Furry Dating Site Shuts Down Due to FOSTA

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nanogrip said:
Furry Dating Site? Everyday, we stray further from God's light.
Click to expand...
KRSgVXF.jpg
 
kju1 said:
Ive said it before and I will say it again. They should just legalize it like Nevada did (outside of vegas), grant a license to sell sex (comes with a guarantee of cleanliness etc) and tax the shit out of it. Course you will still have people trying to avoid paying the tax and those that refuse to get a license...but it would be a lot safer overall.



You just described my evenings...cute.



Oh hell no. Nobody is gonna touch that....and DUDE please for the love of all that is good and right on the [H] please LEARN to use the +QUOTE button rather than making a dozen posts in a row. It just makes you look dumb if you do so many in a row.
Click to expand...
I only do this on my phone, so it's hard for me to keep track otherwise. What can I say, I'm fat. Or old. Or whatever.
 
FOSTA (and other nonsense like the recent CLOUD Act which has been jammed into the craptastic omnibus-fund-the-govt-quick-nobody-is-looking-pack-it-full-of-things-that-our-corporate-masters-wish bill that recently passed. Its in there alongside a provision to shut down minor league baseball players trying to unionize and sue so they can't be paid sub-minimum-wage and other useless cruft to the detriment of We The People) is yet another bill that has a major effect on online discourse through liability. The ACLU, EFF and others have expressed opposition based on this issue .

Succinctly, we've seen many a web page shut down already - those regarding personals/dating etc... when it comes to FOSTA - because the bill essentially makes it so that the website staff could be held liable if people use their platform to do bad things, rather than going after the actual perpetrators. Of course, there is boilerplate "well, it has to be known that they're using your site to do bad things etc.." but that is a problem for a number of reasons, such as user-content generation, the exact requirements of what "know about" might mean, and most importantly the fact that if accused you have to defend it in a lengthy and expensive court case. We've seen this notion used by scum all over the web to drive out competitors and other elements with fallacious law suits and bad DMCA claims, hoping to force a settlement for instance, but it is especially bad when one of the parties knows the other can't handle the legal battle at all! Worse, with things like FOSTA many of the smaller sites know they can't handle should one of these cases ever come up, so the sites themselves either shut down entirely or majorly change their allowed communication or content - a sad, frustrating state of affairs.

W'eve already seen Craigslist and Backpage shut down their personals section entirely rather than deal with the liability of FOSTA because sometimes users post veiled prostitution/escort/modeling ads. There have also been several dating sites shutting down or vastly changing their setup because of FOSTA liability and it seems like this furry site is just the most recent. It is really too bad because aside from its effect on free and open discourse on the Internet, it will actually make tracking down real human/sex trafficking more difficult. Craigslist/Backpage for instance were long known by law enforcement and for the most part given free reign, but when they saw evidence of underage or trafficked individuals they could know it would cross their path centralized to these high-traffic sites; most of which would reasonably provide information under (specific) warrant relevant to the case. FOSTA will drive the nasty stuff even further underground and will require even greater scrutiny of far more sites, not to mention use precedent to add more liability that will further strangle free speech.

It has long been said that "children" and "terrorism" are backdoor passwords to the Constitution, whenever someone wants to bend the rules to quash certain activities or allow corporate or government invasive overreach - see the PATRIOT Act for a perfect example (and that it was often used in ways not related to terrorism). With FOSTA, now "sex trafficking" is yet another excuse to shutdown discourse or go poking your nose into anything with a slight hypothetical likelihood that it could be occurring. Its unfortunate to see yet another angle in this regard, but hopefully with enough support there will be enough cases to rebuke via the courts and force it overturned. It isn't like there aren't existing laws against sex trafficking itself! However, how many sites used by consenting adults will be modified or closed due to new definitions of liability and the unfair burden that provides in the meantime?>
 
The thing I don't understand about this is that some sites are closing down but others don't care and no one seems explain why the laws seem to have scared some places like Craigslist and not mattered to others like Tinder.
 
rudy said:
The thing I don't understand about this is that some sites are closing down but others don't care and no one seems explain why the laws seem to have scared some places like Craigslist and not mattered to others like Tinder.
Click to expand...

