/v/ - Video Games

>>16936325

Vanwatech got dicked to death and all the sites using it fell too.

>>16936335

I sure felt dead. I wasn't able to jump into any of the bunkers at the time due to life shit taking my time and energy away at every opportunity so I couldn't snag any links. It sucked ass.

>>16936344

Julay ate itself alive.

Just read this fucking drama:

https://anon.cafe/shelter/res/8.html

>>16936344

Not as far as I know. I haven't looked in any meta threads since it went down so I wouldn't know.

What gets me thinking is the fact that 4chan is being left alone. I think it's because 4chan is too big to attack, and smaller shit like the already crippled 8chan/kun, along with Julay and Fatchan among others are easier targets.

>>16936351

Julay has a backup domain: https://spqrchan.xyz/

>>16936346

They brought it on themselves for fucking with peoples lolis after they had just abandoned another site for doing the very same thing.

>>16936344

>/cow/ niggers ruin another place

is anyone surprised

>Anons actually going to Markchan

Enjoy living under his kosher cock. As long as you get to post lolis right?

>>16936369

So you're saying that Josh was right about lolifags

>>16936380

I'm saying nobody gave a shit about josh's site to begin with because of that. If he was so right he wouldn't hide daily pph graphs.

>>16936378

I guess that shows were their priorities lie, and why they've been shitting up bunker after bunker.

>>16936384

I've actually liked it here since Mark left. No dumb rules like "template threads" or arbitrary reasons for deleting a post, and no deleting posts by IP like a retard. Mark was the cancer of this place and if the trade-off of not having his fat kike ass here was no more loli, then so fucking be it.

>>16936389

Then what are you talking about? I suffered through the entirety of that insufferable cunts tirade and I still don't know what part you're referring.

>>16936394

That lolifags want to force site owners to host their pedotoons and try to take down anyone who refuses to do their bidding because they want someone else to take the risk of hosting it instead of doing it themselves.

>>16936395

Unless you live in a place where its illegal like the UK theres no risk of hosting it, josh never even mentioned a risk he just personally doesn't like it and doesn't want to see it and would rather cater every board on the site that he plans on using to be specifically for him rather than catering it to what the users of those boards want.

So now he has his dead imageboard where he can scream into the abyss on all his favorite boards all by himself with noone posting anything he doesn't like, he got just what he asked for.

>>16936396

>Unless you live in a place where its illegal like the UK theres no risk of hosting it

Not just talking jail time but deplatforming risk.

>>16936396

9chan /b/ actually seems pretty lively.

>8kun and 8chan.moe went down at the same exact time

Both use Vanwatech CDN and that was being DDoSed.

https://nitter.net/8chan_se/status/1260627926573355009

>>16936399

Yeah that guy endlessly putting out weak bait about whites is really putting the work in.

>>16936378

You post exactly how a crowing cuckchanner would during the exodus times.

I don't even need to insult you, your inane hatred for mark outshines your desire for freedom and its pathetic to witness

>>16936403

If getting a new slave owner that whips you more gently is your idea of freedom then enjoy it friend.

>>16936404

>whips you more gently

nigger Ron has been on an authoritarian bent.

Its not even remotely close to comparable, look at what so many BOs have done. This goes far beyond Mark, and if you can't realize that, then you can't look beyond your own nose and realize why this place fucking died.

Its not because people loved Mark that much, I can tell you fucking that.

>>16936405

Ron hasn't been mass wiping posters because they had the "wrong" opinions about Nintendo.

>>16936403

>Any post that shows they dislike Mark and talk about his fuck-ups is cuckchan

You can't boogeyman anymore, golem

>>16936405

Ron is a messenger, he makes no decisions. The reason this place is dead is because of jim and its been a dead site walking since 2015 when he took over as admin. Every single decision hes made about this place since then has been one more nail in the coffin and now we're just here to witness the finished product.

>>16936406

The only time I've seen mark do that is in regards to soyjack posting in general and during the time where cuckchanners shat up the place during the labo stream, which indeed was pure cuckchan cancer spam and he was not wrong to do so.

>>16936407

>he can't read

Galaxy brain IQ right here

>>16936408

That's actually fair I suppose.

>>16936409

Oh I understand what you're trying to say and I'm simply telling you no one likes Mark and more are glad that he's gone, even if loli had to go with him.

>>16936411

I don't give a shit about Mark, my personal opinion of him is that he's pissed me off on several occasions but I can at least tolerate him compared to the alternatives I've seen.

>more are glad he's gone even if loli had to go with him

this is where you are wrong.

Over 2/3 to 3/4 the users of /v/ fucking left already.

Activity has grinded to a halt.

This is a fucking ghost town now, and it has little to do with Mark and everything to do with the administration.

>>16936409

It is well known that he abused the delete by IP tool. Not only here but on vch too.

>>16936413

>Over 2/3 to 3/4 the users of /v/ fucking left already

Most of them went to fatchan and julay before they both got shut down, trust me they didn't initially follow Mark

>>16936416

I'm well aware of that and I went to fatchan while it was still up, that's why that's proof that it had little to do with Mark and more to do with the fact that this place is cancer and people had to get fucking out to a place with freedom.

Julay was the only big place available after fatchan got fucked up, and then they went to cancer so now they're dead too.

>>16936421

>this is no longer the case with CDNs

>8chan and 8kunt use the same CDN

>one has lolis, one doesn't

wow

>>16936413

>>16936417

Whatever's going on, someone or a group of someones is making an active effort to split imageboard communities.

Why the fuck does the reaction have to be "it's pozzed now, let's leave it to rot because it's dirty now,".

That's blackpillfag-tier logic, and it's bullshit is what it is.

>>16936423

Much like the case of Clearnet sources of Roms.

Only going to be the case until someone notices.

>>16936421

I can find lolicon on both google and twitter, some normalfag willing to use facebook would have to verify that one.

>>16936428

Stay here and contribute. I don't think you'll find anything better atm.

>>16936428

What >>16936430 said. See a thread with a topic you're interested in? Consider posting in it. Want to talk about a topic but don't see a thread on it? Make one. The most bumped threads on Mark's site is fucking GG and meta threads.

This thread should be stickied not anchored, where the fuck else is this discussion supposed to take place?

