Dogo80
Citizen of Zooville
Yes I understand! but where is it possible to see these videos?
Banned Websites
- Thread starter dogluver101
- Start date
There's no group "for amateurs." It was a figure of speech.
JazzyPaws
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
^
I mean non commercial porn creators. And you'll find those videos, in the porn section.
changnoi99
Tourist
dont need to look at other sites can get all the info photos etc on zooville a wonderful site
shadAD88
Tourist
Huh. I’ve been on Luxure before and never came across CP.
The first post is not specifically about that website. It just houses the growing list of banned websites some of which did contain cp.Huh. I’ve been on Luxure before and never came across CP.
I did like a year ago, it took a second to realize it wasn’t a small statured woman and I fucking panicked man. The site after that went through a hiatus like complete lock out to clean the site because people were uploading everywhere and you couldn’t trust a title or thumbnail. I was terrified the feds were going to show up. How the fuck do you explain that? No I swear I wasn’t looking at CP I thought it was zoo… yeah neither sounds goodHuh. I’ve been on Luxure before and never came across CP.
I think you're confused. This is a thread for us to list banned sites, not for you to advertise where to buy content that other people are selling that's not even theirs.
dartel
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
They practically pride themselves on having that category.
I really really get queasy when I’m on a site like fetlife, see a popular account and then see them lip locked onto a guys asshole “eating my meal from master”. I close my laptop lid and cry while rocking back and forth.
Can you expand on this?
Clearly there's illegal and unethical content on many of the sites that are also used to host zoo content (which is often legal to watch, but still illegal to produce in the--vast?--majority of jurisdictions). I'm just asking if, in an ideal world, there were hosting sites that were magically free of all illegal content except for ethically made (mature, safe, enthusiastically participating animals), would that be an acceptable alternative? If not, can you elaborate on why?
And yes, I know I'm asking about an impossible hypothetical, sure--but it's in the interest of understanding your position.
ThatOneGuyHere
Tourist
We have opposite reactions to this haha
Bearsoftheyukon
Tourist
Lux was a go to, why was it banned? I hope not for CP?
dartel
Esteemed Citizen of ZV
No it wasn't.
Second that question. Needs an account, trying to use my proton email kicked back to use a common email service
supersaiyan1234
Lurker
This is great information. Thank you.
thanks for this i think i linked one of these...keep me on the right path!
Silvervine
Citizen of Zooville
Underage animals is what I reported it for, though Floofy also pointed out worms being used for sounding. There was a bit of CP about a year ago, but they did actually clean that out. Just not animal abuse.
ItsKnotMe
Tourist
Honestly, there should just be a "spoilers" cover over the website name or something like that, because acting like it is Lord Voldemort("He Who Must Not Be Named") does not really help anyone or impart knowledge when knowledge could be the difference between freedom and trouble. By that, what I mean is, yeah its good practice to not allow any linkage to a website as far as video links and such, but if its potentially a site that users here go to(unaware of any other kind of content on it) it would be in their best interest and doing them a big favor(potentially) by making them aware. It would also help for anyone that may happen upon it in the future since they would be able to recognize the name and reverse course.
(forgive me for the incoming star wars analogy... lol)
Given that this is a thread specifically listing banned websites, it seems counter-intuitive to name Count Dooku, Darth Maul, and Jabba The Hut(minor bad guys) as the ones to watch out for but neglect to also warn people about Darth Vader(the bad guy). If you just say "Guy from Tatooine, wears a black helmet, 2nd in command of the empire...watch out for him" , Darth Vader himself could come shake their hand, introduce himself, and invite them onto his death star and they wouldn't even realize "its a trap!".
I am aware that a few may take the link and go have a good ole time with it but is withholding from them more valuable than protecting our friends?
Lastly, as someone that uses a couple of ad blockers with some pretty strict parameters I have been to some of these banned sites prior to seeing them on the lists, and due to the ad blockers I was never aware of the adverts responsible for them being banned, and i didnt venture beyond the zoo stuff so I didnt know what other content was on the sites. Now that I have been given the knowledge of those sites hosting such things I dont go to them(not that i supported the ad revenue anyways because of my ad blockers, i just dont want to have any association with sites hosting that stuff). I thank you guys for making me aware in those cases(specifically z***18 and lux**etv i was oblivious too and used to be a visitor of)
(forgive me for the incoming star wars analogy... lol)
Given that this is a thread specifically listing banned websites, it seems counter-intuitive to name Count Dooku, Darth Maul, and Jabba The Hut(minor bad guys) as the ones to watch out for but neglect to also warn people about Darth Vader(the bad guy). If you just say "Guy from Tatooine, wears a black helmet, 2nd in command of the empire...watch out for him" , Darth Vader himself could come shake their hand, introduce himself, and invite them onto his death star and they wouldn't even realize "its a trap!".
