thread_prefix.27 Ban megathread

[Sneedson]

>child trying to reach a cookie jar is pedophilic
Sure let's go with that, why not

Cuz im sure ILC reasoning for posting that and the person who made was purley innocent, juts like loli artists

 

[Sneedson]

No no, I am in complete agreement. We should lynch anyone that posts any depiction of a child in any way anywhere at all for any reason whatsoever.
Those "cute baby videos" on youtube? Kill the uploader and everyone who watched them. Obviously thinly veiled pedophilia.
I mean look at this shit
View attachment 56524
TWO BABIES TAKING A BATH! with half a billion views on PEDOTUBE! We just need to round them up honestly, all pedophiles.

so you think that artwork is purely innocent and not at all weird?

 

[condolana]

No no, I am in complete agreement. We should lynch anyone that posts any depiction of a child in any way anywhere at all for any reason whatsoever.
Those "cute baby videos" on youtube? Kill the uploader and everyone who watched them. Obviously thinly veiled pedophilia.
I mean look at this shit
View attachment 56524
TWO BABIES TAKING A BATH! with half a billion views on PEDOTUBE! We just need to round them up honestly, all pedophiles.

Would you agree that anyone who posts Soylita should be banned for posting a depiction of a child?

 

[Spasoje's Revenge]

Cuz im sure ILC reasoning for posting that and the person who made was purley innocent, juts like loli artists

You said anyone that posts that kind of stuff is a pedophile and anyone that disagrees is a child molester, so I completely agree with you. I too am going to read a motive into the post, the least charitable motive of course. I mean we really need to be witch hunting around the clock.

so you think that artwork is purely innocent and not at all weird?

Of course not! That would make me a child molester! A caricature of a child with completely cartoonish proportions doing innocent, childish things is COMPLETELY PEDOPHILIC. I would NEVER counter signal a witch hunt.

 

[Sneedson]

Of course not! That would make me a child molester! A caricature of a child with completely cartoonish proportions doing innocent, childish things is COMPLETELY PEDOPHILIC. I would NEVER counter signal a witch hunt.

A caricature of a anime character shrunken with a pacifier in its mouth is not something people consume or make with completely innocent reasons in mind and people who like it are pedos

 

[Sneedson]

Would you agree that anyone who posts Soylita should be banned for posting a depiction of a child?

Also @Spasoje's Revenge answer the question above plz

 

[Redditor]

Okay, I guess the guest-posting is finally over. Anyways let's try to shift ban-discussion topics away from talking about kiddie diddlers. Who do you think should be unbanned? Here's my short list:

• Gapey
  • Literally did nothing wrong. Huge falseflag ban.
• loafz
  • By looking at his pfp, he is clearly a poor Jarty refugee in need of a new home. He probably didn't know 'cord was despised here.
• Gii
  • Banned because janny didn't like xim (I think)
• Acro
  • Everyone loved him and he was a well-respected member.
• ILoveVesna
  • I don't know what Rule 3 is but it can't be that bad.
• westernbagel
  • My nigga attentionwhore didn't even get to post.
• PrincessSparkles
  • We need more diversity and inclusion to make us look better to investors.
• Basil
  • I forgot what he did, something with Terry.
• Redditor
  • diaperedsoytanp.com isn't a hostile site, I think his ban is unjustified.

Oh and I just noticed that X Immigrant was temp banned, thought he was permabanned. Make sure to wish xim a happy bday (if xes gonna even come back).

Only one of them can be unbanned:

• Anthony
  • Amazing drawGOD who is very talented and a real man.
• Terry Crews
  • Unban him just to piss him off. Bro isn't even active on the Sharty anymore. I bet him receiving emails from the Shlog will tick him off.

 

[Sneedson]

PrincessSparkles

are you joking about this or are you serious? cuz you seem to "jokingly" defend pedos a liitle too much

 

[NiggerRigger]

@Steve Make me have privilege.

 

[Spasoje's Revenge]

A caricature of a anime character shrunken with a pacifier in its mouth is not something people consume or make with completely innocent reasons in mind and people who like it are pedos

I don't know who the fuck that is, I was under the impression we were talking about the screenshot you posted, don't see why we're shifting the subject. But I do agree that we should be proj or rather reading the worst possible motives into people's actions. Charitability or discretion is really not something we can afford when dealing with these kinds of transgressions.

Also @Spasoje's Revenge answer the question above plz

The question wasn't posed honestly. People posting soylita don't get banned for posting a depiction of a child, they get banned for posting an image that has been closely associated with pedophilia and subsequently outright banned. If the question was posed more honestly it would have been open ended rather than an attempt to entrap me. I don't appreciate such slimy debate tactics.
But what do you think? Should anyone that posted the FDJ soy music video be banned because there's a soylita in it? Is anyone that enjoyed the video, or the person who made it, automatically a pedophile? I think they are, I think we should be very absolute and uncharitable in this matter, I think everyone who liked the video should have their head chopped off, I mean there's a soylita in it for crying out loud!

 

[Redditor]

are you joking about this or are you serious? cuz you seem to "jokingly" defend pedo a liitle too much

Oh yeah nvm I forgot xhe tried to defend Mohammed liking whatever girls name, that's what xhe got banned for right.