>>16936378

And you put up with a pig farmer who actively hates your community and the trouble it brings, wants you gone and will even permaban you for drawings because it offends his core audience of senile Trump fanfiction writers? The pig farmer whose only interest in 8kunt is turning it into a clickbait neocon news site?

I'll gladly take the fat kike over that rancid cancer. You can even ignore the fat kike and go to /vg/ instead, imagine that.

>>16936437

Posting this on /qresearch/ would be more relevant based on the response your tweets get.

>>16936437

>hello fellow imageboard users™, as you can see I truly care about you as illustrated by my cute illegal pedo drawing loli!

Hello! Are you trusting the plan today?

>>16936438

I actually would go to that /vg/ but I'm not sure if I can trust the BO after they've "accidentally" deleted their own board and restored it.

>>16936438

You know that gives me an idea, what if this site got split in the same way they split 4chan where the qboomers and jims annoying fucking news obsession thats taken over the site can all stay here and the real bonafide 8chan that they must still have backups of can be rehosted as a new domain with all the boards and the content we lost?

Ron if theres enough slack on your leash to do something like that yourself and actually pretend you're principled enough to run it like hotwheels did back in 2014 theres a redemption arc in order and /qresearch/ wouldn't require another loli dump.

>>16936449

Ill do it for now.

New javascript posting upgrade coming in a couple hours, just finalizing now and making sure we didnt miss any edge cases. The new upgrade makes posting super fast.

>>16936454

That super fast posting will come in handy when you prove to me you aren't willing to advocate for us while jim is willing to advocate for his boomer legion.

>>16936456

Ron is his dad's employee and will always carry out his decisions. Any remorse or good will he has in his mind is moot.

>>16936457

I'm not asking to be given anything, I want what was taken away from us.

>>16936461

Nigger you literally just asked for your own personal website.

>>16936462

No I asked for OUR 8chan back with the 6 years worth of boards and content that vanished to the ether in favor of putting up this sanitized piece of shit site solely designed for jim and his boomers.

>>16936463

Well for starters you need to not have people josh and hotwheels with petty fucking issues run them.

>>16936464

People like*

Help I'm retarded

>>16936463

First of all

>OUR 8chan

Second of all, you're still asking for Ron to deliberately fragment the fucking board AGAIN for no good reason using that Boomer you have such an issue with's resources. If I were inclined to believe you were up to some sort of faggotry, I'd be inclined to suggest you're too cheap and lazy to actually run D&C yourself.

>>16936467

The board is shattered into a million fucking pieces incase you haven't noticed, but yeah everything is fine nothing to see here folks.

>>16936473

<It's already fragmented so let's fragment it more

Brilliant idea dickass

>>16936475

8chan.co to 8ch.net didn't take a fraction as long as it took the watkins to rebuild 8chan from the ground up as a place for Qboomers.

This site had settled at a whopping double digit pph for 2 boards in the entire site before jim decided lolicon had to go too, now those boards struggle to even maintain a double digit pph.

>>16936476

More like lets just make a new pane of glass instead of pretending we can stitch a million glass shards back together.

>>16936437

>one of his other customers overloading the network by accident

Sounds precisely like what 8chan.moe being DDoSed would cause.

>>16936438

>because it offends his core audience

knock it off pedo, be honest for once and admit that your garbage is a deplatforming threat

>>16936461

>was taken away from us

You took someone else's place for granted.

>>16936482

Go back to your containment board >>>/pnd/ boomer nigger.

>>16936470

>zip up all the boards they wont migrate and hand them over to BO's or the community to start over.

This would actually be nice

>>16936485

Are you ignoring how julay got deplatformed just yesterday?

Save your boogeymen for yourself.

>>16936459

Not sure, but it was probably related to the CDN crashing. I was asleep when it happened, so I wasnt able to see what exactly happened.

>>16936490

Did the feds take them down for that? Or is their admin just being cautious and laying low for a while?

>>16936428

Prolikewoah /geimu/

>>16936489

>2015

fucking dishonest cherrypicking, compare the last days of 8chan to 8kun if you want a significant comparison

>>16936489

>want to know what they changed when they came back up

Just go on /v/ and see for yourself, there's new rules explicitly forbidding loli

>>16936500

I was talking about 8chan.co to 8ch.net years ago.

>>16936494

Do you wish for an end that much? Why not do it yourself and just kill yourself.

>>16936499

8chan has been on a slippery slope of censorship since late 2015 when jim took over so I'd say thats a perfect comparison of an uncucked imageboard that won't kowtow to censors and a cucked one that has.

>>16936490

more like lolikikes sperging out after the staff nuked their loli dumps

>>16936493

It wasn't the feds, it was the registrar. Ask yourself on #julayworld if you want. The people to talk to are rabbipires and The_Hanging_Flesh_of_JCaesar18, they're the people running the site

>>16936501

It was a different time. You can thank Hotwheels for making certain deplatforming tactics widespread.

Also most people weren't aware that loli was illegal so they didn't report them. Now any doubts there were have vanished.

I find it interesting that niggerpill only comes out in stickies.

He's gotten a lot less obvious over the years, but you can still tell it's him.

>>16936508

Loli isn't illegal and emailing a host whining doesn't work on everyone, eventually you'll find a host that isn't susceptible to those deplatforming tactics.

>>16936506

As opposed to what? Your personal shitting grounds to deal with your suicidal tendencies?

>>16936511

Didn't we get a lawyer to explain it to you retards?

>>16936511

You can repeat your "loli isn't illegal" mantra all you want, but 1466A will still be a thing no matter how many times you say it. Want to make loli legal? Then get yourself v&'d over loli and fight it all the way to the SCOTUS. I hope you can afford the lawyer bills. Fucktard.

>>16936520

if it can't be reasonably concluded to be a minor, it's not loli.

if it has artistic value, it's not porn.

checkmate lolicucks.

>>16936521

You having to assign yourself the arbiter of what is and isn't art and deeming anything pornographic to have no artistic value is the entire reason why nobody has ever been arrested over lolicon and the only cases you can find including it were of people that already had CP and just needed the book thrown at them.

>>16936522

No jury will find your loli porn to have artistic value and that's all that matters here. The opinion of the jury.

>cuckime

>>16936523

If thats all that matters then why has a case like this never even reached a jury? You do realize a sizable amount of money goes into even getting to that point of sentencing someone right?

