Voat prohibits the posting of sexualized media of minors (under the age of 18) or any media depicting minors in sexual situations. Your account will be immediately and permanently banned.
I mean, stuff like drawings may or may not depict a child, but who is decide if the person in the drawing is a minor? If it's only concerning real life individuals, than I'm for it.
Sorry but v/loli offers nothing of value to the community, toddlers and small children particularly, even drawn, in sexualized scenarios is of no use, causes controversy, grosses people out, and brings allot of unwanted negative attention to everyone here from the creators to the participants.
Besides, isn't there a site or two dedicated to such like Deviant Art? This site is about maintaining free speech and open dialog, not seeing who can be sexually enticed by images that are clearly meant to resemble toddlers or small children.
Sorry but v/loli offers nothing of value to the community...causes controversy, grosses people out, and brings allot of unwanted negative attention to everyone here from the creators to the participants. Besides, isn't there a site or two dedicated to such like Deviant Art?
Let's try this with a different subject, shall we? A flip of the script, if you will...
Sorry but v/niggers offers nothing of value to the community...causes controversy, offends people, and brings allot of unwanted negative attention to everyone here from the creators to the participants. Besides, isn't there a site or two dedicated to such like Stormfront?
Don't call yourself someone who respects free speech and open dialog, then turn around and advocate censoring speech and discussion you don't like. You'd pitch your shit if it was /v/niggers we were talking about doing this to, but just because it's legal content that you don't like and find disgusting, you'd ban it...you make me sicker than the lolicons do, and that's saying something. And you consider yourself a Voat Goat? Pathetic...
Look at all the pedos in this thread .... fucking unreal... and this from a 'community' that hates muslims so much because they are pedos .... pot meet kettle.
Seems pretty solid to me. Look through this thread, you can't tell me grown men are looking at photos of little girls because they like the 'fashion' .... it's a sexual thing plain and simple, which boils down to pedo shit.
Loli content is literally a victimless crime, and not even a crime, at that, which just makes it victimless. You're trying to pull guilt by association. And you still haven't explained why cartoons are protected under the 1st Amendment, if you want to claim they aren't protected speech.
I never said anything about protected speech, free speech or otherwise, I just said they're pedos.... which is pretty clear. I haven't called for anything to be banned, just saying, they're pedos... when you are looking at pictures of kids for sexual pleasure, cartoon or not, it's pedophilia. Call it what it is.
So what? The lolicons aren't hurting anyone except themselves. What do you care if a bunch of losers want to sit around jerking it to lines on paper instead of going out and finding themselves a real woman?
So I can't call them pedos ? ... does their harming someone directly have something to do with what I can say to them ? They get upset being called pedos but it's exactly what they are. As I'm sure you are well aware free speech doesn't protect anyone from being called out, it just means you won't be arrested or silenced. If they don't like being called pedos then they shouldn't do pedo shit.
You enter a discussion thread about implementation of rules, namely whether or not to ban certain content, and then you want to complain when your comments get viewed in that context.
I see, so you're just a troll, then. What's the matter, CTR not paying you enough, now that the election is over and those Soros-bucks have dried up?
Everyone who disagrees with you is a shill, paid, or a troll right . . . makes perfect sense. I didn't complain about anything, I just clarified what I meant.
It's what makes Voat different from Reddit. Go to Reddit if you get offended easily. Sorry. Let me rephrase that slightly. Fuck off to Reddit if you get offended easily you fucking nigger scum. It's because Voat isn't heavily policed that it is attractive in the first place. Don't turn this place into Reddit. Retard.
So we should ban all drawings? I mean, who decides what looks like a minor? If someone complains that think "think" it's a minor, does that content get removed? The issue a rule that can be abused heavily.
No drawing is not "speech", the rule is quite clear, no "sexualized media of minors (under the age of 18) or any media depicting minors in sexual situations".... I doubt if someone posted an image of teen girls playing volleyball in bikinis would be a problem, unless someone is circling where their bikini has slipped offering up a creep-shot.
Love the Slippery Slope fallacy, but the people in charge of this site, Atko & PuttItOut, or whoever they've got things delegated to are pretty solid and consistent. Consistent in allowing actual free speech, dissent, etc.. Regardless the subverses that are now potentially threatened are toxic to the site, on a multitude of levels, worse than anything else. And when you can go to some of those subverses described, and chase links, and find allot of previously available images were removed from the host site for being questionable, it's a rather strong indicator that what was posted wasn't quite legal.
Could the rule be abused, every bit as much as the other side of the spectrum and perverts trying to push the envelope further and further and posting ever more pornographic or suggestive material depicting minors. Though while the side that wants to push the envelope has a long rich history of such, the controllers of this site do not.
I do feel you on the fact that some 20 year olds may look like 16 year olds, & vise versa, but why not just go to a porn site, which the internet is still about 85% composed of, and check that crap out there?
Plenty of "Free Speech" out there to choke your chicken to.
view the rest of the comments →
7584145? ago
Disagree with this:
I mean, stuff like drawings may or may not depict a child, but who is decide if the person in the drawing is a minor? If it's only concerning real life individuals, than I'm for it.
