107
Reddit permabanned my account for speaking out against pedos.
(piefed.social)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2026
107 points (78.0% liked)
22395 readers
975 users here now
News and Discussions about Reddit
Welcome to !reddit. This is a community for all news and discussions about Reddit.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules
Rule 1- No brigading.
**You may not encourage brigading any communities or subreddits in any way. **
YSKs are about self-improvement on how to do things.
Rule 2- No illegal or NSFW or gore content.
**No illegal or NSFW or gore content. **
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-Reddit posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
But you're okay with the content of the video being shared publically, in principle, right?
Hmmm…
I mean, purely on principle? Sure. No one would have been harmed apart from the environmental damage. Once that's done, nothing will undo that.
Psychological damage purely from exposure and normalization of that kind of content, probably not ideal.
The muddying of the waters around Epstein guilt, also bad. ("That was fake, so any other news must also be fake").
Apart from the above sorts of things, (but maybe there's others I didn't think of off the top of my head): as long as no one watches it, it's no more harmful than the sentence describing the idea in the first place.
So let's remove the additional impacts to test the standard. Hypothetically, someone creates a tool that is freely available and has no environmental impacts, doesn't rely on problematic training data, any of that.
Its free to use for anyone to create and distribute photo-realistic images of what look exactly like 6 year old girls in sexual situations.
You're okay with this, because it's not real and it's just pictures on a screen. Right?
Sure, I guess, although it's kind of inextricably linked to the damage of actually using it.
How is that different when it's a drawing?
Because it's less real. The amount of harm and/or damage is proportional the realism. Using that shitty line drawing I made for an example: if I say the lines represent something objectionable, would that make it so? No, not really.
The closer to real, the greater the psychological damage to the viewer. However it's still no actual harm to anyone else.
And then production of actual CSAM actually does harm children.
Like, this seems like blatantly obvious stuff, no one is harmed by someone making lines on paper. (Or with modern tech lines on a screen but the idea is the same.)
So you agree that your line example is bad then. The lines are "less real" than a more detailed drawing.
I mean if you want to interpret some shitty line drawings as CSAM, knock yourself out.
The point I was trying (and clearly failing) to make is that judging images by the labels is stupid, but so is judging by leaving the appearance entirely open to interpretation.
Hell, I hadn't even considered LLMs where a text description alone would be a problem since an LLM could use that to generate an image.
I mean if you want to say that sexual drawings of children is basically the same as a line, knock yourself out.
Pretty fucked up take though.