rain, other mods, and parents, but I’ve never seen any of them personally. Rain themself claim that parents harass her and other mods.

I'm on the fence with what is and isn't encouraging suicide, it was a while ago but the one thread I did see on Sanctioned Suicide was where a dude wanted to die due to illness or disability so bad he planned to jump off a building, asked for advice on how to not fuck it up and supposedly posted back saying he fucked it up and ruined his body even more. I think if there is no convincing them to live, I would rather them die than live a life as a vegetable. As to cases where people were on the fence and were talked into suicide and then impulsively did it like I said I think that is horrifying and I think everyone in this thread would love to see your examples of those. Kiwifarms is all about archiving things and the only reason we don't see that here is because the website is closed to the public.

As for the content blocking the blacklists are 99% never blackholing - which is the really bad one none of us here want but rather DNS blocking which is essentially the same technology public schools across the world use for content blocking, which is infamously easy to bypass. What you're advocating for will have consequences much bigger than the scope of Sanctioned Suicide. My point is as Null keeps quoting "If you had to chose your censor, who would it be?" and allowing organisations public or private to make more of those decisions at their sole discretion as time goes on is something I think nobody would like once it starts to overreach to their side of the Internet (which these things always do, we see it all over big tech websites).

Honestly, there’s not a whole lot of instances, where people who are suicidal but on the fence, are told to "just do it". In a lot of the threads about suicide by train, drowning or jumping, people will discourage it or ask the OP to reconsider the method since it can be very painful ones and the risk of becoming a vegetable is high if you fail. People also discourage jumping and trains as it can traumatize the innocent witnesses.

 

[HRT Heisenberg]

Honestly, there’s not a whole lot of instances, where people who are suicidal but on the fence, are told to "just do it". In a lot of the threads about suicide by train, drowning or jumping, people will discourage it or ask the OP to reconsider the method since it’s can be painful ones and the risk of becoming a vegetable is high if you fail. People also discourage jumping and trains as it can traumatize the witnesses.

Yup that's pretty much exactly what my experience was when I checked it out, suicide board was almost clinical in their replies, recovery board was pretty benign when I checked it out all things considered. The main reason why I'm always citing if instances exist or not is because I think it's safe to say there's a lot of unwell people with the chance of some being unhinged on the site. So when I see people come out condemning the site I want to give them that benefit of the doubt, especially when they have lost a loved one. However that doesn't change that ideally we should see the evidence of these cases on Kiwifarms and let the kiwis do their thing of archiving and discussing who may have been at fault.

Tantacrul posted a false narrative and the people who came on here to speak out against the site haven't given evidence yet (but please correct me if I am wrong). So I can't really form an opinion either way yet. I really want to reserve judgement on the site until I can see it for myself and I'm sure there's a lot of other kiwis ready to start feeding the thread when the floodgates open if this stuff does exist.

 

[muffin123]

If you look back at what I’ve said you will see that yes there should be somewhere for people to talk freely about how they are feeling, but it is not necessary to discuss methods of suicide.
I’m well aware there are still members from those countries on there, because the site directs you on how to be able to access it, but it will not come up to others who are searching. I know you can sign up as a new member and there’s the loophole on how to sign up if you are trying to sign up from a banned country.

It will still show up in search results if you use a VPN. Something that an increasing amount of people are using these days, and that number will continue to increase substantially if you start blocking a lot of sites in the UK. I personally use a VPN most of the time when I browse the web anyway.

 

[iffywas]

SS has an onion doorway anyway now, so it'll be a lot harder to take that down even if the crusade gets it taken down from the clearnet in certain countries.

With the mental health crisis getting worse, and lack of funding and resources, is there any wonder people are struggling to survive? Getting revenge on a website because your family member accessed it may give you some sort of personal medal but ultimately it raises more issues, not least restriction of free speech.

 

[frap]

If you look back at what I’ve said you will see that yes there should be somewhere for people to talk freely about how they are feeling, but it is not necessary to discuss methods of suicide.

You are fucking delusional if you think this won't result in unintended consequences in other areas. The Online Safety Bill is just another excuse for nanny state politics. Sorry your kid died but your grief doesn't trump the rights of others.

The UK is already a speech-controlled dystopia, with rape victims being ordered to refer to the men who raped them as 'she' if he decides he wants to live out his fetish publicly now and our politicians coming out with batshit about how it's not right to say only women have a cervix. Someone a decade ago reading my previous sentence would think what I've written is batshit and could never happen. Yet here we are anyway, because the online *be kind* left wouldn't entertain even considering what the theoretical endpoint might be of indulging narcissists playing dress-up.

 

[Sjm411]

I'm on the fence with what is and isn't encouraging suicide, it was a while ago but the one thread I did see on Sanctioned Suicide was where a dude wanted to die due to illness or disability so bad he planned to jump off a building, asked for advice on how to not fuck it up and supposedly posted back saying he fucked it up and ruined his body even more. I think if there is no convincing them to live, I would rather them die than live a life as a vegetable. As to cases where people were on the fence and were talked into suicide and then impulsively did it like I said I think that is horrifying and I think everyone in this thread would love to see your examples of those. Kiwifarms is all about archiving things and the only reason we don't see that here is because the website is closed to the public.

