Message Turncoat in a DM to get moderator attention

Users Online(? lurkers):
10 / 43 posts
0 votes

Jim: A Discussion On Policy


Posts: 34468

So... Jim has posted CP on here once during some sort of manic episode, and since then it has been taken down and nothing else has come of it (we've also had an imitator who is now banned from doing this behavior on repeat to try to kick up dust). 

He has also posted the same CP link (Serbian Mouse) in the Discord twice (but I handle the discord as separate from here), once for reasons I didn't witness and once more as a response against Tryp's drunken powergame. 

There's two modes of thought on this that I have dubbed Moral vs Liable

Moral: People won't want to come to this website if they think kiddie diddlers frequent it. 
Liable: People won't want to come to this website if it supports the posting of kiddie diddling. 


I personally lean towards Liability, and I feel in that regard that keeping the website free of cheese pizza is us doing enough. If we were to be brought into some sort of legal situation or court scenario or etc for whatever reason, we'd be able to more than argue that we were keeping such content off of the website. Like google and youtube, we show we have a policy in keeping it off, and people can expect that such content won't be what's left around. 

The Moral issue though has been bubbling under the surface: There are people who either are or want to be offended by not merely the content, but the "scum" that would post such things. Even with the content kept off of the website, they find it deplorable to be seen next to such detestable roachkin regardless of their level of success vs failure on the website itself. 

So, since people seem to want to make a huge deal out of this, how do we handle Jim? 

Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
last edit on 4/24/2019 11:08:20 PM
Posts: 13
-1 votes RE: Jim: A Discussion On Policy

cp should be permitted. this place is nothing without the roach squad

Posts: 738
1 votes RE: Jim: A Discussion On Policy

i think the issue is that when we anger jim we anger turkey and we need saudi oil so we cant anger turkey but we have to show our people that we care and aren't with the syrians so i propose we "ban" jim while he can still cause havoc on the borders of syria but another thing is that he cant be seen in syria remember we banned him hahaha we need to use our armed forces to invade syria nad get kurdistand kurd genocide, and put it on jim say we can't handle it! it's not our fault it's these terror groups hahahahhahahhahahaha

Posts: 738
0 votes RE: Jim: A Discussion On Policy

de discusson most end ehaar be coz of de situation in the central afrikon repooblic of sudan we must take action almost immeditaley

Posts: 738
0 votes RE: Jim: A Discussion On Policy

we most ban jim on sight and show these male terrorrista zat dey are not welcom ehaar

Posts: 738
0 votes RE: Jim: A Discussion On Policy

yeah yeah it's an issue i agree but you're a nigger hahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa i'm gonna plunder your continent again if you don't shut the ufck up bitch

Posts: 738
1 votes RE: Jim: A Discussion On Policy

sory 

Posts: 1511
0 votes RE: Jim: A Discussion On Policy

The idea of trying to permanently keep somebody away is dumb in the first place, regardless of the offense. Bans do not help SC by its standards.

I've been on both sides, and getting banned fuels one to post more on a new account. Mods should have a feature to delete a user's last XXX posts without banning the person (for extreme cases).

If you ban somebody's main account for let's say CP, they have no reason to hold back and not retaliate.

If SC is put into lockdown, it dies in the core. We've seen this happen on Luna's SC.

Pushing authority kills SC's core and is resource heavy. Not only will the site need to be put into lockdown state i.e. "passive measures" implemented to repel retaliations/minimize CP exposure to people by direct embedding, you will still need a mod watching 24/7 because it could always be posted as links as well.

Mods should just do their jobs and delete CP. The ban button should only be utilized against Primal.

last edit on 4/25/2019 8:12:13 AM
Posts: 749
0 votes RE: Jim: A Discussion On Policy

I don't care about the people doing it, but the content on this site has resumed being filled with CP rape and jokes. This is a place now for Jim and some of his followers (Cawk, TPG more recently) to fill with CP shit. Unless you do something about this, for it to stop, SC will die. I'll be among those leaving anyway. For both Moral and Liable reasons. I don't want to be associated with this crap, nor do I enjoy myself when I come here.

I just want other people to read this shit and be confused whether it's part of the post or not.
last edit on 4/25/2019 1:35:57 PM
Posts: 1511
0 votes RE: Jim: A Discussion On Policy

"ban the pedos or im leaving"

the old "they post cp" is not valid anymore since we all know its limey posting the cp and trying to get other framed cuz he knows you guys are retarded enough to possibly continue intuition bans

10 / 43 posts
This site contains NSFW material. To view and use this site, you must be 18+ years of age.