I see many support Light in this. 

KangAnon wrote on Dec 28^th, 2019 at 6:09pm:



the problem is that those same people would support light in any attack on me or Greg no matter what the subject matter is. I could put up an image of a dog being groomed and if someone found fault, all the same people would join in with them. 

John Smith wrote on Dec 28^th, 2019 at 6:45pm:


Thats disgusting John a dog? that is just too far.

John Smith wrote on Dec 28^th, 2019 at 6:45pm:



What's the difference between you and gweg?


Why do you identify with him so closely? He's a real dishonest slime. What makes you identify with him?

Frank wrote on Dec 28^th, 2019 at 8:31pm:


you can only aspire to be as honest as he is.

rhino wrote on Dec 28^th, 2019 at 4:23pm:


I made it clear early on that I don't like the content, but the owner of the site made a ruling on it, the discussion is over, in fact threads discussing it have been closed for that very reason.

I have worked in the ISP space where we have had to report, restrict access to child sexual abuse material and work with federal police to help with their investigations.

Light is acting like this gif from Southpark is that, so he can attack others.  Yes I may be letting my own experiences and bias on this matter show, but what he's doing to the real victims by cheaping their abuse by linking it to Southpark is unacceptable, and for what, to call people here paedophiles or insinuate, or flat out claim they condone child abuse?

It's unacceptable.

I've been a part of blocking the ACMA Blacklist years ago on an ISP level and the list, while it was not without it's flaws, was something that should have never seen the light of day, let a lone people accessing what was on it.

I was an advocate against the mandatory ISP level filtering initially based off that list with the full intention to have a greater government controlled scope of what is or isn't allowed online.

Through fighting against that, even if I was required by law and my employment at the time to play ball, those against the idea of secret Government controlled censorship of the internet had a moderate win in that what is being blocked is the Interpol list, but a monumental failure overall now that the filtering is in place as well as the mandatory data retention is to boot.

So forgive me if Light's faux outrage to perpetuate his justification to attack other posters here, claiming they support the sexual abuse of children when he has no idea the lengths that some posters may have gone to in the very fight against that doesn't make me take his triggered snowflake reaction over Southpark seriously. 

To avoid this topic altogether I wouldn't allow the content from the game to be posted here but would come down hard on those exploiting the issue for their personal gain.

I know Light will have a problem with that, hence him reaching out for support from all these posters who I've rarely if ever, seen in the Fringe before now.

it_is_the_light wrote on Dec 28^th, 2019 at 9:44pm:


Well again, it's already banned, but yes, I would also take action to remove it.

This is humanity 101.  You don't win points for being against the abuse of children, this should be our default setting.  The fact that you're still trying to use this for your own personal gain is sickening.

It's like how you don't get points for not murdering people...

Now if you would be so kind as to answer my question in return, if you take such offence and consider the Southpark content to be child sexual abuse content, will you take action and report it to the AFP or at least request it be reclassified with the Australian Classification Board to be given an RC rating so not only would it no longer be anywhere on this forum, not just in a subform you may mod, but also off TV and our store shelves?

over to you