As for the content blocking the blacklists are 99% never blackholing - which is the really bad one none of us here want but rather DNS blocking which is essentially the same technology public schools across the world use for content blocking, which is infamously easy to bypass. What you're advocating for will have consequences much bigger than the scope of Sanctioned Suicide. My point is as Null keeps quoting "If you had to chose your censor, who would it be?" and allowing organisations public or private to make more of those decisions at their sole discretion as time goes on is something I think nobody would like once it starts to overreach to their side of the Internet (which these things always do, we see it all over big tech websites).

 

[Prince Vegeta]

Didn’t mean to post the same one three times.

No problem. The site hiccups now and then as a result of real life mitigation attempts to prevent deranged troons and their tier 1 subs taking it down. We're used to it. But avoid actively double posting. If you want to say more after hitting post, you can hit the edit button on your post to add more text.

Edit: like so!
Edit 2: you can even add or remove pictures

 

[afounder]

View attachment 4394708View attachment 4394716View attachment 4394720View attachment 4394728View attachment 4394736

I don't really see encouragement or anything really backing what you're saying here.

The most I can see from these screenshots is that someone believed that the site wasn't pro-choice, but even then, they admitted that they were proselytizing, which is expressly against the rules. The other screenshots aren't really providing much proof to back up your claims of encouragement.

 

[Sjm411]

No problem. The site hiccups now and then as a result of real life mitigation attempts to prevent deranged troons and their tier 1 subs taking it down. We're used to it. But avoid actively double posting. If you want to say more after hitting post, you can hit the edit button on your post to add more text.

Edit: like so!
Edit 2: you can even add or remove picturesView attachment 4394928

Thanks I’ve never posted on something like this before so still learning.

 

[frap]

Thanks I’ve never posted on something like this before so still learning.

It's alarming that someone who doesn't understand how to use the basic functions of some fairly standard forum software thinks they should have any input on regulating the Internet for the rest of us.

 

[HRT Heisenberg]

-snip-

Thanks for posting what you got, a lot of people have come on to talk bad about the site then just left so I think this is really good.
Out of all of these I think the first two and the last are the most interesting because for the others we already know that they talk about suicide methods on the site.

The first one's a bit hard to read on its own but isn't the person being quoted in the post basically chastising people for saying "think this through?" then someone else is basically saying "kill yourself, and don't break the rules". I don't think he's actually telling the poster to kill themselves literally, there was a thread I was in here where one user was breaking site rules and Null replied kill yourself. Honestly that happens all the time on the "edgier" parts of the Internet.

Second I'm not sure the context; it could be a moderator looking for posts that encourage suicide to delete them, a user looking for an excuse to kill themselves or something else entirely - hard to tell from that one post.

The last one with the user saying their post about getting treatment first before suiciding getting deleted does sound a bit worrying, and if that user's judgement is right then I think that's a really shitty thing. I might still be missing something, I understand if you might not have a photo because the user may not have shared what the "warning" was, but that would help out with understanding the context in full (was it posted in the wrong board? or is it that can you not mention treatment on the site at all? - It's hard to know what's going on). I think this one could be either really worrying or just a violation of their posting guidelines of "post it in the right place".

A lot of speculation from me because it is hard to gather the full context from one post out of a thread, when the site goes back public I'd be interested in tracking down the posts to see the whole thread.

 

[Sjm411]

Think back to our phone call, you said you had eyes and ears everywhere, if you had eyes and ears everywhere, why was it that when a post was read out to you, you agreed that yes that was indeed encouraging suicide.

It's alarming that someone who doesn't understand how to use the basic functions of some fairly standard forum software thinks they should have any input on regulating the Internet for the rest of us.

Lol I know

 

[afounder]

Thanks for posting what you got, a lot of people have come on to talk bad about the site then just left so I think this is really good.
Out of all of these I think the first two and the last are the most interesting because for the others we already know that they talk about suicide methods on the site.

The first one's a bit hard to read on its own but isn't the person being quoted in the post basically chastising people for saying "think this through?" then someone else is basically saying "kill yourself, and don't break the rules". I don't think he's actually telling the poster to kill themselves literally, there was a thread I was in here where one user was breaking site rules and Null replied kill yourself. Honestly that happens all the time on the "edgier" parts of the Internet.

Second I'm not sure the context; it could be a moderator looking for posts that encourage suicide to delete them, a user looking for an excuse to kill themselves or something else entirely - hard to tell from that one post.

The last one with the user saying their post about getting treatment first before suiciding getting deleted does sound a bit worrying, and if that user's judgement is right then I think that's a really shitty thing. I might still be missing something, I understand if you might not have a photo because the user may not have shared what the "warning" was, but that would help out with understanding the context in full (was it posted in the wrong board? or is it that can you not mention treatment on the site at all? - It's hard to know what's going on). I think this one could be either really worrying or just a violation of their posting guidelines of "post it in the right place".

