Motherless has been banned for years one reddit and even 4chan because of their lack of moderation of CSAM.

I was reminded of this fact when a user brought it up in a comment thread. We are now promptly taking action to ban it here.

We recommend you use redgifs, catbox, or upload directly to the instance for media posts.

  • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
    1·
    1 day ago

    This is a photo hosting site, that you don’t even need to stop using yourself. If you’d like to view motherless, you can. Hell, if you find something that’s not CP you could upload it on another site if you really wanted.

    This is such a weird hill to die on. You’re defending a site known to have CP, that’s very weird.

    I don’t really care about motherless. It’s just a simple principle regarding censorship and overreach and I don’t understand why you respond with such a kneejerk reaction? Bans like this should have a proper basis behind them, regardless of what site it is.

    Your argument is reddit and 4chan hosted questionable material and they banned the site. Wouldn’t that mean, by your logic, that we would also want to ban it because if we’re supposed to be better than them, then we would want to ban something they deemed as worse than them.

    My argument is that all those mentioned sites are known to have been a host for such material. Now the question is why we treat one site differently than others, despite evidently there not being much of a case against any of them at least in their current state. So yes, if all those mentioned sites host such material, and that is the basis for this ban, then all of those sites should be banned along with motherless. Also, I cannot really verify with what exact reasoning & evidence 4chan & Reddit banned it or who did it first. If they just said they host CSAM and gave an equally flimsy reason for that as you did, then there would be now just 3 sites that banned another site while citing each other? So what’s next? A fourth site doing the same, on the sole basis of the other 3 doing it but without further proof that there’s actually a CSAM issue there (at least one that’s not generally worse than all the other mentioned sites)? Do you not see how that is a problem?

    Also, if there was a direct link to someone’s social media with personal identifying information that was not consensual it would get removed. So yes Facebook and places are not 100% in the clear either.

    That wasn’t really the topic though? It was about alleged CSAM being hosted there, primarily based on your .pdf report, which also listed all those other sites along with it. Yet, only one of them gets this treatment? I simply do not understand how this line is drawn at this site specifically.