Size of the legal team/not wanting to deal with the headache? The Personals section was only one part of Craigslist. They can shut it down without shutting down their entire site. Pounced was small and the burden this law placed on them is simply too much for them to deal with. I'd imagine companies like Tinder are preparing their legal teams to fight FOSTA.
 
rudy said:
The thing I don't understand about this is that some sites are closing down but others don't care and no one seems explain why the laws seem to have scared some places like Craigslist and not mattered to others like Tinder.
Click to expand...

Part of it is money. Tinder has massive cash reserves and can afford to fight if there was a FOSTA claim against them. Some niche site somewhere can't afford to do so. This is a big reason why many sites shutdown or alter their content without even a claim against them - they know they couldn't afford it if one ever arrived. There's also some technical elements (Tinder's setup isn't really technically conducive to sex work I'd think - I've never actually used the site at all so I'm only going on what I've heard of its premise, but the mobile only, swipe-matching system etc doesn't seem to be very useful. Likewise, many other dating sites that are focused on longer term relationships and/or cast a narrow net based on user preferences don't seem particularly viable. I could be wrong about this somehow though) , but there's also exposure of how much each particular site is used for escorts/modeling/erotic massage/prostitution. Sites like Craigslist, a variety of "adult" dating and sex-focused meetup sites, are used by those offering sex work services of one sort or another, with varying degrees of veiled language and code words. That makes them more likely to be targeted, legitimately or otherwise.

Money is the biggest element I think but the others are certainly present.
 
Derangel said:
Size of the legal team/not wanting to deal with the headache? The Personals section was only one part of Craigslist. They can shut it down without shutting down their entire site. Pounced was small and the burden this law placed on them is simply too much for them to deal with. I'd imagine companies like Tinder are preparing their legal teams to fight FOSTA.
Click to expand...

[H] is small. If I make a post in the FS section trying to sell an hour of my "company" for 50 "roses" you'd better believe the shit would get deleted in an instant. Moderation isn't that hard to achieve.
 
rgMekanic said:
[H] is small. If I make a post in the FS section trying to sell an hour of my "company" for 50 "roses" you'd better believe the shit would get deleted in an instant. Moderation isn't that hard to achieve.
Click to expand...

As far as I'm aware most dating sites try to crack down on that stuff. The problem is, even cracking down on it does not seem to be enough. If even one ad slips through the cracks it could leave sites open to legal action from the Feds. I can understand why a small dating site wouldn't want to take that risk.
 
rgMekanic said:
[H] is small. If I make a post in the FS section trying to sell an hour of my "company" for 50 "roses" you'd better believe the shit would get deleted in an instant. Moderation isn't that hard to achieve.
Click to expand...
But if your "company" is filming it, it is ok as then it is just "acting." Just make this shit legal, regulate the shit out of it and tax it at the same rate as cannabis (or higher) and be done with it.
 
[21CW]killerofall said:
But if your "company" is filming it, it is ok as then it is just "acting." Just make this shit legal, regulate the shit out of it and tax it at the same rate as cannabis (or higher) and be done with it.
Click to expand...
Why must arguments for legalizing a vice always include a "tax the shit out of it" component?

Conservatives: Keep it illegal.

Progressives: Legalize it then bury it under a mountain of taxes.

Libertarians (me): Legalize it while keeping taxes minimal if not nonexistent.

To me onerous taxation on vices is every bit as anti-freedom as making them outright illegal.
 
Smashing Young Man said:
Why must arguments for legalizing a vice always include a "tax the shit out of it" component?

Conservatives: Keep it illegal.

Progressives: Legalize it then bury it under a mountain of taxes.

Libertarians (me): Legalize it while keeping taxes minimal if not nonexistent.

To me onerous taxation on vices is every bit as anti-freedom as making them outright illegal.
Click to expand...

