they arent uncomfortable with it lol they just don’t want legal bs to deal with
1 Like
Did you even bother reading the thread? I can’t count how many times they repeated it wasn’t done out of personal taste but it’s not like I’d expect you to give a shit if it validates your worldview.
Oh my god, dude. Seriously?
No one’s making you read the thread.
There are plenty of pertinent discussions taking place.
And yeah, no, I don’t care how it is seen from people like you. Freedom, rights and all of that are worth standing up for an no amount of shaming is gonna shut us up.
We’re aware the decision is final and we have mostly accepted it. We’re trying to find compromises or to understand what it will mean concretely. I got most of my answers, but others are allowed to keep probing.
Just mute the thread like you should have muted the tag if it bothered you that much, jesus.
5 Likes
Hello! Please don’t get emotional.
As I mentioned earlier, I understand that the moderators are considering only the legal risks.
If that’s the case, I am pointing out that there are legal risks associated with content other than lolicon and shotacon.
I am raising this issue because I find their arguments contradictory.
In fact, my question has not yet been answered.
You claim that the moderators are uncomfortable with me, but have you asked them directly?
It might be due to my poor English skills, but I couldn’t find any context indicating that the moderators are uncomfortable with me.
Again, emotional responses won’t lead to a productive discussion.
In the end, we will likely follow the administrators’ intentions. However, I feel that there is currently a lack of explanation.
5 Likes
Yes, I’ve read the whole of this godawful mess of a thread. The mods are uncomfortable with the level of risk they perceive regarding the content. Going on and on about how they should take your perception (the user with no risk) over their own is tiresome.
The whole freedom and rights nonsense is a typical projection that Trumpies make - no rights are absolute. No freedoms are absolute. The consitutional protections afforded to free expression protect you from THE GOVERNMENT censoring you, not private parties. If you hang some sexualized loli content on the wall of your office at work, you’re going to get fired. All the yelling about your rights and freedoms wont change that.
The mods have stated innumerable times that, in their judgement, the risk around this content is unacceptable to them. Going on and on trying to argue technicalities in search of ways around the rule is disrespectful to the people that host and run this site for free.
Respect their decision. Stop stirring the pot and giving them grief. If you don’t like it, leave and host your own site.
6 Likes
Ehh okay some of my content I would like to share is already banned (deepfake), but we peeps found eachother and share through PMs.
1 Like
Working on it.
This is a thread to discuss the ban, that’s the whole point. If it was so simple to up and make a new forum, We would’ve done it. But it’s not, the entire community is essentially this one site, creating a new one with slightly altered rules is not gonna bring over the userbase.
I like eroscripts, if I didn’t give a shit I’d say nothing and move on. But this site as a whole is great, but this ban is a dealbreaker for me and a lot of others.
Many of us aren’t satisfied by the answers given by the mods. Yes it’s their choice, yes they have every right to ban whatever they want, but I think the risk they’re talking about has no merit and there’s no evidence to suggest that there is any real risk.
Stop trying to shut down discussion, yelling nonsense about “Trumpies” is the only thing stirring the pot.
4 Likes
Any porn will do that lol
Jesus you all sound the absolute same.
It’s fine if you don’t give a damn, but what is it with you spineless people trying to drag us down with you.
Let people discuss. The mods can lock the thread if they get enough. That said, people like Hentai_Scripts are politely asking questions and they are allowed to.
2 Likes
So many flagged posts. Y’all need to realize the isn’t about the current but about what housing that content could do to the site. We want to keep ES alive and right now that means not hosting this content.
4 Likes
I believe this line from the law should have also been quoted in this thread
It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist.
A lot of discussion here goes back to “they are fictional, there is no victim”… This type of argument is beyond the point when law was defined to make practically any contact (produce/receive/possess/distribute) with the content in which any depiction of a child in adult context a crime. Even user of the forum who opens a page with images of offending content has received it to their PC (and it stays there in the cache), if you happen to live in US and they persecuted you, they would take that as evidence (not proof until you get to court, but evidence they collect against you).
This implication of the law should be enough to make everyone understand why you would not want to bear risk of having any kind of potential target on your back due to being even adjacent to the potentially illegal content.
For rest of the discussion, the only valid point I see being raised is about this site being distributor primarily of funscripts, and not of any audio/visual content, but every topic right now happens to have description, links, previews - all pasted into the topic and hosted here (actually according to #8 of Acceptable Use, it is not even allowed to paste links to images, they have to be here). You have not stated if main reason for ban is that you expect that funscripts might start to be perceived as illegal by law enforcement in near future, or that you don’t want this particular category to be special in a way that no links/images/previews etc is posted for funscripts in it (which introduces a lot/too much/unsustainable amount of work for moderators to make sure all topics and all comments are clear, while not actually reducing the risk for you since a gap in moderation is all it takes to be exposed), or it might be both of these reasons. I don’t demand you answer this, it is your discretion after all, but I think having this answer would be understood and accepted by at least those users who are participating here in good faith.
6 Likes
That’s a misunderstanding of how those US codes are written.
Section (c), the one you quoted, basically means that someone can be prosecuted under this law for fictional depictions, BUT it first has to meet the requirements of section (a) and (b), which includes
lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;
3 Likes
Good observation.
So, assuming we host the problematic content, what issues could arise?