Law enforcement without enough surety that they can actually convict the person won't even arrest them in the first place and basing god knows how much time and money on the opinion of a random jury of people on what is and isn't art is not a smart gamble so its never happened.

New posting upgrade going on in a few minutes.

>>16936325

Is 8chan.moe even safe? I feel like that place glows like mad. Lolifox is like the elephants foot to me.

>>16936523

no courtroom wants to rule on this because they don't want to become a porn haven like california

>>16936528

How would it still be banned?

>>16936534

Either it's banned or a loli poster is committing perjury. Take your pick.

>>16936535

In what way?

New posting upgrade is now live. Please reset your cache and let me know if there are any bugs.

>>16936538

What they personally used it for doesn't alter whether or not it has artistic value.

>>16936539

I welcome you to in all good faith try to argue that you "Totally posted it for the artistic value, bro" to a court, but you I and likely the prosecutor know that's perjury.

>>16936528

But he did call into question the legitimacy of the chart, having no "yes" option for "does the work have any scientific, cultural or artistic value?" sounds as though loli artwork could never possibly have any of those values, and thus the whole thing would be illegal from the very beginning long before it got to that step.

>>16936543

damn bro got more?

>>16936540

Okay let me phrase it another way, whether or not the sole purpose of the person having the images was to masturbate to them in no way changes whether or not the images have artistic value and thats what determines their legality.

>>16936542

A yes option is implicit in being contrary to a no.

>>16936543

If literally being a pedophile is illegal where you live, then yes. The hard lesson is obviously not a sexual depiction of a minor.

>>16936544

I'm not saying, but I do not want to post more if it's illegal. It was just an example.

>>16936547

It's not illegal. I am interested in art history. it's obviously a fascinating angle.

>>16936547

note my ID and digits.

>>16936544

>>16936542

Not really, you just don't understand flowcharts.

What you added to it was just clutter. It's like an if function.

For instance

if new_posts == true {
favicon_mode=1};

That function will set the variable favicon_mode to 1 if the variable new_posts evaluates as true, but it won't do anything if that valuable evaluates to false.

That flowchart determines if the law will find something to be illegal. The default state of things is legal, unless they're forbidden by a law or another legal regulation (bylaw, executive order, jurisprudence, etc).

>>16936550

>if that valuable

meant to say that variable

>>16936424

>Why the fuck does the reaction have to be "it's pozzed now, let's leave it to rot because it's dirty now,".

It's really just extreme astroturfing. It has been from the very start. A few posters transferred on their own. Posters who consistently ran things (like agdg/share/game night posters) were specifically targetted to attempt to make them leave in a blatant attempt to take the content away, hoping the users would follow. Constant claims that people have new, good boards with better rules, and with higher populations, yet they're all rulecucked and dead as anyone could have easily predicted.

If anything, I'm disgusted with how many people fell for it, especially considering that nothing has even changed. Boards like /hgg/ and /a/ are still laden with loli because it's impossible to separate from other content. The locked threads in /hgg/ were nothing more than a rogue mod trying to redirect traffic to a different image board. It's just a concentrated d/c effort, nothing more.

>>16936520

The two violations in the flowchart are separate. You redesigned it to actually say that cartoon porn without cultural merit is actual, real CP. For your sake, I hope you haven't posted this more than once, because you've shown a real ineptitude for making a basic flowchart.

>>16936543

That's not even nearly obscene. All you pedos know is sophistry because deep down you know you're wrong.

>>16936545

What matters is that they were created to be fapped to.

>>16936543

anti-loli posters are literally just concern trolls who hate anime.

>>16936544

>https://www.wikiart.org/en/william-adolphe-bouguereau

>>16936554

No it doesn't, just look at the flowchart. Even if yes is said to "could this image be seen as having a sexual appeal and found offensive" it still doesn't violate 1466A.

>>16936553

>You redesigned it to actually say that cartoon porn without cultural merit is actual, real CP.

Bullshit, elaborate.

>>16936555

I'll have you know I actually enjoy anime faggot.

>>16936556

Just that isn't enough to make it violate 1466A, that's why the next step is asking if it has any artistic value.

>>16936555

I hate lolifags, not loli.

>>16936546

>A yes option is implicit in being contrary to a no.

It's true you could infer the possibility, but I think his gripe is that it feels designed to lead someone into thinking otherwise. It should be intuitively readable to someone who is even taking a cursory glance at it.

>>16936550

I understand flowcharts and do coding myself, I just think that it could mislead people. By hiding it, you do not just take it out of sight, but also potentially out of mind. It's not clutter, it is clarity. It should be something that even the lay could easily understand.

>>16936561

*or anime

>>16936553

>The two violations in the flowchart are separate. You redesigned it to actually say that cartoon porn without cultural merit is actual, real CP. For your sake, I hope you haven't posted this more than once, because you've shown a real ineptitude for making a basic flowchart.

Damn, I hadn't noticed that. Pedos are such fucking retards, he basically made violating 2252A the opposite of not violating 1466A.

>>16936560

Exactly, so the crux of the matter is whether or not it has artistic value, not whether or not its fap material.

>>16936562

>I understand flowcharts and do coding myself, I just think that it could mislead people. By hiding it, you do not just take it out of sight, but also potentially out of mind. It's not clutter, it is clarity. It should be something that even the lay could easily understand.

See what >>16936553 pointed out.

You mixed up two different violations in your effort to make a non-violation explicit. Your flowchart isn't just cluttered, it's objectively wrong.

>>16936565

If it was created as fap material that means it wasn't created as art. Therefore, no artistic value.

Nobody sane would claim the painting posted ITT is obscene, while its artistic value is self-evident.

>>16936566

It's not my flowchart, I was just defending the "yes" option being unhidden. You are right in that it is pointing to the wrong violation, but it does not inherently damage the idea of "yes" being visible.

>>16936565

In a total vacuum, sure. The latter kind of implies the former to be a dubious claim if it was a factor of manufacturing.

>>16936566

I'm the one that edited the lawyers flowchart and I was in such a hurry I didn't even notice the two violations cited different laws so yeah thats on me but the point I was trying to make still stands and others in this thread understand it.

>>16936569

How can you even argue that an artists motive in creating their art determines whether or not its art?

