No.2774
<You WILL NOT post, upload, request, or link to anything that is illegal in the United States. This includes:
<Child sexual abuse material (any obscene content of a person or fictional character under 18 (including "lolicon"/"shota" as well as child erotica)).
It's quite disappointing that in the ban logs, people posting actual 'p will receive the same description as people who do anything from posting degen loli porn to posting porn of older character who are under 18, think of all the anime characters under 18 that are still very popular
At the least, separate these animated porns, which are still degenerate, from actual CSAM, otherwise this site will end up submitting false reports to the NCMEC and potentially from there local police departments. While degenerate and disgusting, non-real 'p cannot be considered CSAM, but jannies might wrongly report it as such, which could lead the NCMEC to stop interacting with our site due to false reports.
It would also waste NCMEC resources and make it harder for them to prosecute actual cases.
So i think this rule should be split into CSAM, which is reported to the NCMEC and law enforcement and porn of underage animated characters, which is instead earning a permaban from the website.
What do you think?
I didn't know what to use for the mandatory thread image so here's an ohio pepe to lighten the mood a bit.
No.2775
>>2774Troongeleno will collaborate with glowniggers? No one could predicted that.
>this site will end up submitting false reports to the NCMECDepends on whether it will be automated or not. If yes, then there is no way to prevent false positives.
No.2776
>>2775I mean, the rules consider animated porn with underage characters "child s*xual abuse material". If we dont rewrite those rules to show a difference between actual abuse material and animated pornohraphy, we would end up submitting false positives to the NCMEC, which could put our relationship with the NCMEC, which is needed on a board that is spammed by 'p sometimes, in jeopardy.
>spaceaccording to the rules this also counts porn of characters with adult bodies, as long as their textual age is underage. it also would count porn of characters who have ages that are over 18 textually to be posted as long as they aren't "loli/shota". this shows just how stupid it is to talk about textual ages for this, or someone can post porn of a character who is clearly underage but not "loli/shota", find a japanese comic that called them 78 years old despite looking underage and then use that to justify posting it.
No.2777
>>2775You also need to collaborate with them if your board has p spam, we have to be honest. If you dont cooperate with them and still are spammed, your board will not be around for very long
No.2778
obsessed yejistone
No.2780
>>2778Why do you think im yeji
No.3134
Although this distinction is not in the rules, the procedures for dealing with animated ‘p and real csam are very clear for moderators. Moderators have a system to quickly permaban the user, get the content off of our site permanently by hashbanning it, and reporting it to the NCMEC. Fictional ‘p simply results in a permaban and a deletion of the post iirc, but I believe the admins can hashban the images as well.
No.3138
>>3134Have you considered expanding the definition of what isnt allowed? I realized if a character wasn't considered "loli/shota" and had an age in the story of over 18 it would be allowed even if it had a clearly underage body. Remember all the animes with characters who clearly look like children but who the creators say is actually a 300 year old demon? We should expand the rule to close this loophole.
No.3139
^snca
No.3141
test
No.3143
>>3138i think we’re going by common sense which means that the rules don’t have loopholes and if it looks underage then it is considered underage