Sleep_chvd's coal gallery

SmallAnus said:
The way sleep_chvd left is kinda suspicious doe. Nobody had any problems with him and he didn't seem to have any problems with the site. Suddenly, you bring this up and he leaves all of a sudden.

He didn't even need to do that shit since he claimed he's not gonna be on the Shlog anymore due to his prison job or something. He decided to bail right now when it was brought up
Click to expand...
Idk, if people on a site I wasn't really active on (he averages 10 posts a day) thought I was a pedophile, I'd probably just leave too.
 
Hagon said:
Idk, if people on a site I wasn't really active on (he averages 10 posts a day) thought I was a pedophile, I'd probably just leave too.
Click to expand...
It wasn't just being called a pedo. It was being called a pedo with proof. Shitlita was already a problem during the Doll era, especially when that Cobson's playpen shit happened. Shitlita was an obvious pedophile thing, even when it wasn't banned. Even the name eludes to it
 
SmallAnus said:
It wasn't just being called a pedo. It was being called a pedo with proof. Shitlita was already a problem during the Doll era, especially when that Cobson's playpen shit happened. Shitlita was an obvious pedophile thing, even when it wasn't banned. Even the name eludes to it
Click to expand...
i remember when they had to make a vote to ban shitlita nsfw in 'ru in like Jan 2023
 
ISTANBUL said:
This is an unshaded drawing though, that could just be the sternum.
Click to expand...
1725651991307.png

Buddy...

With princessparkles, the battle was over words. An image tells a thousand of them after all, and those words are 'I'm an ESL shitskin FNFpedo Jartycuck' on repeat.

Why would you need to show and reveal where her breasts are?
 
Fucking @baqqrih dude.
1725674570707.png

Don't you see the line on the other side as well?

I keep on asking this, why would they even slightly expose the breast to begin with? It's completely unnecessary unless you're adding it as goonfuel.

And how is it obvious?
 
Well Rot and Imperator agree with me, so I'm not forcing it or anything.

Fine, forget all that shit. What is another reason to make the V-neck shirt loose enough to expose something like that?

Like I said, every drawfag I knew who drew Soylita was outed as a pedo.
 
X Immigrant said:
Well Rot and Imperator agree with me, so I'm not forcing it or anything.

Fine, forget all that shit. What is another reason to make the V-neck shirt loose enough to expose something like that?

Like I said, every drawfag I knew who drew Soylita was outed as a pedo.
Click to expand...
I don't know man, I mean, I'd be concerned if he drew her in a sexual manner, but I really don't think he did at all. She really just looks like how someone of that age would dress in the modern day, and, at that, it isn't like he drew her butt-naked and spread-eagle. They didn't add the little genitals on the baby angels in all of them Catholic paintings because the Pope was having a field day in his undergarments on the throne as the painters presented them to him. Well, maybe he was doing that, actually, but the rest of the people who made those paintings never did it for a sexual purpose, which is my point; the slight addition of curves and lines to present an average female form don't inherently indicate sexual interest or attraction from the artist.
 
It's a red flag.
However it would be unfair to start calling him names and trying to drive him away without hard evidence to support the pedophilia accusations.
Maybe if he was a she X Imm would be on the other side of the argument standing up in her defense, but alas.
 
Back
Top