>>16936568

Did you even bother to read my post or just realized I disagreed and instantly replied? I understand the concept, it is true that the lack of a yes option does not guarantee that no possible yes state exists, but it could absolutely give someone that impression. People do not have perfect impressions of things 100% of the time, they are not infallible.

>>16936559

>>16936558

>>16936561

just look at what's happened with patreon, if you ban loli you have effectively banned all anime art because there is no way to fairly and universally distinguish the age of a drawing because drawings are not people they are symbolic abstractions.

>>16936574

My issue is that I fail to see how it could mislead someone with a reading comprehension above that of a 4th grader.

>>16936571

"kind of implies" isn't very compelling to me, sorry.

>>16936573

Because it's what separates art from obscenity.

Do you consider the material in blacked.com to be art? Or is it a product that seeks to profit from the lowest urges of broken people? Could anyone consider that filming prostitutes getting fucked by male nigger prostitutes is a valuable contribution to art?

>>16936578

skillessly taking a picture of your own dick is in no way comparable to honing your artistic skills for years to create something that you personally find obscene.

Posting speeds are much faster for me now.

>>16936578

A picture can be "obscene" and have artistic merit at the same time. Like erotica.

>>16936580

So you're saying that because they have people who have refined their skills in lighting, photography and set design for years therefore BLACKED is art because it's more than some random guy taking pics of his dick with his phone, got it.

It's clearly pornography in both cases, not art. Maybe you could argue that the blowjob scene in Vincent Gallo's "The Brown Bunny" has artistic merit and get some people to agree, but BLACKED? Hell no. That's porn through and through.

>>16936583

Erotica isn't obscene, that's why it's erotica and not porn. It's sexual, it can be explicit, it's not obscene.

>>16936586

May be a minor, but that face is not one of a child.

>>16936588

See, you're being retarded on purpose. No jury worth its salt will think that can be reasonably concluded to be a drawing of a minor.

>>16936584

pornography and art are not mutually exclusive.

>>16936590

How so? Its a drawing, it has no age.

>>16936576

Well, you are right. Under normal circumstances a person really should not make such a mistake. But even intelligent people make mistakes, especially late in the day after having made many decisions, and I feel that there is no harm in optimizing the chart to minimize that kind of risk.

But I think that you also overestimate the average American. The Institute of Education Sciences conducted large-scale assessments of adult proficiency, measuring prose, document and quantitative skills. In 2008, 50 percent of adults were at basic or below-basic levels of proficiency in all three categories.

What I'm saying is that if there's no downside to only making the flow of the chart a little more fool-proof, there's really no reason not to.

>>16936592

This is why no one takes you seriously. You permanently argue in bad faith.

>>16936584

Tinto Brass movies are incredibly obscene, yet have artistic merit. Blacked is cheap kike garbage.

>>16936587

But it is explicitly made for the purpose of masturbation, which makes it obscene and lacking artistic value?

>>16936594

They sure as hell aren't taking your points seriously.

it is also worth noting that for any drawing by an artist, professional or otherwise artistic value is inherently assumed and there is no state in the union that wants to drag an obscenity case to court because if they lose they'll become the next porn valley. so essentially ron got played

>>16936572

>but the point I was trying to make still stands and others in this thread understand it.

People who are posting understand what you are saying because of the context of your posts. People who skim the front page and look at pictures read a chart you posted that says a loli flashing her tits is objectively the same as actual minors performing bestiality.

>I was in such a hurry

To what, rack up 30 posts in this thread? Why are you wasting time trying to justify your mistakes instead of fixing them? Next time, put at least a fraction of the time you spend posting into the images you edit.

>>16936598

You'd honestly argue A has more artistic value than B due to your motives in creating each of them?

>>16936596

They're not obscene, maybe exploitative but not obscene. For example "Caligula" is a drama that has explicit parts and is even famous for them, but it's still a drama. Blacked is porn, the only reason to watch blacked is being a degenerate who needs to watch women get defiled by niggers to get hard.

>But it is explicitly made for the purpose of masturbation

It's not. It involves titillation but it's not the end-all and be-all of those works.

>>16936600

Do you see how fast this thread is moving? I'm not going to meticulously spend time editing a lawyers retarded flowchart while the subject of this thread flies by onto whatever the topic of the next 10 minutes will be.

Why is it not the responsibility of the people who skin the front page to not just listen and believe and actually use their critical thinking skills?

>>16936602

Absent the context of it being an informative example, what I'm saying is that Cube B would be hard pressed to try to argue it's creation was for artistic merit and not it's eroticism.

>>16936606

Why are you so obsessed with its motive for creation? Why on earth do you think that even matters?

>>16936586

She may be like 17. Not the same as a preteen, which is mostly what loli is about. The lack or still underdeveloped lack of secondary sex characteristics.

>>16936606

cube B isn't even erotic, draw some actual tits and you MIGHT have something resembling an argument

>>16936607

Because the artistic purpose behind the piece is what excludes it from violating the aformentioned law.

>>16936609

The purpose of Cube B is demonstrative as an example. I'm not drawing you cube woman porn

>>16936610

No, its artistic value is what excludes it from violating the aformentioned law.

>>16936610

>The purpose of Cube B is demonstrative as an example. I'm not drawing you cube woman porn

Then it's a shitty example because there's nothing even resembling obscenity in it.

>>16936611

Necessarily wouldn't value be derived from the purpose? Otherwise it's a redundant factor as any sufficiently crafted piece would be excluded by default, rather than being conditionally included as a violation

What lolifags always end up resorting to is the pretense that the whole is just the sum of its parts as if the parts didn't interact with each other. So they give you an anime crone and pretend it's a minor because one part of loli is that it is anime. Olympic level mental gymnastics.

>>16936612

Look I know you're trying to trick me I'm not going to draw porn of Cube B stop trying to be overly literal with the example

also for all you fucking boomers arguing about what is and isn't art vs obscenity should keep in mind performance artists literally go on stage naked and beat their dick with a hammer and that's considered art

>>16936589

>>16936608

that doesn't matter according to the rules ron has put in place

>>16936613

Thats the entire reason why nobody has every been arrested for loli and never will unless the law changes.