The moderators have only mentioned legal risks, but what specific risks are they referring to? I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels that there is a lack of explanation regarding these risks.
Possible consequences could include being sued by legal authorities or the site being forcibly shut down, but are there any actual cases where a site has been sued or forcibly shut down for hosting fictional lolicon or shotacon content?
2 Likes
This is completely irrelevant for their risk assesment and decision because it does not prevent law enforcement action. Once investigation starts, they won’t be bothered by this. Value is not defined in the law, it is left to be evaluated by subjectivity of a judge who will sign a warrant to confiscate the content, they can simply say “once you add funscripts to the artistic content, you objectified it in a sexual way, therefore the artistic value was lost” and proceed with the case.
And lets say you are right and the judge was wrong. Even if the admins can prove in court that there was artistic value, that is after the fact, when site was already shut down and they are faced with huge legal costs, potentially an arrest and a scandal that affects their family, job, friends… there is everything to loose here, and you probably know it or you would start your own site to host the content.
If “no site has been shut down for it” is enough of argument for more than just you, then you can join and easily crowdfund the cost for running server and pay for instance of discourse forum, but you can’t force these who disagree with that risk assesment to take risk they perceive, either they decide to take it themselves, or they don’t. Saying that there is no risk is not the same as doing it. Words on the internet don’t mean anything.
You are either completely oblivious to reality or not posting here in good faith.
6 Likes
You know what isn’t irrelevant. History. How many US sites have been shut down from hosting loli hentai?
ZERO
That’s all theoretical what-if nonsense. I could say the same about the abundance of copyrighted works or cg bestiality.
4 Likes
Rip, can’t edit posts in slowmode.
To add onto the last reply. I’m not saying that the mods aren’t allowed to evaluate what they perceive as a risk to the site and get rid of it. I’m saying that loli art is just not that big of a risk, and the mods are unjustly banning it, and not only banning it, They’re going to purge all existing content.
and I answered that earlier
You wouldn’t be saying that if they were removing something you liked with the same lack of justification.
Tell that to the artists who create it. Careful, your bias is showing.
2 Likes
People have varying values. With 100 people, there are 100 different sets of values. With 100 people, there are 100 different sexual preferences.
No one has the right to deny another person’s values. That’s why when rules are established, people discuss them.
2 Likes
You are implying that no one except you cares about the content that is being banned. Or is just a cope out and you want someone else to bear the brunt of the risk of hosting it.
I think the argument about it not being much of a risk is a little bit in bad faith.
The stated fact that Loli stuff doesn’t get you shut down seems to be doing a lot of heavy lifting in the argument. Firstly I doubt many sites would be willing to fight that if it came up so the number of sites shut down for this or other reasons probably isn’t known.
Secondly, Losing a court case isn’t the issue, getting into legal trouble in the first place is. If a bunch of volunteers who started this forum a few years ago after the last forum shut ever have to hire a lawyer then that’s too much risk. It took them work to build this and they took on all the costs and risk involved. Hell the community suggested the Patreon to help cover the hosting costs.
C. What a funscript legally constitutes has not been tested in law as it is a new, niche thing that most people don’t know exists. If someone gets a bee in their bonnet and decides to go after it as “Immoral” then Eroscripts is likely to be one of the first sites found and therefore an obvious target.
In regards to trying to get round the ban I can foresee a few issues. If you have to be so vague as to not trigger the banhammer then people who want Loli stuff won’t know and people who don’t may get gotcha’d by it.
Theoretically you could post your non loli free scripts on the site and put a link to a mega folder that contains all your scripts. As long as the folder doesn’t have the videos or images and just text files it wouldn’t trigger the mega ban hammer I guess.
My Final point is this, If you are complaining about this issue and you have never shared a free script, helped out with peoples technical queries or chipped in on the Patreon every now and then you haven’t been helping grow this community in the first place. If you didn’t put in that minimum amount of effort why should the mods come to your rescue at their own personal risk?
14 Likes
This makes sense. I also don’t like censorship etc but in my country this sort of thing can land you in big trouble, even just having it in your browser history or a cache file on your disk can be problematic. I don’t think this country is particularly alone.
And it’s not like furry where there is at least a minimal amount of mainstream adoption/support where you could possibly wiggle out of it.
(n.b. I don’t really know much about furry stuff, but afaict loli is much more politically charged, frequently being used as the excuse for encryption-banning regulations and forced scanning regulations. IMO if you wind up in a situation where this shows up, you’re probably finished)
For everyone else who doesn’t have this problem, it is a pity, but it’s fair to acknowledge the risk of a one-stop shop like ES, both for the operators and the visitors.
I appreciate people who can afford to take a stand, but IMO the risk here is too great.
4 Likes
This. lol
We have read this and also considered history of this law:
Under United States you will see verious cases that show this law has been used in many situations both with innocent and guilty verdicts.
Please look into the miller tests and read in full what they state.
the “3rd prong” of the 3 prong test that you mentioned is where this hinges. what is considered art? what makes art obscene in the legal sense? these questions often has different answers depending on who you ask. if HC was taken to court his life would be under the luck of who landed in his jury.
That is too high a risk. HC would be taking a very big liability and if you dont care thats fine, I happen to care if someone finds themselves going to court over a hobby.
3 Likes