A lot of speculation from me because it is hard to gather the full context from one post out of a thread, when the site goes back public I'd be interested in tracking down the posts to see the whole thread.

I got someone to retrieve the post in question (a mod) in regards to the last one, the first one just seems like frustration at something someone was saying:

 

[Sjm411]

Thanks for posting what you got, a lot of people have come on to talk bad about the site then just left so I think this is really good.
Out of all of these I think the first two and the last are the most interesting because for the others we already know that they talk about suicide methods on the site.

The first one's a bit hard to read on its own but isn't the person being quoted in the post basically chastising people for saying "think this through?" then someone else is basically saying "kill yourself, and don't break the rules". I don't think he's actually telling the poster to kill themselves literally, there was a thread I was in here where one user was breaking site rules and Null replied kill yourself. Honestly that happens all the time on the "edgier" parts of the Internet.

Second I'm not sure the context; it could be a moderator looking for posts that encourage suicide to delete them, a user looking for an excuse to kill themselves or something else entirely - hard to tell from that one post.

The last one with the user saying their post about getting treatment first before suiciding getting deleted does sound a bit worrying, and if that user's judgement is right then I think that's a really shitty thing. I might still be missing something, I understand if you might not have a photo because the user may not have shared what the "warning" was, but that would help out with understanding the context in full (was it posted in the wrong board? or is it that can you not mention treatment on the site at all? - It's hard to know what's going on). I think this one could be either really worrying or just a violation of their posting guidelines of "post it in the right place".

A lot of speculation from me because it is hard to gather the full context from one post out of a thread, when the site goes back public I'd be interested in tracking down the posts to see the whole thread.

Thank you for your reply. I do have a lot of screenshots. I didn’t want to overload.

The last one wasn’t posted in the wrong place, there is a lot of talk of how to avoid medical intervention, what to say the health professionals, how to get out of psych ward.

Just wanted to add these last two.

 

[muffin123]

Thanks for posting what you got, a lot of people have come on to talk bad about the site then just left so I think this is really good.
Out of all of these I think the first two and the last are the most interesting because for the others we already know that they talk about suicide methods on the site.

The first one's a bit hard to read on its own but isn't the person being quoted in the post basically chastising people for saying "think this through?" then someone else is basically saying "kill yourself, and don't break the rules". I don't think he's actually telling the poster to kill themselves literally, there was a thread I was in here where one user was breaking site rules and Null replied kill yourself. Honestly that happens all the time on the "edgier" parts of the Internet.

Second I'm not sure the context; it could be a moderator looking for posts that encourage suicide to delete them, a user looking for an excuse to kill themselves or something else entirely - hard to tell from that one post.

The last one with the user saying their post about getting treatment first before suiciding getting deleted does sound a bit worrying, and if that user's judgement is right then I think that's a really shitty thing. I might still be missing something, I understand if you might not have a photo because the user may not have shared what the "warning" was, but that would help out with understanding the context in full (was it posted in the wrong board? or is it that can you not mention treatment on the site at all? - It's hard to know what's going on). I think this one could be either really worrying or just a violation of their posting guidelines of "post it in the right place".

A lot of speculation from me because it is hard to gather the full context from one post out of a thread, when the site goes back public I'd be interested in tracking down the posts to see the whole thread.

The last picture regarding Alexa, she did not get banned from the site. I found several other threads that she made about wanting to recover, that are still up, and where people generally were supportive and happy for her. Her last thread was about how she’s still alive and included a small update on why she’d been gone.

Example 1: https://sanctioned-suicide.net/threads/i-want-to-be-taken-seriously.17406/

Example 2: https://sanctioned-suicide.net/threads/dont-have-a-real-reason-any.11048/

 

[Path Wanderer]

If I could clap my hands and make S.S (nice shortening) disappear, I would, along with the still alive mods giving tools of death to kids. The OP does make a fair point about the slippery slope with pseudo legal sites. Still MATI

 

[afounder]

giving tools of death to kids

I think hyperbolic language like this is the problem, though.

Even through an extremely biased lens, I don't think this describes the site in the slightest imo.

 

[muffin123]

If I could clap my hands and make S.S (nice shortening) disappear, I would, along with the still alive mods giving tools of death to kids. The OP does make a fair point about the slippery slope with pseudo legal sites. Still MATI

Most people on the site that I’ve ever talked to, are like 40 or 50 years old. A 70 year old member just sent me a private message an hour ago. The youngest person I’ve talked to is FC, who claims to be 22.

 

[iffywas]

Most people on the site that I’ve ever talked to, is like 40 or 50 years old. A 70 year old member just sent me a private message an hour ago. The youngest person I’ve talked to is FC, who claims to be 22.

22 years old with clearly no life experience whatsoever and she's out there telling people twice and three times her age that they're "deluded" because they acknowledge life can at least sometimes have happy moments.

 

[Spud]

That is giving somebody the information on how to hang, that is assisting somebody with their death. If I did that in person to someone then it is illegal, so yes it should be illegal online too.

I hate that I have to share a country with people like you. Perhaps you should look into your behaviour it'll explain why life has happened the way it has