>>16936617

the prostasia (pedo defense lawyers) guys provided examples where it has happened, even with jail time

>>16936614

i'm not lolifag and i think loli is fucking weird but i'm a working artist who has to deal with the fallout of all your cheap and lazy plays to moralism that just end up get our communities censored or shutdown

>>16936619

But allowing loli is what gets sites shut down, just look at how bad things have been with (((Esther))) around.

>>16936618

Without the inclusion of CP which is actually why they're being arrested?

>>16936625

Clearly the argument isn't with ron, he only addresses dick suckers.

>>16936604

That movie was very controversial and was heavily criticized when it released for it's hardcore sex scenes. Roger Ebert called it "sickening, utterly worthless, shameful trash"."Caligula's release was met with legal issues and controversies over its violent and sexual content. Its uncut form remains banned in several countries." as per wikipedia. It's undoubtedly considered obscene. Most Tinto Brass movies are far lewder than Caligula. His movies are still a step above something like blacked, which has no artistic merit to speak of, independent of its content. It's like comparing Airplane! to Jackass.

>It's not. It involves titillation but it's not the end-all and be-all of those works

The point is the same. People enjoy erotica for it's sexual nature, much like a porn. The only difference is that one has a modicum of artistic effort and talent put in its presentation, the other is cynically cheap.

>>16936621

>which is actually why they're being arrested

They tried to get the 1466A charges dropped on unconstutionality grounds and every time the courts of law upheld that it was constitutional.

>>16936627

>The point is the same. People enjoy erotica for it's sexual nature, much like a porn. The only difference is that one has a modicum of artistic effort and talent put in its presentation, the other is cynically cheap.

You're acting as if porn doesn't have a plot. It's partly about having more than just sexual acts in the movies, having some substance. Roger Ebert was a tasteless hack with a weak stomach that kept kvetching about movies like Cannibal Holocaust and praising basic bitch movies that didn't offend his politically correct sensibilities.

>>16936628

Throwing the book at a child pornographer and trying to get someone imprisoned over drawings are two entirely different things I hope you can see that.

Would you waste countless hours and money to get someone into court for no no drawings only to have the jury let them off because the public may be easily offended but they'll still take affront to a victimless crime like drawing or writing the wrong things?

>>16936629

>muh throwing the book

Read the appeals and the reasoning behind their rejection.

>>16936630

Can you give a specific example or am I going to have to hunt and peck to try and find exactly what you're referring to?

>>16936628

They have a plot in the same way Super Mario Bros has a plot. It's just basic setup, not an actually developed story. A movie like L'Uomo che guarda has more than just sexual acts in it, it's no less obscene because of it. It's intentions are perfectly clear.

>>16936632

That's my exactly my point. It's what makes it art instead of obscenity.

>>16936631

Just search for 1466A in US v Wellman.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-4th-circuit/1587536.html

>18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a).

>The term “obscene,” as used in statutes of this type, refers to an objective, legal standard, not to an issue of fact. The Supreme Court explained this distinction in Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87 (1974), a case involving a prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 1461 for the mailing of, and conspiring to mail, an obscene brochure containing sexually explicit photographs. The Court explicitly rejected the defendants' argument that the government was required to prove that the defendants knew that the mailed materials were obscene. The Court emphasized that:

>It is constitutionally sufficient that the prosecution show that a defendant had knowledge of the contents of the materials he distributed, and that he knew the character and nature of the materials. To require proof of a defendant's knowledge of the legal status of the materials would permit the defendant to avoid prosecution by simply claiming that he had not brushed up on the law. Such a formulation of the scienter requirement is required neither by the language of [the statute] nor by the Constitution.

>>16936634

I'm not sure how a case of a guy who was already imprisoned for raping a 7 year old before and gets caught with CP again after failing to register as a sex offender giving a bad defense of "I didn't know all this CP I had was obscene I swear" being shot down is something I should take as proof that drawings are illegal.

>>16936637

The CP isn't what 1466A covers, that's 2252A.

>>16936639

The only reason they even brought up 1466A was in reference to transporting obscene material over interstate lines which is illegal for any pornography at all, until theres a legitimate case brought to court over drawings and it isn't just used as a means to throw the book at a literal child rapist I see no reason to believe drawings are illegal.

>>16936643

That's just a fancy way to say he downloaded it from a server located in a state that wasn't the one he was in.

>>16936645

They specified "transported in interstate commerce" but nice try.

>>16936637

Quit disingeniously trying to blunt it out as the cartoonishly broad subject of "Drawings" it's pretty direct about what it's saying isn't allowed.

YOUR LATEST UPDATE BROKE THE TOR DETECTION, I'M TORPOSTING AND I GOT A REGULAR ID

>>16936648

What phrase would you have me use?

>>16936647

Transported via the internet.

>>16936651

No, interstate commerce, theres a difference.

>>16936650

"sexual depictions of a (non/fictional) minor", the thing the law is saying isn't allowed

NOW I'M GETTING DOUBLE POSTS

>>16936652

He was downloading them via Gnutella, a P2P sharing network.

>>16936653

You forgot the obscene part, you really expect me to use legalese and write out the entire law every time I refer to it instead of just calling it what it is?

>>16936658

Well look I don't know how many times I can articulate what is functionally the difference between a regular fucking picture and porn if you're pretending you can't tell the difference

>>16936657

>Eldridge acknowledged that neither he nor the investigators who conducted the peer-to-peer searches over the Gnutella network possessed supporting documentation regarding the content of the digital files suspected of being child pornography. As paragraph 21(c) of attachment D of the application explained:

>The information in [the spreadsheet] is believed to be accurate, but no supporting documentation (i.e. downloads of child pornographic files from the suspect computers) was collected by the investigating officers during these searches of the Gnutella networks.

>>16936660

Its your opinion that pornography contains no artistic value, nothing more. Artistic value is not a matter of fact and thats why nobody has been brought to court over drawings because they know a jury could find they have artistic value and let the guy off and they'll have wasted all that time and money bringing him to court to try and get another slave in their private prisons.

>>16936662

Jesus fuck don't even get started on the "private prison slavery" bullshit

>>16936537

Identical posting problems as always. Totally arbitrary whether the post goes through (same error, no information; roughly one post per captcha), whether the media server even loads (not loading now; 90% of the time I can’t see images), whether the CSS of any given page loads (loading now, 90% of the time it does load), or whether the site even loads at all (my browser tells me the URL doesn’t even exist; trying a minute later or so causes it to return).