 

[Sneedson]

I don't know who the fuck that is, I was under the impression we were talking about the screenshot you posted, don't see why we're shifting the subject. But I do agree that we should be proj or rather reading the worst possible motives into people's actions. Charitability or discretion is really not something we can afford when dealing with these kinds of transgressions.

The question wasn't posed honestly. People posting soylita don't get banned for posting a depiction of a child, they get banned for posting an image that has been closely associated with pedophilia and subsequently outright banned. If the question was posed more honestly it would have been open ended rather than an attempt to entrap me. I don't appreciate such slimy debate tactics.
But what do you think? Should anyone that posted the FDJ soy music video be banned because there's a soylita in it? Is anyone that enjoyed the video, or the person who made it, automatically a pedophile? I think they are, I think we should be very absolute and uncharitable in this matter, I think everyone who liked the video should have their head chopped off, I mean there's a soylita in it for crying out loud!

this is the hill your dying on btw

 

[Redditor]

this the hill your dying on btw
View attachment 56533

At least I know he was the one responsible for the agugu threads on /qa/.

 

[Spasoje's Revenge]

this the hill your dying on btw
View attachment 56533

I'm not dying on any hill, I don't see why you feel such a need to demonize anyone who seemingly doesn't 100% align with entirely absurd notions. WHICH I DO, I have completely agreed with you through out this thread and yet you somehow took it as mockery, I don't know why me parroting your points and line of logic would provoke such a conclusion. It sounds like you're just trying to fight people over nothing. Or trying to "kill" them over a nothinghill.

 

[Spasoje's Revenge]

and I also don't appreciate that you dodged my question to (You), @Sneedson . I really need to know whether you're a pedophile or not so please answer the following question, I did honor yours.

But what do you think? Should anyone that posted the FDJ soy music video be banned because there's a soylita in it? Is anyone that enjoyed the video, or the person who made it, automatically a pedophile? I think they are, I think we should be very absolute and uncharitable in this matter, I think everyone who liked the video should have their head chopped off, I mean there's a soylita in it for crying out loud!

 

[condolana]

The question wasn't posed honestly. People posting soylita don't get banned for posting a depiction of a child, they get banned for posting an image that has been closely associated with pedophilia and subsequently outright banned. If the question was posed more honestly it would have been open ended rather than an attempt to entrap me. I don't appreciate such slimy debate tactics.
But what do you think? Should anyone that posted the FDJ soy music video be banned because there's a soylita in it? Is anyone that enjoyed the video, or the person who made it, automatically a pedophile? I think they are, I think we should be very absolute and uncharitable in this matter, I think everyone who liked the video should have their head chopped off, I mean there's a soylita in it for crying out loud!

Sorry for the way in which I worded the question, it was rather slimy. Although I do thing it was an interesting point within what you mentioned about it being something associated with pedos. Of course anyone who posts it isn't automatically a pedo if one posts it regardless of the use such as in a small inclusion in a video. I think the point about the agugu stuff is people are comparing the widely known pedophillic implications Soylita trying to compare and say they are used in the same way though I don't know whether it is secretly a cord pedo trend or some more zellig slop. I can also understand how such a subject is a minefield where if you even insinuate that a use of a depiction of a child in some OC doesn't make one an immediate pedo you get lumped in with actual pedos.

 

[Redditor]

This thread is getting le boring and kinda getting sick of le discussion about kiddie diddlers. I'mma hop off.

Actually just shuts down le PC and Tabletfags all comfy in bed
LIKE A BOSS

 

[Stephen]

I dont like it when people get banned, I like talking to people
Maybe for future retards like this you could just take away their image posting or something like that

 

[Spasoje's Revenge]

Sorry for the way in which I worded the question, it was rather slimy. Although I do thing it was an interesting point within what you mentioned about it being something associated with pedos. Of course anyone who posts it isn't automatically a pedo if one posts it regardless of the use such as in a small inclusion in a video.

Well I'm glad to hear it wasn't active malice and just an unfortunate wording.

I think the point about the agugu stuff is people are comparing the widely known pedophillic implications Soylita trying to compare and say they are used in the same way though I don't know whether it is secretly a cord pedo trend or some more zellig slop. I can also understand how such a subject is a minefield where if you even insinuate that a use of a depiction of a child in some OC doesn't make one an immediate pedo you get lumped in with actual pedos.

And that's exactly why I don't see them as equal. I haven't seen a single agugu post that was in any way sexual, nor do I see how you could make it sexual when agugu looks like a sack of potatos with stumps for limbs.
I just really have a bone to pick with manufactured outrage of this sorts, where people start witch hunts and moral crusades over absolute nothingburgers

 

[Fortuna]

And that's exactly why I don't see them as equal. I haven't seen a single agugu post that was in any way sexual, nor do I see how you could make it sexual when agugu looks like a sack of potatos with stumps for limbs.
I just really have a bone to pick with manufactured outrage of this sorts, where people start witch hunts and moral crusades over absolute nothingburgers

To me it seems he was absolutely toeing the line.