A good way to sell something to politicians is to talk about how much money it could make. With something that causes "moral outrage" you have to appeal to the thing a politician thinks about the most: Their pocket book. There is no way some states would have legalized marijuana without the huge tax incentive that came with it.
 
Derangel said:
A good way to sell something to politicians is to talk about how much money it could make. With something that causes "moral outrage" you have to appeal to the thing a politician thinks about the most: Their pocket book. There is no way some states would have legalized marijuana without the huge tax incentive that came with it.
Click to expand...
This is why. It is about the only way it gets passed, plus it helps get other things funded, like infrastructure projects, more $ for schools, and the blackmail money to pay off the governer's mistress (half kidding).
 
[21CW]killerofall said:
This is why. It is about the only way it gets passed, plus it helps get other things funded, like infrastructure projects, more $ for schools, and the blackmail money to pay off the governer's mistress (half kidding).
Click to expand...

Actually what gets me is when the voters pass these sin taxes and basically say, hey I dont do it so I dont care, then whine when they raise the gas tax or sales tax and say how unfair it is, the irony..
 
Gideon said:
Actually what gets me is when the voters pass these sin taxes and basically say, hey I dont do it so I dont care, then whine when they raise the gas tax or sales tax and say how unfair it is, the irony..
Click to expand...
Most of our infrastructure is going to shit. We really need to raise the gas tax to help fund it.

I have never once complained about how high a tax is. Doesn't mean that I didn't like it or didn't understand it though. Someone has to pay for the services and infrastructure provided by the government. Money doesn't grow on trees (it actually grows in fields and we have to harvest that shit to literally make money) ;)
 
Fear not though, actual human trafficking will continue because laws are more effective than hunting down human traffickers and putting a bullet in their head.
 
Twisted Kidney said:
Hey, so long as they only go after your neighbour it doesn't effect you, right?

Then your other neighbour, then your buddy from a street over, then your cousin, but not you, so it's A-OK. They could never have a reason to think you were filled with impure, unchristian thoughts.

Could they?

We can all joke about furries, because ewww. In a suit of fun fur? That has to be messy. Remember that there's only one set of rules that apply to everyone, any moron who cheers because some group they don't like is in the cross-hairs is just too stupid to understand how easy it is to be next.
Click to expand...

I assumed rgMekanic was just attempting some good natured ribbing. I could be wrong as that sort of things does not always come across well in text. Not personally a furry but if Scarlett Johansson showed up at my house in a horse costume and asked if I was down to F%$^ I don't think I would turn her away.

I mean seriously whatever your thing is as long as no one gets hurt I don't see an issue.
 
NickJames said:
There's groups for everyone, Christian Mingle, Black People Meet, Farmers Only and these are just the ones you see on TV. Honesty if there's a fetish for it, it most likely has a way for people to connect via conventions or dating sites.
Click to expand...

As a representative of men who like to dance with doughnuts on their dicks while singing, "Have you seen The Muffin Man?", this is not always the case. I call on Congress to enact legislation to make the internet more tolerant of people with narrow sexual motivations. Except furries, of course, because those people are perverts.


The following link is NSFW! NSFW! NSFW! Mods, forgive me if I crossed a line here ....


And how perverted are furries, you may ask? Well, if you've ever seen the Real Doll website, which I am not going to link to here (but which is also NSFW), I offer you this for your furries-are-all-perverted consideration:

NSFW! NSFW! NSFW! Real Hamster NSFW! NSFW! NSFW!



Please don't ban me. I am small and stupid. And it is one of the websites that made me laugh hard. Read the F.A.Q. page, it's the best.
 
Last edited:
rgMekanic said:
[H] is small. If I make a post in the FS section trying to sell an hour of my "company" for 50 "roses" you'd better believe the shit would get deleted in an instant. Moderation isn't that hard to achieve.
Click to expand...

So youre saying I shouldnt send you 50 roses? I am so bummed now.