0/10; you tried.

>>16936662

>literally using the same “arguments” that jews used to make porn “legal” in the 1960s

Well, we know you’re objectively wrong.

>>16936663

>5% of the world population but 25% of the worlds prisoners

>>16936664

What fucked up setup do you have that gives you so many problems? I have no issues and I'm on TOR lmao

>>16936665

You are aware that a noninsignificant portion of the world's population cannot be relied on for accurately reporting any statistics about itself, and another is fucking india.

>>16936668

Is this the american private prison defense version of "purely socio-economic factors"?

>>16936428

8chan which actually has higher PPH than right now, and there is always I hope the webring. Otherwise, here, if you don't want to leave for whatever reason.

>>16936669

NO YOU FUCKING RETARD, IT'S AN HONEST ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE FACT THAT HISTORICALLY, AND REPEATEDLY CHINA EITHER FAILS TO PROPERLY CATALOG DATA OR LIES ABOUT THEIR DATA FOR THE SAKE OF THEIR BENEFIT ON A GLOBAL SCALE.

WE ARE LITERALLY IN THE MIDDLE OF A GLOBAL FUCKING PANDEMIC BECAUSE THEY FUCKING LIED AND THE WHO, AGAINST ALL BETTER JUDGEMENT OR EVEN THE SLIGHTEST HINT OF DUTY TO THEIR ORGANIZATION GAVE THE GO AHEAD FOR TRAVEL TO OTHER COUNTRIES LEADING TO MULTIPLE OUTBREAKS OF A POORLY DOCUMENTED DISEASE, NEVERMIND THE FACT THAT THEY HOARDED MEDICAL RESOURCES BEFORE EVEN MENTIONING THAT IT WAS BECOMING AN ISSUE, CONTINUE TO BRAG ABOUT HOW WELL THEY'RE HANDLING THE DISEASE WITH STATISTICS THAT ARE LITERALLY MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE GIVEN THEIR POPULATION, AND DENSITY. AND FOR THE RECORD, IF THE PRISONS WERE A FORM OF LEGALIZED SLAVERY (THEY AREN'T) WHY THE FUCK WOULD THEY TAKE THE SCRAWNY FAILING DEGENERATE THAT DIDDLES THEMSELVES TO KIDS? THEY WOULDN'T. YOU'D MAYBE HAVE AN ARGUMENT WITH DUMBASS MEATHEADS THAT HAVE A PROCLIVITY TO CRIME, BUT THAT NEED NOT APPLY.

I DON'T EVEN WANT TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION FIVE YEARS AGO, I HAD TO FUCK OFF TO ANOTHER WEBSITE BECAUSE SOME TALENTLESS CUNT DECIDED IT'D BE OKAY TO VIOLATE JOURNALISTIC STANDARDS FOR A HALF RATE WHORE AND A SUBSTANDARD HTML DOCUMENT LAUGHABLY REFERRED TO AS A GAME, FOR THE PAST 5 FUCKING YEARS I HAVE DEALT WITH THIS FUCKING WEBSITE NOT THAT THE ENTIRE THING IS BAD, BUT IN PARTICULAR THE FUCKING VOLUNTEERS AND PRIOR ADMINISTRATOR OF THIS BOARD ALL BECAUSE I HAVE A VARIANT OF VOCABULARY THAT IS IN INCONGRUITY WITH MODERN SOCIETAL STANDARDS, AND UNFORTUNATELY IT'S NONPRODUCTIVE TO ACTUALLY ARTICULATE THAT THE MEANING OF THE FAG WORD, EITHER ON IT'S OWN OR A SUFFIX IS NOT ACTUALLY ANY INDICATOR OF A PROCLIVITY OF IRE TO THOSE THAT ARE HOMOSEXUALS, BUT INSTEAD A TERM RESERVED FOR THE MOST OBNOXIOUS FUCKING CUNTS ON THE GODDAMN PLANET

LIKE YOU, YOU GODDAMN FAGGOT

>>16936665

I'm thinking maybe crime isn't a nigger problem but an amerimutt one. Even when you look information about being imprisoned abroad most is about US citizens.

>>16936672

>AND FOR THE RECORD, IF THE PRISONS WERE A FORM OF LEGALIZED SLAVERY (THEY AREN'T) WHY THE FUCK WOULD THEY TAKE THE SCRAWNY FAILING DEGENERATE THAT DIDDLES THEMSELVES TO KIDS? THEY WOULDN'T. YOU'D MAYBE HAVE AN ARGUMENT WITH DUMBASS MEATHEADS THAT HAVE A PROCLIVITY TO CRIME, BUT THAT NEED NOT APPLY.

This, they'd make steroids illegal overnight if only to get a steady supply of capable slaves.

>>16936672

You're doing gods work 3e3bff.

>>16936675

It is illegal unless prescribed.

>>16936677

my bad

>>16936680

That and the rest of the drug war exists for purely ethical reasons though, believe them.

>>16936683

the problem isn't the drug war, is that they don't want to win it

>>16936685

Well winning the drug war would involve there no longer being any drugs in circulation and if theres no drugs in circulation then theres no more busloads of prisoners convicted over the victimless crime of getting high to fill the private prisons up with workers.

>>16936687

>victimless crime

kek

it's a crime against society, widespread drug addiction is a crippling social illness

>>16936428

Considering, Julay got shoahed, now its this one or 9/v/.

>>16936691

>tobacco

It doesn't wreck your mind or make you drive like shit. It doesn't make you an unproductive member of society.

It's garbage but it's not nearly close to the level of other drugs and certainly not crippling unless you're one of the people who develop complications but it's usually at an elder stage.

Smoking it around children should be punishable with jail, though.

>alcohol

Literally unenforceable and it's impossible for a war on alcohol to not do more harm than good because of very simple chemical reasons. It's one of the simplest compounds that exist. If keeping meth in check is hard, it's child's play compared with a prohibition on alcohol.

You can make high strength alcohol in your kitchen with sugar and water.

Besides, there's a similar distinction to the one between porn and erotica: alcohol isn't only valuable for its effects on the central nervous system. Without going into the medical reasons, you have plenty of culinary reasons in favor of it. Many people drink for the taste and don't even get near a dose that buzzes them.

