Debate @Get the rope Macaulay! on whether or not laws against child exploitation will harm Kiwi Farms

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
I’m really proud to know that these were his final words.
IMG_8342.webp
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: AMHOLIO, jenna raiding, Yellow Rose Of Texas and 11 others
Hey Johnny Bravo said:
Turns out all you have to do with shitty users is wait until they spin out and get banned. I've been on the site for a few months and it's already worked four times.
Click to expand...
Yep. With the sheer number of people who think joining this site will protect them from this site, you're gonna see a lot more.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Scarlett Johansson, Markass the Worst and Hey Johnny Bravo
Xavier Ravenblood said:
Can you elaborate?
Click to expand...
Cherie Ann Hapney \ Cynthia Hanson is a retarded, mildly schizophrenic (medically retarded and schizophrenic, not meme retarded and schizophrenic) owner of Wogglebug Love Productions, a movie studio focused on making movies (and sometimes some accompanying promotional merchandise) about character named Wogglebug and his adventures in the world of Genoma.
Wogglebug is an obscure side character in the Oz series of books. Genoma is a world Cherie created for Wogglebug, because she believes he was mistreated by other characters in the original books (in reality Wogglebug is a pompous asshole, snake oil salesman and severe Dunning-Kruger effect sufferer, and other characters treat him accordingly).
Cherie's version of the Wogglebug is is supposed to be really smart and capable but because Cherie is retarded the final effect is a whiny, pompous, emotionally unstable and effeminate character wearing pretentious purple suit and top hat. This lead to regulars in her thread comparing him to stereotypical portrayal of a gay man. Example (my humble contribution):
Illuminati Order Official

Artcow Post in thread 'WogglebugLoveProductions / Cynthia Hanson / Cherie Anne Hapney'

Ladies and Gentlemen, someone very special and dear to our hearts has a Pride Month message for us all:

  • Winner
  • Like
  • Informative

Cherie, of course, doesn't appreciate this. So, when thread regulars used TOR to call Wogglebug gay, as we do, Cherie - literal schizo retard - figured out how to use TOR to correct the record, as she does:
 
  • Informative
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Disagree
Reactions: Adr1anD, Not Xavier Ravenblood, Hey Johnny Bravo and 1 other person
>the goooooverment will this to slippery slope into sending to the death camps anyone who isn't a commie troon

Pedoniggers still unironically use that argument? Fucking hell, and the Convinced No One Award goes to...

I'm all seriousness now, it's alarming how many sick fucks we have stalking the farms
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Markass the Worst and Maori Kiwifruit Growers
NotAFanOfTheJews said:
Outside of making it so every UK user like 10% of the site, has to play internet hide and seek. The whole thing feels so backwards, like we're back in the days of trying to download music from sketchy websites.

Guess UK users just don't matter enough to care about. Rather dreadful way to treat such a huge part of the userbase, isn't it?
Click to expand...
The only UK user of value here is @Otterly, the rest of you crook toothed poofs can disappear this instant and nobody would notice or care.
 
  • Agree
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: Ibanez RG 350EX, deadtofaunus, draggs and 1 other person
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: The I Scream Man, Illuminati Order Official and Markass the Worst
I'm a random retard and I'm just putting this out there, I wish people only got banned for breaking the law, I think it's a bit heavy handed to ban people for what appears to be little to no reason. Of course, I understand mods/null have their reasons.
.
I also think we need better laws against porn in general, the ease of access for young folks is a real problem. This isn't a modern issue either, really, porn has been a problem since the 70s or so. It has a real corrupting influence on young guys (and gals) and there is no real easy solution. I wish it was gatekept better at the very least.
 
Sammich said:
I'm a random retard and I'm just putting this out there, I wish people only got banned for breaking the law, I think it's a bit heavy handed to ban people for what appears to be little to no reason. Of course, I understand mods/null have their reasons.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I think pedophiles should be banned even if they haven't technically broken the law. Harboring pedos is nothing but a liability for when they eventually break the law. And they will, because there is no such thing as a non-offending pedophile.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: CuntessMaximus
Markass the Worst said:
I disagree. I think pedophiles should be banned even if they haven't technically broken the law. Harboring pedos is nothing but a liability for when they eventually break the law. And they will, because there is no such thing as a non-offending pedophile.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't disagree there, but was he really? I never kept up with him that much, I just know of his endless sperging over retardation.
 
Tricky said:
The House passes the Take it Down Act to protect children from exploitative images

PROTECT CHILDREN AT ALL COSTS

409 (Yes) to 2 (No) Votes

This law supposedly against child exploitation is worrying people in politics general because it will in fact harm kiwifarms and mean the take down of many of the sex tapes and AI images hosted here.

It creates unlimited CRIMINAL liability for every website and allows takedown notices with presumptive guilt where you basically just have to take their word for it or risk getting the government up your ass. This is basically a get out of jail free card and seriously incentivizes hosting offshore.

this happened only a week after this thread was made
Click to expand...
@Null is this true? IANAL but the bill only applies to "covered platforms", defined as any website "for which it is in the regular course or trade [...] to publish [...] nonconsensual intimate visual depictions." Am I wrong, or does this only apply to sites dedicated to publishing revenge porn?

The media hype makes it sound like it applies to all social media and any sort of Internet forum, but journalists don't do research. I've attached the bill text for reference.
 

Attachments

tl;dr I was dumb see below for the right analysis.

Only the victim can file a take-it-down. Hilariously, this includes non licensed distribution of commercial porn, therefore, Kelly Wang memes might become illegal. See below.

It's late so I'm going to be pithy,

There's a 48h take down duty, and if the site does not take the material down in that time, that's a ~50K fine, if the FTC wanted to seek civil penalties or injunctions, per violation. This is tied to § 57a(a)(1)(B). Keep in mind, this is what the site would get hit with per violation. This means per day, per image. In plain English, if some faggot anonymously uploads 20 images and reports it as revenge porn he can whine at the FTC which could choose to demand $1 million in injunctive relief. I'm not kidding.

"Knowingly publishing non-consensual intimate imagery" is a federal crime that can get you up to 5 years, targeting the uploader. The site is liable if it is "knowingly complicit." You tell me how this would be argued in federal court.

The 48 hour clock is a fucking joke. The only way to be compliant is to let anyone whine to get any image taken down, or not allow images at all. In short, this law will harm almost everyone running a website that allows anyone to upload images at all. How far "knowingly hosting or assisting in NCII distribution" goes is up to a test case.

I would not want to be that test case. I would not want to be that test case especially if I was running something like Kiwi Farms that has been in the cross hairs of a lot of powerful people for years.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back