Xaeos said:
Part of it is money. Tinder has massive cash reserves and can afford to fight if there was a FOSTA claim against them. Some niche site somewhere can't afford to do so. This is a big reason why many sites shutdown or alter their content without even a claim against them - they know they couldn't afford it if one ever arrived. There's also some technical elements (Tinder's setup isn't really technically conducive to sex work I'd think - I've never actually used the site at all so I'm only going on what I've heard of its premise, but the mobile only, swipe-matching system etc doesn't seem to be very useful. Likewise, many other dating sites that are focused on longer term relationships and/or cast a narrow net based on user preferences don't seem particularly viable. I could be wrong about this somehow though) , but there's also exposure of how much each particular site is used for escorts/modeling/erotic massage/prostitution. Sites like Craigslist, a variety of "adult" dating and sex-focused meetup sites, are used by those offering sex work services of one sort or another, with varying degrees of veiled language and code words. That makes them more likely to be targeted, legitimately or otherwise.

Money is the biggest element I think but the others are certainly present.
Click to expand...

Tinder has a lot of sex workers on it. They can post provocative pics and get you to say HELL YES to them and then hit you up with the request for cash either in their chat or when you meet. ANY site that is for sex will draw this kind of attention and so will dating sites. Typically the people on these sites are either looking for it specifically (sex not paid sex necessarily) or are desperate enough that if they get the offer they might take it. Anyone who has used a site like this can tell its pretty obvious that its going on even if thats not what you are there for...because you have to sort through all that garbage.

Smashing Young Man said:
Why must arguments for legalizing a vice always include a "tax the shit out of it" component?

Conservatives: Keep it illegal.

Progressives: Legalize it then bury it under a mountain of taxes.

Libertarians (me): Legalize it while keeping taxes minimal if not nonexistent.

To me onerous taxation on vices is every bit as anti-freedom as making them outright illegal.
Click to expand...

Because our government is in dire need of funding. Regardless if you agree with its current size or not you have to agree we have accumulated massive debt. Id like to see that paid off without increasing the regressive income taxes we face.
 
Smashing Young Man said:
Why must arguments for legalizing a vice always include a "tax the shit out of it" component?
Conservatives: Keep it illegal.
Progressives: Legalize it then bury it under a mountain of taxes.
Libertarians (me): Legalize it while keeping taxes minimal if not nonexistent.
To me onerous taxation on vices is every bit as anti-freedom as making them outright illegal.
Click to expand...


The other downside to "taxing the shit out of it" is if the price of something like weed is high due to taxes then you are encouraging the black market to flourish because its easy for them to compete on price.
 
Xaeos said:
FOSTA (and other nonsense like the recent CLOUD Act which has been jammed into the craptastic omnibus-fund-the-govt-quick-nobody-is-looking-pack-it-full-of-things-that-our-corporate-masters-wish bill that recently passed. Its in there alongside a provision to shut down minor league baseball players trying to unionize and sue so they can't be paid sub-minimum-wage and other useless cruft to the detriment of We The People) is yet another bill that has a major effect on online discourse through liability. The ACLU, EFF and others have expressed opposition based on this issue .

Succinctly, we've seen many a web page shut down already - those regarding personals/dating etc... when it comes to FOSTA - because the bill essentially makes it so that the website staff could be held liable if people use their platform to do bad things, rather than going after the actual perpetrators. Of course, there is boilerplate "well, it has to be known that they're using your site to do bad things etc.." but that is a problem for a number of reasons, such as user-content generation, the exact requirements of what "know about" might mean, and most importantly the fact that if accused you have to defend it in a lengthy and expensive court case. We've seen this notion used by scum all over the web to drive out competitors and other elements with fallacious law suits and bad DMCA claims, hoping to force a settlement for instance, but it is especially bad when one of the parties knows the other can't handle the legal battle at all! Worse, with things like FOSTA many of the smaller sites know they can't handle should one of these cases ever come up, so the sites themselves either shut down entirely or majorly change their allowed communication or content - a sad, frustrating state of affairs.

