Kino Casino - Read Kiwifarms with abortionist A-a-andy Warski and lardy PPP. A lolcow drama show. 2/28/2019, never forget.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
All becomes gunt said:
I posted the 6 clues for the Dost test and according to this man's description here:

  1. Whether the focal point of the visual depiction is on the child's genitalia or pubic area. :agree:
  2. Whether the setting of the visual depiction is sexually suggestive, i.e., in a place or pose generally associated with sexual activity. :?:
  3. Whether the child is depicted in an unnatural pose, or in inappropriate attire, considering the age of the child.:agree:
  4. Whether the child is fully or partially clothed, or nude.:agree:
  5. Whether the visual depiction suggests sexual coyness or a willingness to engage in sexual activity.:?:
  6. Whether the visual depiction is intended or designed to elicit a sexual response in the viewer.:agree:
Click to expand...
Hi, you are completely off base. You are applying the standard to the page, not the stream.

1) Focal point
- Did Warski zoom in on any inappropriate areas, or show the page as-is? Did he emphasize any specific areas for any reason? I don't think so.

2) Sexually suggestive setting
- The original context matters. We can argue inappropriate or poor taste, but that doesn't mean illegal. This element is missing.

3) Unnatural pose or inappropriate attire for age
- This is very subjective, but if they were wearing clothes and posing as determined by standard retail marketing, this element is missing.

4) Full or partial nudity
- There doesn't appear to be nudity here, but still, courts have ruled that nudity alone isn't illegal.

5) Sexual coyness or willingness displayed
- If all he streamed were children posing as catalog models would, this element is missing.

6) Intended or designed to elicit a sexual response to the viewer
- It doesn't sound like Warski or anyone streaming with him was expressing sexual interest. This weighs against criminal liability.

Dude just call him creepy or stupid, stop accusing him of crimes. You are being a horrible person.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Dumb
  • Autistic
Reactions: crinklefry, All becomes gunt and RandomShirtlessMan
Americunt said:
I'm starting to think you actually are someone's sock, we don't think you're working for the known elders of the protocols of zion, we just think you're fucking stupid.
Click to expand...

If he is a sock then whoever he's meant to defend isn't getting their money's worth. So far what we've gotten from him is:
  1. Images of children in their underwear presented in a sexual manner are fine.
  2. Images of nude children are fine so long as you can only barely see their nipples and pubic areas.
  3. Sexual images of nude children are fine so long as the children in the images were coerced into posting the photos onto the internet themselves.
If I were Warski, I'd be pissed if the person sweeping for me were making these arguments on my behalf.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Cyraxian Horror, RandomShirtlessMan, All becomes gunt and 1 other person
RandomShirtlessMan said:
MEANWHILE, the thread lolcows consistenly harass other lolcows
Click to expand...
How about their half-year long cowtipping operation against Phil, THAT JOSH PARTICIPATED IN. I won't speculate if they told him what their real plans were for Phil when they got him on a stream with him last year, but if it was anyone else that roped him in to something like that he'd be very pissed.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Agree
Reactions: ddddank, dvorak, RandomShirtlessMan and 1 other person
Americunt said:
Again, it was never about whether or not it is legally actionable, it's to highlight why he's a retarded piece of shit who can't be trusted. They would never apply this level of nuance to anybody who they cover, why should it be afforded to them?
Click to expand...
Personally i think the guy up there was wrong and according to Lit Cigarette's testimony these are legally actionable. So because it wasn't the whole stream and only some segments of it it's fine ? What ? Except if i misunderstood @IMayUseSpaces argument.
 
Americunt said:
Again, it was never about whether or not it is legally actionable, it's to highlight why he's a retarded piece of shit who can't be trusted. They would never apply this level of nuance to anybody who they cover, why should it be afforded to them?
Click to expand...
We agree on this. That's why I think they're cocksuckers. I just don't like seeing those types of accusations in general unless they're founded in legal backing because it's the same mindset that floods tiplines with bullshit and ruins innocent people's lives. But I get your point.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: crinklefry and Americunt
IMayUseSpaces said:
We agree on this. That's why I think they're cocksuckers. I just don't like seeing those types of accusations in general unless they're founded in legal backing because it's the same mindset that floods tiplines with bullshit and ruins innocent people's lives. But I get your point.
Click to expand...
Have you considered that lit cigarette posted entirely different timestamps than the screenshot of @MilkSports_2018 ? Did you take these timestamps into account ? Because with the descriptions given at least from that guy wouldn't that constitute legally actionable behavior ?
 
Chef Red Pill said:
Lol this thread's gonna get locked, isn't it?
Click to expand...
we are so getting sacrificed to the corn.
in-remembrance-3-condolences-3.gif
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: Cyraxian Horror, Local Fed, Lobster Cult High Priest and 3 others
IMayUseSpaces said:
1) Focal point
- Did Warski zoom in on any inappropriate areas, or show the page as-is? Did he emphasize any specific areas for any reason? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

When Warski got to the screencap with the mostly-naked girl, there were 3 pictures of her on screen and he circled the naked one with his cursor.