I am aware that a few may take the link and go have a good ole time with it but is withholding from them more valuable than protecting our friends?
Lastly, as someone that uses a couple of ad blockers with some pretty strict parameters I have been to some of these banned sites prior to seeing them on the lists, and due to the ad blockers I was never aware of the adverts responsible for them being banned, and i didnt venture beyond the zoo stuff so I didnt know what other content was on the sites. Now that I have been given the knowledge of those sites hosting such things I dont go to them(not that i supported the ad revenue anyways because of my ad blockers, i just dont want to have any association with sites hosting that stuff). I thank you guys for making me aware in those cases(specifically z***18 and lux**etv i was oblivious too and used to be a visitor of)
Silvervine
Citizen of Zooville
The filter means any attempts to even link the site is foiled, and yeah it prevents people from being able to know openly, they can always reach out to a moderator to ask what's going on, not to mention it is in the rules that members are supposed to read before they interact further with the site. And the fact that it says "updated list" shows that the list is constantly being added to, unfortunately.
It's not so much never speaking of it as it is "this is necessary to avoid associating with shit like pedos and zoosadists." Plus if you read back on this thread, you'll see that me and several others helpfully answer why a site gets banned, with moderators chiming in regularly.
Derek2719
Tourist
Ok, I’m just going to be honest . Fully understand why watching new zoo movies for free that cost hundreds of dollars is bad, nut I am pretty poor so in no way shape or form can a spend 150 dollars on a 2o minute video. I don’t share,trade or sell the videos I watch from these sites, so when sites like tic zoo go down for having cp content, that they don’t even have it really makes it nearly impossible to find new good quality videos. I try to purchase them when Iberia got a little extra money, but it’s not easy these days, so I maybe only get 2 new videos a year. I hope you understand and.can post me I. The right direction. Thank you
Franny&Zooey
Citizen of Zooville
I'm new and not up on all the jargon yet: what's "CP"?
Franny&Zooey
Citizen of Zooville
And while I'm in an inquisitive mood: I assume from context "Honeypot" is a site monitored by ill-intentioned anti-zoos?
Child porn.
Franny&Zooey
Citizen of Zooville
I actually had never heard of or visited (to my best recollection) z---18 until I joined this site and received a link to it from a longer-term member.
Granted the moderators has inserted **** into the link. I'll be more vigilant now, thanks to this thread. I will say, however, the banned list really does take out many if not most of the big players.
Franny&Zooey
Citizen of Zooville
Tell me. When you go the sites which are banned, how much new porn which is not on all of the rest of the sites do you find? What exactly are we loosing here?
Every single site I have ever visited since joining this forum had exactly the same content on the front page. All of them.
Franny&Zooey
Citizen of Zooville
Not disputing you are correct, and as a moderator you are in a better position to know; I'm just referring to the search response hit rankings. Now that I'm sensitive to the issues, or at least some of them, I will act accordingly. For someone like me who is (a) a neophyte (b) with limited focus/interest that does NOT include such things as CP and (c) whose search requests are usually pretty specific, I'm not sure my results would even include such content or that I'd recognize it, at least in passing review of results.
Franny&Zooey
Citizen of Zooville
In the area of law I specialize in, rules --especially restrictions -- need to be narrowly tailored to a legitimate/compelling goal. I realize this is a private enterprise (albeit open to the public) and your rule-making authority is broader. If the policy is to keep CP etc off this forum/site, then it would seem the more legitimate rule would be to ban members from posting CP from wherever sourced, as opposed to banning reference to a site that may contain both legitimate and illegitimate content. If, on the other hand, the policy is to boycott such sites to (a) put them out of business or (b) use collective strength to get them to change their content mix, then I see the policy imperative for the total ban. Perhaps the purpose of the ban is all of the foregoing. I'm not, mind you, challenging the ban, just discussing it and seeking to understand it better. Now, remember I'm new so, if gentleness is in your nature reach back for it now: it may be that the policy goals and rationale for the ban are stated somewhere. I'm not asking you to be a spoon feeder; I'll start looking around to find statements to that effect. And I'll go back and review the rules, which I read once before I started posting. It seems like there's an intricacy involved in the moderation overlay here, and review on a periodic basis maybe in order both to comply and for self-preservation of one's membership....
Yeah I can totally see you have the ability to stretch 3 sentences to a book.
That rule exists. And the bans are not just because of CP, the banned sites also include stolen content, commercial stolen content and animal abuse. The CP portion is usually small or just in the form of adverts and not actual content.
We do not want to give platform to sites that do fuck all about animal abuse and serve it to people.
That would be nice, but it is completely in the realm of fiction considering that this is a small forum containing a tiny fraction of their visitors.
Some explanations are in the rules.