W'eve already seen Craigslist and Backpage shut down their personals section entirely rather than deal with the liability of FOSTA because sometimes users post veiled prostitution/escort/modeling ads. There have also been several dating sites shutting down or vastly changing their setup because of FOSTA liability and it seems like this furry site is just the most recent. It is really too bad because aside from its effect on free and open discourse on the Internet, it will actually make tracking down real human/sex trafficking more difficult. Craigslist/Backpage for instance were long known by law enforcement and for the most part given free reign, but when they saw evidence of underage or trafficked individuals they could know it would cross their path centralized to these high-traffic sites; most of which would reasonably provide information under (specific) warrant relevant to the case. FOSTA will drive the nasty stuff even further underground and will require even greater scrutiny of far more sites, not to mention use precedent to add more liability that will further strangle free speech.

It has long been said that "children" and "terrorism" are backdoor passwords to the Constitution, whenever someone wants to bend the rules to quash certain activities or allow corporate or government invasive overreach - see the PATRIOT Act for a perfect example (and that it was often used in ways not related to terrorism). With FOSTA, now "sex trafficking" is yet another excuse to shutdown discourse or go poking your nose into anything with a slight hypothetical likelihood that it could be occurring. Its unfortunate to see yet another angle in this regard, but hopefully with enough support there will be enough cases to rebuke via the courts and force it overturned. It isn't like there aren't existing laws against sex trafficking itself! However, how many sites used by consenting adults will be modified or closed due to new definitions of liability and the unfair burden that provides in the meantime?>
Click to expand...
#ThisShitRightHere

They're basically taking the internet and removing the interactivity portion of it, and turning it into another cable network with 5000 shitty channels.

Cue Hard|OCP/Hardforum moving to TOR in 3...2...1...
 
Smashing Young Man said:
Why must arguments for legalizing a vice always include a "tax the shit out of it" component?

Conservatives: Keep it illegal.

Progressives: Legalize it then bury it under a mountain of taxes.

Libertarians (me): Legalize it while keeping taxes minimal if not nonexistent.

To me onerous taxation on vices is every bit as anti-freedom as making them outright illegal.
Click to expand...
Yes, but you also think that that you shouldn't have to pay your share to live in this society, so in essence you're just a freeloader who won't see the big picture, including the "tax the shit out of..." comments.
 
rgMekanic said:
[H] is small. If I make a post in the FS section trying to sell an hour of my "company" for 50 "roses" you'd better believe the shit would get deleted in an instant. Moderation isn't that hard to achieve.
Click to expand...


not until it had been reposted a few times for all of us to chuckle at first
 
[21CW]killerofall said:
This is why. It is about the only way it gets passed, plus it helps get other things funded, like infrastructure projects, more $ for schools, and the blackmail money to pay off the governers'/Congresscritters' mistresses (NOT kidding).
Click to expand...

Fixed for ya.

Plus, taxes help pay for regulation of sex workers, which makes it easier to limit the age range, disease status AND the trafficking we see now. Clean hookers are GOOD hookers.

Same for weed: taxes can help fund medical research, detox programs (and not just for weed), and even illegal weed importation enforcement--which will eventually lead to weed cultivation in those countries being legalized, so they can compete in a legal weed market.
 
Azphira said:
Fear not though, actual human trafficking will continue because laws are more effective than hunting down human traffickers and putting a bullet in their head.
Click to expand...
It will only continue while sex work (prostitution) is illegal, because that's the best way for them to get fresh meat.
 
seanreisk said:
As a representative of men who like to dance with doughnuts on their dicks while singing, "Have you seen The Muffin Man?", this is not always the case. I call on Congress to enact legislation to make the internet more tolerant of people with narrow sexual motivations. Except furries, of course, because those people are perverts.


The following link is NSFW! NSFW! NSFW! Mods, forgive me if I crossed a line here ....


And how perverted are furries, you may ask? Well, if you've ever seen the Real Doll website, which I am not going to link to here (but which is also NSFW), I offer you this for your furries-are-all-perverted consideration:

NSFW! NSFW! NSFW! Real Hamster NSFW! NSFW! NSFW!



