FUCK REDDIT

[POS Industries]

Originally Posted by Jagos

So let's get this straight... The US government goes after people for having teenage images but not harming girls. These people are sharing photos.

There's a stark difference in degrees of reprehensibility and harm caused between distributing pictures of real minors for sexual gratification and having some Lucky Star hentai.

[Jagos]

Originally Posted by shiney

You're something else Jagos.

I'm going to ask that anyone who responds to this keeps a civil tone, because even I am having some trouble. This is mind-boggling, Jagos. This guy is a legitimate and perfect example of a creeper hiding behind internet anonymity, and you're butthurt because he learned the consequences the hard way. If someone were gluing these photographs to the walls in NYC subways and got busted I imagine you'd be there decrying government intrusion? And would defend the owners and operators of the subway system, as this was happening with their knowledge and consent, and they knew exactly who was doing it every step of the way and were contacted repeatedly about this and not just did nothing but actually took steps to warn the person. And THAT'S OK but him getting outed isn't?

'Cause it's totes legal and not at all something that should be discouraged??

*sigh*

NO. Shiny.

First, the journalist found out because the guy actually went to people and basically stalked him. That's what I'm concerned with. Everyone's so far getting the connection of "pedophile" with "he deserves it" yet when we ask for the same info in other contexts, suddenly you aren't allowed anonymity at all.

The entire point here is how two wrongs DO NOT make a right.

In the contexts that you're describing, there are legal laws against that. The journalist would report the story, and done. Here, I just think that the journalist was kind of being a dick for outing this individual. Sure, Reddit brought even more attention to the the guy with their inappropriate ban on Gawker links. But no one's stopping that at all.

I find this the same as going after Craigslist for what its users are doing. Get the police involved to track who's doing what and take them down. The first context that I was responding to was Reddit being involved with this type of stuff. I have my doubts because I use Reddit for information gathering on politics and technology. But I'm just one of the millions of people that use Reddit on a daily basis. The fact is, these types(pedos and sickos) do use other sites and should be taken care of in other ways besides a public outing. I just don't think Chen should have done it because I feel he was doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. Maybe he's emotionally involved, maybe it's because that was his investigation, maybe he felt right about having that kind of power, iunno. It just seems like an ethical line was crossed in regards to journalistic integrity by being so involved with the story.

I'm glad protecting the self-admitted identity of a self-admitted pedophile is more important than protecting the safety of young women and girls.

I'm glad that we're more uncomfortable with abusers suffering consequences for their actions than protecting their victims.

I'm glad that people like you, who condone and perpetuate systems of oppression and rape culture exist, while 1 in 4 women are rape victims.

I'm glad that there are people who live in bubbles where they never have to suffer from violence because of their gender or race.

I'm glad that we can call this man a troll over and over, as if being a troll changes his abusive behaviour one iota.

Yes, I'm real glad that this discussion is alive and well today, in 2012.

Pocheros, let be very, very, VERY clear to you.

The first thing that people hear when "child porn" is brought up as a topic is usually an emotional plea. Then they project something that is NOT said at all. No, I haven't defended the guy here and I said I'm uncomfortable with how this information was used to publicly out him. Maybe naming and shaming works but it doesn't do a damn thing to change the behavior. Maybe in a year, he gets more internet, becomes more secretive, and becomes more depraved instead of seeking help. No, I don't agree that we should seek "eye for an eye" vengeance just because he traded photos or anything else. Maybe I feel that the first part of this equation is to find out what the hell is going on here on a variety of levels:

Are the women still in a position of submission or can we get them to psychiatric assistance for the damage of actual rape or torture?

Are we sure of all photos being ones of dark intentions or have we looked at the evidence stacked against the perpetrators?

Do we have public services to answer the issues of rape and oppression in most, if not all, circumstances? If not, how do we improve this issue?

And FFS, stop trying to say I condone this crap. That just tells me you don't want to read a word or you want to jump to a conclusion and make me out to be a bad guy for doing nothing other than disagreeing with Chen's decision to out the guy instead of finding ways to answer a myriad of questions about this. Also, it's not a bubble when something gives me an uneasy feeling about a very difficult situation that doesn't look good for anyone.

You know why people have to take actions like this? Because no one else gives enough of a shit about victims to help them. The police don't give a fuck. So it's up to the victims to take actions to protect themselves, when no one else will. When people have a problem with victims taking actions to protect themselves all I can think of is ABUSE APOLOGIST. All it indicates, to me, is that the people defending this man are really, really uncomfortable with the idea that they will have slightly less power than they did before. Because suddenly someone experienced consequences, and some people aren't used to experiencing consequences for their actions.

...

Last time to tell you. I'm not defending him.

Do you think that the right of the children in those pictures to not be easily, trivially further victimized--on the Front Page Of The Internet, no less--is less important, or more important than Violentacrez' right to inalienable freeze peaches in trading pictures of those victims?

It wasn't on the frontpage of the internet. At all.

So tell me, everyone, have you ALL seen the pictures for yourselves and seen what they're trading in? Because this is just as bad and the MPAA or the RIAA saying "child porn" to pass legislation. What I do know is that people lose their minds once someone says those magic words and all civility goes out the window. And that's the problem. In not one argument have I seen anyone asking how do we fix the situation. Instead, I keep hearing how everyone wanted to see him punished even if it's something symbolic. That's not helping the situation at all.

