[–] 1smartass ago (edited ago)
No, I'm not. Stop putting words in my mouth.
Why are you applying morality to the issue? This isn't about morality
You can't even follow your own arguments.
By your argument, even a Voat babyrape subsite isn't or shouldn't be off the table in the name of freedom of speech. There is as much need or reason for a name like that as there is for jailbait.
[–] FFX01 ago (edited ago)
No, you just lack reading comprehension. I mentioned explicitly several times that I wasn't talking about morality.
This is correct. Now you're getting it. If there are people in that community actively participating in illegal activities, legal action should be taken against those users, not the web service that hosts their community. The issue isn't moral, it's legal. Regardless of whether or not you approve of an idea or group of people should have no bearing on whether or not that idea or group of people have a right to exist. Simply put, if you don't like it, you have every right and ability to ignore it.
If you're so concerned about /v/jailbait, why don't you just go dox them and give their info to the F.B.I. or something?
It's not Atko's responsibility to play thought police.
[–] 1smartass ago (edited ago)
Knowing that jailbait exists on his website at the very least makes him responsible for what might happen on it, or what others will think about it, including potential clients of his. No big company is going to want to be associated with a site that has a name that implies it's about statutory rape.
I'm done with you, I feel like I'm debating someone who's feeble minded.