Please don't ban me. I am small and stupid. And it is one of the websites that made me laugh hard. Read the F.A.Q. page, it's the best.
Click to expand...
zIOmP.gif
 
Kdawg said:
i hope fosta gets challenged by the supreme court and overturned quick. It's too broad.

I hope people can move this shit overseas where US law can't touch them. Sex trafficking is a smaller issue than they make it out to be. Certainly a lot smaller than gun shootings and deaths.
Click to expand...

Estimates are between ~8500 for 2017 and 25,700. Which if you exclude suicides and police homicides, is pretty much in the same area. If you use politicians preferred interpretation of human trafficking, which is that all sex trade is human trafficking and can't possibly be voluntary, then the numbers are WAY, WAY bigger. BTW, because you probably have no idea, firearms homicides are ~10k per annum.

Both are pretty small numbers relative to the population.
 
seanreisk said:
As a representative of men who like to dance with doughnuts on their dicks while singing, "Have you seen The Muffin Man?", this is not always the case. I call on Congress to enact legislation to make the internet more tolerant of people with narrow sexual motivations. Except furries, of course, because those people are perverts.


The following link is NSFW! NSFW! NSFW! Mods, forgive me if I crossed a line here ....


And how perverted are furries, you may ask? Well, if you've ever seen the Real Doll website, which I am not going to link to here (but which is also NSFW), I offer you this for your furries-are-all-perverted consideration:

NSFW! NSFW! NSFW! Real Hamster NSFW! NSFW! NSFW!



Please don't ban me. I am small and stupid. And it is one of the websites that made me laugh hard. Read the F.A.Q. page, it's the best.
Click to expand...

Clicked the link. Didn't enter(pun intended). Couldn't find a youtube clip(no surprise) but there's an awesome but short(pun intended again) skit in the movie Tomcats involving hamsters, and interestingly enough slightly goes with this thread too.
 
NickJames said:
Stop all the sex, that will help prevent violent crime... right? None of what this country is doing is for the good of it's people but I am still curious as to where FOSTA even came from.
Click to expand...
Follow the money. Maybe brick and mortar whorehouses want to fight the onslaught of online escort services? After all, pimps and madams have to make a buck, too.

Derangel said:
You know, there is a very easy solution to a lot of this: LEGALIZE PROSTITUTION.
Click to expand...
Argued many times. Societies don't grow unless there's some sort of incentive/punishment to steer men to marry and support families. Cheap prostitution, who in their right mind would get married? So, they keep any sex outside marriage illegal and immoral. Doesn't work perfectly, as we can see, but it keeps lots of stupid men stuck raising families. Most don't learn until it's too late, that we can get sex without the hassle of a house with a fat ugly wife and annoying kids.
I'm not saying that there aren't content married couples out there. But tell me the last time a guy who's married over a year, was in a hurry to get home after work so he could have hot nasty sex with his wife. Doesn't happen.
Single with a new girlfriend? Happens all the time.
You choose your type of sex. Same old same old, or new and hot (and more frequent).
 
Smashing Young Man said:
Why must arguments for legalizing a vice always include a "tax the shit out of it" component?

Conservatives: Keep it illegal.

Progressives: Legalize it then bury it under a mountain of taxes.

Libertarians (me): Legalize it while keeping taxes minimal if not nonexistent.

To me onerous taxation on vices is every bit as anti-freedom as making them outright illegal.
Click to expand...

the same morons who dont really think shit out.

the illicit marijuana trade is very much alive and well in fully legal states, colorado and california included.. why? because its cheaper.

it should simply be ran as a business and taxed as such. find a way to keep things above board and (generally safer) so employees pay income taxes and the business pays their taxes.

creative taxation is garbage as you said, and most should be illegal.
 
nightfly said:
Societies don't grow unless there's some sort of incentive/punishment to steer men to marry and support families
Click to expand...
Plenty of people I know in NV get married and raise families, this argument does not hold water, hmm...maybe that's not the best phrase in light of this topic. Prostitution has been legal in flourishing societies in the past (Ancient Greece and Rome come to mind).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top