7584328? ago
Sorry but v/loli offers nothing of value to the community, toddlers and small children particularly, even drawn, in sexualized scenarios is of no use, causes controversy, grosses people out, and brings allot of unwanted negative attention to everyone here from the creators to the participants.
Besides, isn't there a site or two dedicated to such like Deviant Art? This site is about maintaining free speech and open dialog, not seeing who can be sexually enticed by images that are clearly meant to resemble toddlers or small children.
7594041? ago
Let's try this with a different subject, shall we? A flip of the script, if you will...
Don't call yourself someone who respects free speech and open dialog, then turn around and advocate censoring speech and discussion you don't like. You'd pitch your shit if it was /v/niggers we were talking about doing this to, but just because it's legal content that you don't like and find disgusting, you'd ban it...you make me sicker than the lolicons do, and that's saying something. And you consider yourself a Voat Goat? Pathetic...
7588853? ago
Look at all the pedos in this thread .... fucking unreal... and this from a 'community' that hates muslims so much because they are pedos .... pot meet kettle.
7594212? ago
Ad hominem and appeal to hypocrisy fallacies are not arguments.
7599680? ago
It's not an 'argument' it's a statement.
7599752? ago
FTFY.
7599848? ago
Seems pretty solid to me. Look through this thread, you can't tell me grown men are looking at photos of little girls because they like the 'fashion' .... it's a sexual thing plain and simple, which boils down to pedo shit.
7600079? ago
Loli content is literally a victimless crime, and not even a crime, at that, which just makes it victimless. You're trying to pull guilt by association. And you still haven't explained why cartoons are protected under the 1st Amendment, if you want to claim they aren't protected speech.
7600222? ago
I never said anything about protected speech, free speech or otherwise, I just said they're pedos.... which is pretty clear. I haven't called for anything to be banned, just saying, they're pedos... when you are looking at pictures of kids for sexual pleasure, cartoon or not, it's pedophilia. Call it what it is.
7600295? ago
So what? The lolicons aren't hurting anyone except themselves. What do you care if a bunch of losers want to sit around jerking it to lines on paper instead of going out and finding themselves a real woman?
7600362? ago
So I can't call them pedos ? ... does their harming someone directly have something to do with what I can say to them ? They get upset being called pedos but it's exactly what they are. As I'm sure you are well aware free speech doesn't protect anyone from being called out, it just means you won't be arrested or silenced. If they don't like being called pedos then they shouldn't do pedo shit.
7600448? ago
You enter a discussion thread about implementation of rules, namely whether or not to ban certain content, and then you want to complain when your comments get viewed in that context.
I see, so you're just a troll, then. What's the matter, CTR not paying you enough, now that the election is over and those Soros-bucks have dried up?
7600558? ago
Everyone who disagrees with you is a shill, paid, or a troll right . . . makes perfect sense. I didn't complain about anything, I just clarified what I meant.
Looks like I found one of the pedos.....
7600869? ago
Nah, just an advocate for free speech that mistook someone who just wanted to call names for someone having a serious discussion about the site.
7585303? ago
It's what makes Voat different from Reddit. Go to Reddit if you get offended easily. Sorry. Let me rephrase that slightly. Fuck off to Reddit if you get offended easily you fucking nigger scum. It's because Voat isn't heavily policed that it is attractive in the first place. Don't turn this place into Reddit. Retard.
7584377? ago
Drawing is part of free speech.
So we should ban all drawings? I mean, who decides what looks like a minor? If someone complains that think "think" it's a minor, does that content get removed? The issue a rule that can be abused heavily.
7584622? ago
No drawing is not "speech", the rule is quite clear, no "sexualized media of minors (under the age of 18) or any media depicting minors in sexual situations".... I doubt if someone posted an image of teen girls playing volleyball in bikinis would be a problem, unless someone is circling where their bikini has slipped offering up a creep-shot.
Love the Slippery Slope fallacy, but the people in charge of this site, Atko & PuttItOut, or whoever they've got things delegated to are pretty solid and consistent. Consistent in allowing actual free speech, dissent, etc.. Regardless the subverses that are now potentially threatened are toxic to the site, on a multitude of levels, worse than anything else. And when you can go to some of those subverses described, and chase links, and find allot of previously available images were removed from the host site for being questionable, it's a rather strong indicator that what was posted wasn't quite legal.
Could the rule be abused, every bit as much as the other side of the spectrum and perverts trying to push the envelope further and further and posting ever more pornographic or suggestive material depicting minors. Though while the side that wants to push the envelope has a long rich history of such, the controllers of this site do not.
I do feel you on the fact that some 20 year olds may look like 16 year olds, & vise versa, but why not just go to a porn site, which the internet is still about 85% composed of, and check that crap out there?
Plenty of "Free Speech" out there to choke your chicken to.
7594078? ago
Then explain why cartoons and other drawings are protected under the 1st Amendment.