Neither is trying to paint me as a defender of child porn just because the guy is a troll/pedo/baby killer/whatever. I just found it unsettling that Chen decided to out him.

It makes them think that being a predator is okay, especially when they're part of a thriving and very public porn-swapping community of like-minded fellows.

That's where I think you're wrong. What this does is force them to go further underground and possibly become more depraved and I think that's worse than having law enforcement track them and put them in jail or merely possessing photos while not having the time to actually commit crimes.

I KNOW this is a sensitive topic. And I'm trying my damndest to keep emotions out of it because of what this seems to indicate. The topics that I'm concerned about are quite a few that seem to get missed in the shuffle.

In regards to privacy, I do think you should have some online. I think Chen should have handled this a different way if VA actually did something against the law. I don't know what possessed him to go after VA but that's his choice.

In regards to the child porn issue, that's even harder. Some people believe that child porn should be legalized because it may give law enforcement the wrong incentives to convict people. Someone might actually be 15 and their SO is 18 and that's considered statutory rape. Hell, two 15 year olds can be charged with sexting for just sending each other naked photos. And it's not implausible to think that a 16 year old has an account and poses nude on the same sites that VA posted to.

So no (yet again) I'm not defending this guy or his actions. I'm mainly thinking about the nuances that this situation has brought up that are being missed and I doubt if there has been considerable discussion about those issues.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Originally Posted by shiney

Devil's Advocate: none of this qualified as the letter of the law definition of child porn. There was no nudity. Doesn't make much difference though.

And gross financial misdeeds don't qualify technically as murder but that don't mean bankers don't murder nobody.

[shiney]

If he has to go further underground, then good. It makes it much harder for other creepers to find then, and associates him with the kind of scum that thinks this is an acceptable thing to do.

[Grimpond]

*sigh*

Jagos, let me be very, very, VERY clear with you.


When child porn is mentioned, It is not a fucking emotional plea. It brings to mind very mentally disturbing images of the fact that it's, you know....CHILD PORN! Now this man has not sought help, and has in fact gone out of his way to create a safe haven for himself and others like him.

The fact that the moderators KNEW HIM and what he did is terrible in every way, and the fact that you're crying out for what you wrongly believe to be a wrongdoing is just cementing the fact that you have a very warped view of things.

You have now led me to personally believe that, on several critical issues, you are a terrible human being.

[Amake]

So it's a question of just how much privacy you should be allowed online. I think that just like the real world it depends on how much you involve yourself with people around you. If you think that things you say contribute anything of value, you should generally not be afraid to sign your name to them.

What you don't get to do is say anything to anyone without consequences happening. As the saying goes, there is no such thing as speech that is free. You pay for everything you say, one way or another.

[POS Industries]

Originally Posted by Grimpond

you are a terrible human being.

Hey now, you're totally right and all but you're not allowed to name call over it. That's my job.

Originally Posted by Jagos

The first thing that people hear when "child porn" is brought up as a topic is usually an emotional plea.

Jagos, the thing with statements like this and the whole meat and potatoes of your post where you constantly claim that you aren't defending the guy and then go on to defend him against the rightfully-earned consequences of his actions begins to blur the line between just being sincerely wrong and outright trolling. The whole "but this internet vigilantism might only drive him to become a more hardened, dangerous pedophile" concern trolling on top of it, regardless of whether you intend it or not, doesn't exactly come off that much better.

But I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt about just being hilarious wrong and unable to rationally convey your arguments to any tangible degree, which leads me to conclude that the news forum, for the time being, just isn't for you.

Three month news forum ban. Hopefully this will give you a chance to find a fresh perspective or something.

[Grandmaster_Skweeb]

To shift things to a different light, what concerns me, among the already discussed points, about all this is the attention reddit is getting might force the predditors to change up their tactics of distributing their ill gains. Encrypted steganography being one of a number of ways to potentially slip things through traaffic noise. If an upsurge of. Bmp or. Wav files started cropping up it'd def be noteworthy as those are two of the easiest types to hide stuff in, lotta slackspace and all.

Just a thought i didn't see any talk about.

[synkr0nized]

Originally Posted by Jagos

It wasn't on the frontpage of the internet. At all.

I'm sorry, I've gotta "lol" at someone who I assume does frequent reddit not getting SO's use of the glitter tag to mock their self-appointed nickname for their site.




e: So is this the same guy that SA was all over for child porn on reddit before?

e2: Oh, shit, it is. What the Christ. I thought he was already dealt with and off the Internet.
Oh, I get it, the OP article is about who's the guy behind that handle. Well fucking with him is fine with me. He's a terrible human being.

[Loyal]

I didn't understand a fuckin' word you just said, Skweeb.

But if it's more difficult to find and access, it's probably less likely to gain much traffic. That said, shortly after the shutdown of /r/creepshots there were two or four more copycat subreddits, named things like "Creepyshots," which were promptly shut down. I doubt they're going for subtlety or an underground society of upskirts here.

e: Yes, Synk, one and the same. Dude had literally hundreds of porn subs under his belt besides the obvious-trolling subs.