Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.1K

(post is archived)

[–] • 6 pts

The reports of other users who saw it get posted would help.

[–] • 2 pts

But making the reporter's names public could be used to target them specifically.

[–] • 3 pts

I meant the voluntary confirmation by those other users that they saw the content in question. Not you sharing the report logs.

[–] • 2 pts

What about offenders found by the admin account? Just like the last two accounts banned for pedophilia (joke and apology).

[–] • 1 pt

But what about when you specifically decide it?

Like if you specifically decided to say a certain user was banned, because they were sexualizing kids?

I've brought this up before, and I know there is no perfect response, but what if you just banned a user for saying something that you viewed as sexualizing, but wasn't in most people's view?

This is obviously going to be a terrible example, because I am making it up off the top of my head, but what if a there was a video of a girl punching a donkey, and the title was "Pounded that Ass"?

Would that be sexualizing a minor?

[–] • 3 pts

But what about when you specifically decide it?

I'm running the place, so it is my sole responsibility.

Obviously, I'm not asking to blindly trust me, but if someone doubts or don't trust me, nothing forces them to stay.

Would that be sexualizing a minor?

I don't understand why you ask such a question when the ToS is clear about it:

Sexually oriented discussions (including memes, jokes, sarcasm, sexual innuendoes, stories...) involving children is strictly prohibited.

https://poal.co/tos

Aka normalization of pedophilia through proxy humor.

[–] • 0 pt

I'm 120% down with making reporters names public

[–] • 2 pts

Well, I don't think all of the reporters would want that, and it would reduce the amount of reports, making it harder to spot the offenders.

[–] • 0 pt

Makes sense when a bunch of people are reporting it

[–] • 2 pts (edited )

You don't. If you have a shitty admin for the site, then you have a shitty site. It's basically a monarchy. Get a good king. Or use your observational skills to evaluate a site over time.

[–] • 2 pts

  • Other witnesses

  • Mod logs showing a pic was posted by the user prior to the ban

  • The user never returns under a different account because v&

  • Some degree of trust in the person making the claim, just like literally anything else in life

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

This is the reason we have due process in the real world--so that evidence can be publicly presented and people can be sure that justice is served.

[–] • 0 pt

Yeah, that is good for criminal cases, because governments have a captive population and wield enormous power. AOU isn't sending anyone to prison so his standards shouldn't be as high as those that should be found in a trial.

[–] • 0 pt

Yeah, but he's stating that someone posted CP which could be libel.

[–] • 1 pt

Leave the link up, send it to a viewable, but not clickable prison with warnings that if you copy and use the url you are breaking the law and a death squad will be visiting you soon.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt (edited )

I'll take the admin's word for it. I don't want to see that shit, and anyone else in their right mind wouldn't want to either. Seeing that stuff inadvertantly can lead to serious trauma. LEO investigators often end up with PTSD after CP exposure.

[–] • 1 pt

You can't know. Trying to evaluate the admin (or anything really) is a fool's errand. The important thing is whether you are getting value from this site. If you are, stay. If you aren't, leave.

[–] • 1 pt

You only know what your told. That being said, history of comments do make a difference.

[–] • 1 pt

> The ToS did not say multiple choice, and those who do not like the updated ToS can leave. You are not the Admin, and should never achieve that rank either.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

You're asking too many questions now.

[–] • 1 pt

If a ser is banned for cp, they should say so.

Load more (5 replies)