Updates to Website

All Races, Ethnic Groups, Religions, Gay or Straight, CIS or Trans: If you can rock with us, you are one of us.

For the time being register with Protonmail until I can check with G-Mail.

Reminder: Person Vendetta Threads (especially against staff) will be locked and thrown into the dumper.

Onionfarms.online is temporarily down.
Topics of Interest

Cowsphere - KF Orbiter Lounge 96

Someone who is an orbiter of Kiwifarms and a central figure in the cowsphere.
Subtitle
An Autism Forum About An Autism Forum About An Autism Forum
Out of contax screen shots

Screenshot_20241115-185637.png.jpg

Screenshot_20241115-185913-617.png.jpg

Now here's the full context
Screenshot_20241115-185913-617.png.jpg

I was agreeing with @Troonos
Screenshot_20241115-185913-617.png.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20241115-185817.png.jpg
    Screenshot_20241115-185817.png.jpg
    189.8 KB · Views: 2
Reason: It would seem @View was trying to pass off a Cheep fake 🤥
Posting the same screenshots twice to show "context" sure seems like a great way to show context.

Now post the image you claim isn't CP.
I know the image that was posted because I was the one who deleted it. It came from a modeling website that does indeed have models under the age of 18 years of age. What @kiwifails posted (the seminude model with the teddy bear) was in all likelihood someone who was 18 or over even though the background may have given the appearance of a somewhat "childlike setting". I don't know what else may have been posted on Gargamel's forum and I don't want to know.

Modeling websites that depict sexually explicit content are regulated by 18 USC section2257 which mandates recordkeeping and labeling requirements on adult performers who engage in sexually explicit content. It is legal for a site to use underage models if the content produced is not considered sexually explicit content (either real or simulated) and is exempt from recordkeeping requirements.

Screengrab one.jpg


Screengrab two.jpg
 
I know the image that was posted because I was the one who deleted it. It came from a modeling website that does indeed have models under the age of 18 years of age. What @kiwifails posted (the seminude model with the teddy bear) was in all likelihood someone who was 18 or over even though the background may have given the appearance of a somewhat "childlike setting". I don't know what else may have been posted on Gargamel's forum and I don't want to know.

Modeling websites that depict sexually explicit content are regulated by 18 USC section2257 which mandates recordkeeping and labeling requirements on adult performers who engage in sexually explicit content. It is legal for a site to use underage models if the content produced is not considered sexually explicit content (either real or simulated) and is exempt from recordkeeping requirements.

View attachment 75296

View attachment 75297
Thank you :)
 
I know the image that was posted because I was the one who deleted it. It came from a modeling website that does indeed have models under the age of 18 years of age. What @kiwifails posted (the seminude model with the teddy bear) was in all likelihood someone who was 18 or over even though the background may have given the appearance of a somewhat "childlike setting". I don't know what else may have been posted on Gargamel's forum and I don't want to know.

Modeling websites that depict sexually explicit content are regulated by 18 USC section2257 which mandates recordkeeping and labeling requirements on adult performers who engage in sexually explicit content. It is legal for a site to use underage models if the content produced is not considered sexually explicit content (either real or simulated) and is exempt from recordkeeping requirements.

View attachment 75296

View attachment 75297
Yeah Ken, dropping encyclopedic knowledge about CSAM laws is a great look. About as normal as knowing the age of consent laws by state.
 
I don't know what else may have been posted on Gargamel's forum and I don't want to know.
Well, since it's always opposites day in Onionland, I'll tell you.

It's the same girl in the image you deleted, except the pose was significantly more suggestive and obviously designed to make her look as young as possible.
It came from a modeling website that does indeed have models under the age of 18 years of age.
How damning.
What @kiwifails posted (the seminude model with the teddy bear) was in all likelihood someone who was 18 or over even though the background may have given the appearance of a somewhat "childlike setting".
So, essentially no different than those v-tuber anime avatars that (are designed to) look child-aged, that @kiwifails has spent so many words trying to make an argument that all viewers of such v-tubers are pedophiles.

In other words, since @kiwifails keeps images of this girl (which are designed to make her look child-aged) that makes @kiwifails a pedophile by @kiwifails' own definition.
It came from a modeling website that does indeed have models under the age of 18 years of age.
Oh right, almost forgot this bit. She might actually be under 18, and @kiwifails keeps images of her, which leads to the same conclusion - @kiwifails is a pedophile.
Modeling websites that depict sexually explicit content are regulated by 18 USC section2257 which mandates recordkeeping and labeling requirements on adult performers who engage in sexually explicit content. It is legal for a site to use underage models if the content produced is not considered sexually explicit content (either real or simulated) and is exempt from recordkeeping requirements.

Screengrab one.jpg


Screengrab two.jpg
I don't care about this.
Thank you :)
You're very welcome, pedofails.
Yeah Ken, dropping encyclopedic knowledge about CSAM laws is a great look. About as normal as knowing the age of consent laws by state.
:thinking:
Keeping a known pedophile around is a great look.
 
How damning
Incredibly. The fact Kiwifails thought he was remotely exonerated is shocking.
Thank you :)
This is the second website you've posted porn from that also peddles in CSAM but it's fine because some autistic shit about ethics in record keeping or whatever.
Sort of funny you and your friend Shadfan both jerk off to galleries that contain children but you're only really looking at the goth/cat girls.
I'm actually looking forward to Garga's OP, I expect it will be revealing
 
Excuse me. I did not say the model was designed to look underage, I said the teddybear gave it somewhat of a childlike look. Having said this, I'm sure the website runs whatever content they produce by their
attorney.
 
Incredibly. The fact Kiwifails thought he was remotely exonerated is shocking.

This is the second website you've posted porn from that also peddles in CSAM but it's fine because some autistic shit about ethics in record keeping or whatever.
Sort of funny you and your friend Shadfan both jerk off to galleries that contain children but you're only really looking at the goth/cat girls.
I'm actually looking forward to Garga's OP, I expect it will be revealing
If you feel they are peddling illegal content than by all means report them to law enforcement.

Actually, the recordkeeping requirement is federal law and yes it is mandatory.
 
Excuse me. I did not say the model was designed to look underage,
No, you are not excused. The image posted to Lounge 96 is significantly more damning (and is free of any and all teddybears) than the image posted here.

I saw both images (you did not) and therefore I can make that statement.
Having said this, I'm sure the website runs whatever content they produce by their
attorney.
I'm pretty sure that extremely sketchy site is a front for a pedophile ring anyway. You don't even have to have a lawyer when your site is fake.
 
No, you are not excused. The image posted to Lounge 96 is significantly more damning (and is free of any and all teddybears) than the image posted here.

I saw both images (you did not) and therefore I can make that statement.

I'm pretty sure that extremely sketchy site is a front for a pedophile ring anyway. You don't even have to have a lawyer when your site is fake.
I would think it over before throwing out those kinds of accusations concerning that site.
 
Having said this, I'm sure the website runs whatever content they produce by their
attorney.
What a batshit assumption to make about a site that distributes jerk off material featuring children
I would think it over before throwing out those kinds of accusations concerning that site.
You sure seem invested in jumping into the conversation at an extremely bizarre juncture. Feeling guilty over a bookmark or what?
Also, another batshit statement.
>Um, ackshually I would reconsider your statement about this CSAM site before calling them pedos
Go to bed Ken, your brain is misfiring
 
Back
Top