IMayUseSpaces said:
2) Sexually suggestive setting
- The original context matters. We can argue inappropriate or poor taste, but that doesn't mean illegal. This element is missing.
Click to expand...

I'll give you this one.

IMayUseSpaces said:
3) Unnatural pose or inappropriate attire for age
- This is very subjective, but if they were wearing clothes and posing as determined by standard retail marketing, this element is missing.
Click to expand...

In this case, it isn't subjective. The express purpose of the images was to market CSAM images of children, therefore the naked/underwear photos were explicitly sexual.

IMayUseSpaces said:
4) Full or partial nudity
- There doesn't appear to be nudity here, but still, courts have ruled that nudity alone isn't illegal.
Click to expand...

There is enough nudity to where you can see the breasts and pubic areas of several girls, even with some of the images censored.

IMayUseSpaces said:
5) Sexual coyness or willingness displayed
- If all he streamed were children posing as catalog models would, this element is missing.
Click to expand...

See the statement made for point 3.

IMayUseSpaces said:
6) Intended or designed to elicit a sexual response to the viewer
- It doesn't sound like Warski or anyone streaming with him was expressing sexual interest. This weighs against criminal liability.
Click to expand...

When Warski got to the first image of a little girl with her breasts exposed that was censored, Ralph sounded disappointed, because the other ones up to that point weren't censored. Though that's more a knock against Ralph than Warski, the prior images apparently elicited a sexual response in one of the hosts.


Keep in mind that I only watched <10 minutes of the stream. You're welcome to watch the whole thing and report your own findings back to us.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Local Fed, RetardRising88, DogZero and 3 others
Chef Red Pill said:
Lol this thread's gonna get locked, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Doesn't need locked, just needs the last 10 pages moved to the Andy Warski thread lol
I'm here to discuss the show as a whole, be it good, be it shit.
If I want to discuss Andy and PPP and their apparent past crimes I'd go to their threads.

But the reason people are posting here instead of in the individual threads is because of one reason.
There's one big difference between this one and the individual threads for Warksi and PPP which is why people feel the need to be retarded in here.
This thread is more active which means their posts get more attention.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Disagree
Reactions: Chuck's Feed and Seed, Gaius Cumulus, New & Improved Username and 15 others
RandomShirtlessMan said:
My nigga, the WEBSITE OWNER came here to tell you were being fake mass reported for spamming, never showed the receipts and then threatened to ban YOU for daring to disagree on CP details, as he also came here early this year to remove the caps text from the thread header because "ITS NOT TROO". MEANWHILE, the thread lolcows consistenly harass other lolcows with CPS (RTU, Aselieri) and on their own words, "gild the lilly" so retards like @MilkSports_2018 donate their disability checks.

Its not sweeping anymore, this is full blown 9/11 coverup ops.
Click to expand...
in this website, the website owner calls you a csam consumer and a retard and you will keep using it like the lowly whore you are.

Ill be true and say that i never really liked josh, but after he came out and delivered righteousness today I immediately gained respect for him, the jannies here have for the most part been complicit with the all csam mafia, they have banned me before and they changed the title of the thread even, also that weirdo libtard autisticright is an open and proud a csam gang member.

Lowly sektur and guint guards have attempted doxxing me live on stream and have even attempted to do dox me in other ways.
I have been alone here, backed by nobody, battling schizophrenia for 6 months because its fun to me and its the righteous thing to do. .


If there is any conspiracy is how weird it is for a group of newfags to suddenly come out of the woodwork and start beating the dead horse that is this dead drama from six years ago, if you wanna know the truuuth about it, bish.
 
  • Autistic
  • Dumb
  • Lunacy
Reactions: Sprate Header, RandomShirtlessMan, Cancer Man and 2 others
Smack Patrick said:
Doesn't need locked, just needs the last 10 pages moved to the Andy Warski thread lol
I'm here to discuss the show as a whole, be it good, be it shit.
If I want to discuss Andy and PPP and their apparent past crimes I'd go to their threads.

But the reason people are posting here instead of in the individual threads is because of one reason.
There's one big difference between this one and the individual threads for Warksi and PPP which is why people feel the need to be retarded in here.
This thread is more active which means their posts get more attention.
Click to expand...
Isn't Andy Warski one of the 2 hosts of the Kino Casino ?
 
  • Horrifying
  • Informative
Reactions: Cyraxian Horror and Local Fed
Smack Patrick said:
And are you talking about the contents of the show, or are you always just talking about Andy the individual and what a giant CP streamer he was in the past?
Click to expand...
Let me reiterate, every one of the cows discussed here have 1 degree of separation with the show and constitute enough of a clause to be discussed here while this thread not being their thread ( see Phil for example ). Andy while also being one of the 2 hosts of the show which means he has 0 degrees of separation with himself and ergo the show and is a lolcow therefore has even more of a right to be discussed here and not just in his thread. If we were to apply your retarded argument you'd have to delete almost the thread as a whole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomShirtlessMan and Thiccy Smalls
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back