That would be pointless in the case of other drugs.

>>16936694

Only the domain was. Their fallback domains and hidden service are still operative.

>>16936696

Yes, but their reputation is lower than elderly ballsack.

julay/v/ has only 7 PPH now.

same shit

status 0

error

>>16936709

>mostly red; illegal

wew

Also it doesn't matter if it was or was not illegal. Internet providers can and will shut down any site for having unsavory content to ignore bad publicity, regardless of legality.

>>16936495

/geimu/ is full of commies and retards, it's complete shit.

Stop it.

>>16936713

>commies

Are you okay?

>retards

It's /v/ alright

>>16936718

As somebody who's seen countless altchans and 8chan boards die on the vine, there's a point at which slowness goes from "quality over quantity" to "the only time PPH rises above 0.1 is when both I and one other particular guy are logged on".

The flaws of recruitment can be dealt with by any kind of communal norms

>>16936715

So if one lawyer says it's illegal he's a liar and a fraud, but if another lawyer called Legal Eagle says it is legal, then it is the absolute truth because it's what you wanted to hear.

>>16936719

I'd be fine if it was from any other place but just looking at the state of this board you can tell no one from here is worth recruiting, just look at the post beneath yours.

>>16936720

If one says it's illegal and another says it is legal then obviously Ron's report is faulty and should be questioned, you faggot.

Did Ron even ever provided evidence of a lawyer?

>>16936718

Nigger you don't get it

If you don't let other people know about your place, it'll just be yet another 5 people project which will end up in the usual circlejerk that so many ibs become

Like, sure you risk attracting homos, but the alternative is not attracting anyone or worse attracting discord trannies.

>>16936720

You joke about it but the legal system is basically this. If a case hurts my fee fees then it's conjecture.

>>16936721

>Ron's report

Oh, also, too lazy to quote it, but even Ron didn't say his attorney had found conclusive case law against loli, instead merely enough uncertainty that it was theoretically possible you could get taken to court for loli in certain jurisdictions.

Now I know how the jews felt 109~ times.

>>16936721

Then tell Ron the actual name of "Legal Eagle" so he can ask him too.

>>16936369

>fucking with peoples lolis

No, this all started because the BO kept deleting The Last of Us 2 leak threads for being "hidden gamergate threads". Their paranoia was their undoing. They're that autistic.

>>16936470

Because it was the easiest way to curate what they wanted and didn't want for MUH PR. Fucking even Ron admitted this when he was pressed to ask why /pol/ and some of the porn boards were not migrated. How do people STILL not get this? "Migration" is bullshit. They need an easy way to control what boards will apear with minimal sperging so migration was the obvious choice.

>>16936709

notice on that chart how only pozzed-up, liberal, kike-ridden, tolerant progressive fagholes are bleu.

gee, i wonder who brought us this wonderfull loli degeneracy to begin with???? could it be the same chosen semetic people of pisrael who invented the furry fandom??? and marxism???

its good to see your sexual deviancy still invokes a primordial sense of DO NOT FUCKING WANT IN MY NEIGHBOURHOOD!!! in anyone not part of the rainbow crowd. hell, most fags dont want your kind in their movement.

preach the lawl all you want, find every rule in the big rulebook of your country pull out yet another shitty excuse of ITS REALLY A 10.0000 YEAR-OLD BIG-TITTIED VAMPIRE DISGUISED AS A CHILD U GUYZ. it makes no different because its not a matter of law, its a matter of basic human/animal instinct at the core level:

protect the offspring.

bears do it, birds do it, scorpions do it, hell even the most dumbest unevolved critters on planet earth will seriously fuck you up if you get anywhere near their young.

the lolishit your kind pushes triggers a animalistic sense of disgust in the same way a hetero would be disgusted by viewing homoporn.

only lolishit is ten times worse because unlike hetero/homoporn which involves sex between two or more consenting adults, your lolishit involves humanities most precious resource: their children.

and even most criminals have a unspoken code amongs them of do not involve children.

have fun getting shanked and clubbed to death by your fellow inmates if they find out that you have only been looking at sexual images of children

thats how low you rank on humanities ladder.

on a sidenote: do you know what other species has pedophilia programmed into their kind???

bugs, and no, not the beautifull and useful ones like butterflies, bees and dragonflies.

its usually the kind of brown turd/puke-coloured useless bugs that exist to either annoy you like: bedbugs, shitflies, anal hookworms. and cockroaches. or the ones that inflict pain upon you like: ticks, parasitic wasps, leeches & sandflies.

you know, the ones that mozes of pisrael summoned upon egypts firstborn.

>>16936748

>gee, i wonder who brought us this wonderfull loli degeneracy to begin with???? could it be the same chosen semetic people of pisrael who invented the furry fandom??? and marxism???

Yes I heard that Alaskans have decided to join the COMINTERN this time of year

>>16936748

>Maine

>Alaska

>Kentucky

>Indiana

>Mississippi

<liberal

>>16936750

1

take a close look at the map and notice how almost al of the flyover states are either red or green. hell the entire rustbelt is bleeding red from north to south.

2

only states or cities with influential jews in them are blue. there are only five exceptions to this rule. three of which are due to large liberal movements based in cities who are by sheer numbers winning from the countryside conservatives for control of power.

those are indiana, maine, and mississippi,

maine being a special case due to having a large group of fart-smelling pretentious upper-class hippies who want to turn it into fem/lib-infested europe when it comes to laws deu to their white guilt.

those three states as of 2020 have become red zones this map dates from the pozzed-up era of obama but you didnt know you are defending a outdated map from 2013 didnt you???

3

hawai is where obama grew up and has litterally a rainbow flag.

4

alaska is eyeblaringly huge but has insignificant population beyond moose, bears, drunken iceinjuns, weird frontier people, and alaska state troopers whos wildlife troopers have to singlehandedly patrol areas the size of some southern states. congratufuckulations for finding the one large unpopulated state that defies the ruleset about pozzing and its ginormous too to the point that even a blind toddler could spot it.

LOL its also red as of 2020

there are 3 other states that i mentioned that i explained in this comment why they defy the ruleset and are now red aswel

but you didnt catch them didnt you???.

5

the ruleset for the us deems green areas as having effectivly made lollicon illigal, trudeau is a liberal faggot. blame canada for making green zones in his country legal loliholes.

>>16936758

hawaii is red too i just looked it up

>>16936756

There are Republicans who aren't in service to puritanical apocalyptic Baptist neocons

>>16936758

>hawai […] has litterally a rainbow flag

3/10 b8 m8

A few days ago someone launched zchan.cc, a new site using JSChan (the software Fatchan used) that allows anything legal in the U.S., though requiring permission for board creation. Loli is of course allowed. Yesterday I asked the Zchan owner if he would be fine with it being a new home for fat/v/, reminding him that having a potentially popular board means people might try to send emails to the companies he's using trying to get him shut down and if they're sucessful we'd want him to switch companies like Smug has done rather than giving up. He said it was fine and I created the board:

https://zchan.cc/v/index.html

I emailed the fat/v/ board owner yesterday asking him if he wants to be board owner again and he hasn't responded yet, I'll give him the board if he says yes. If not I'll try doing it myself, rules would be pretty similar to fat/v/ except I'll be more permissive about "board culture" threads. Pretty much all of 8kun/v/ had migrated to fat/v/ by the time it was shut down, so it would be nice if that happened again rather than being trapped here. Check it out, consider making a thread, tell the site owner if you run into any technical problems, and tell me what you think.

>>16936799

Looks cool so far.

I like that there's a fuckload of board themes to choose from, but Tomorrow will always be the most aesthetically pleasing.

>>16936861

>It's about even for the latter two in activity right now

Maybe, but 8kun numbers aren't like they were in like a month or so ago, it went from roughly 700 active ISPs to 300 at best, so more than half actually went to a different place, that place being the webring in general. I use both /geimu/ and smug's /vg/ and try to avoid 8kun as much as possible.

>>16936625

/abdl/ confirmed best board

>>16936910

>trying to find porn by just searching "porn term" into a search engine

you retards don't actually do this do you?

>>16936799

Admirable, sadly it's too late. Exodus momentum is long gone now. I don't think many will come there even if it was the best option. Guess it would be good to keep in my for a bunker though in case anything happens.

>>16936955

I can't remember the last time I used a search engine for a specific porn anything. Way too many specific sites that are far better to search what you need.

>>16936532

>mfw Ron deleted my fucking posts

Professor Kruglov here, I can confirm 8chan.moe to be even more radioactive than the Wish Granter. Do not enter without a SEVA suit a good VPN/Tor!

>the moment the loli question was taken care of board migration actually progressed again

>mfw julay had to put their loli board on tor only access

Where they fucking belong.

If you happen to read this, Ron, you're a god damn visionary. Make sure to slip those lawyers you consulted a tip, cause they saved you from a shit ton of trouble.

>>16936720

>but if another lawyer called Legal Eagle says it is legal,

No. No. No, you retard. The US supreme court says it's legal and he's passing that information on. I'm British and I have a English law degree, and I'm quite comfortable not digging up the case for you, you can fucking google it, but you can take it from me that it exists.

Just think about it, in your land of the free. If you take a piece of paper and pencil, and scrawl two underaged stick figures having sex, you think you deserve a fine or prison time for that? lmaoing at your existence. I hope they take away your right to draw guns, and ron disables the upload of anything that isn't watkins's ugly molten face, you poofter.

>>16937097

I have two law degrees(so I'm more trustworthy than you), and I saw Eagle is not more of an authority than the lawyer(s!) Ron asked. Even prostasia said it's not 100% legal, and they would know since they defend pedophile rights of all kinds. In that light, Ron did the right thing, and all the other board getting attacked over loli need to learn from this.

>>16937170

He did say it's illegal and even made a flowchart.

Things don't become illegal the moment a criminal is brought to court, the criminal is brought to court because he did something illegal. This is basic shit.

Case law isn't the only source of law and it's reactive, not proactive. Statutory law claims loli is illegal and you provided no case law that overturned that, all you have is conjecture.

>>16937172

>a flowchart

That did not extend to the federal level

>all you have is conjecture

Just like untested regulation

>>16936748

Being a pedo doesn't mean you automatically lack empathy for children. Nor that you would want to do something that harms them either physically or mentally.

Consider how biased and lacking nuance your view is. Do you think I would not want to protect a little girl if some sick fuck wanted to rape or molest her?

>inb4 hurr kys pedo

>>16937467

The only ones defending pedos are pedophiles themselves. The only reason someone defends pedophiles is because they want to rape children. Lolicon has absolutely nothing to do with pedophilia, and if you think it does then you're a pedo who can't separate fictional and reality. Lolicons go even out of there way to ostracize any material that is similar, like toddler and 3dcg, but which has absolutely no connection to lolicon, to establish their reputation as virtuous non pedophiles who absolutely, under no circumstances, have or want anything to do with pedophilia. Pedophilia is an inevitable precursor to child rape, while lolicon is a pure artform without connection to any real world phenomena.

t. Akemi Mokoto

>>16937504

>>16937467

is being a pious little shitter whos trying to blindside you,

he goddamn knows i was talking about PEDOSEXUALS the kind of sickfucks who want to fuck children.and not the original roman/latin definition of pedo which can be roughly translated as cares about/provides for children.

hes merely pretending to be retarded by acting like hes out of the know

>>16937504

crap, i was being overzealous, i should have readed the rest of your post before mindlessly hammering my keyboard in rage at

>>16937467

>>16937504

you wank it to pictures of minors/toddlers that makes you a pedosexual. period.

example:if some guy is fapping it to pictures of fictual men than he is very likely a queer homosexual.

and once again: that its really a 10.0000 year old ghost in a childs body is nothing but a pathetic excuse your cumbrain came up to normalize its sickfuckery to other people. you are a degenerate whos reached the sexual bottomline of all sexual preferences available and who has very likely exsausted all other fetishes to the point of wanking it to children.

suicide is the only option preferably before your cumbrain decides it needs another big hit of dopamine, because wanking it to fictional children isnt stimulating it anymore, and you decide go outside and touch children IRL.

>>16937805

>>16937808

>muh bobo doll studies

Inability to separate fiction from reality past toddlerhood is a sign of developmental retardation

>>16937805

No. I meant the modern definition of pedophile or what you call pedosexual in your post. I said it doesn't automatically mean you lack empathy for children, even if you are attracted to them.

hi ron