THE EVIL OKCONFIRMED CSAM BLOCKLIST

https://bsky.app/profile/fearanddelight.work/lists/3lblac3436r2r

Please email [email protected] or DM me on bluesky if you know accounts that should be added, removed, or know dogwhistles to add to the end of this page.

With this list receiving more attention online I figure I’d elaborate more on why this list exists, as well as criteria for being added.

DISCLOSURE: I AM A PROUD LOLICON ARTIST!!!

Yes… get your laughs out (The lolicon is against CSAM? Isn’t that like an oxymoron??) Let me get this clear,

• I am not a pedophile. I do not have attraction to IRL minors.
• I do not condone people harming children.
• Yes, the age of consent is perfectly fine where it is currently!

Now that we got the icks out of the way, here’s the rundown!

What does this list block?

Block users that intend to find or distribute CSAM & minors who prostitute themselves online.

Why does this list exist?
This list started as a way to manually moderate the Loli, Shota & Kodo weekly feeds. It is combined with a big word filter to get rid of CSAM content invading the #loli & #shota tags. Considering the popularity of not only the list but my account I figure this as a special opprotunity to do genuine good, though I have added responsibility to ensure the list isnt used for evil or to bring harm to innocent people.

This list operates on an innocent until proven guilty policy.
I.E if someone just “looks” young I wont add them. I need proof beyond a reasonable doubt that someone is either distributing or obtaining CSAM.

The Criteria for Being Added:

The following are some of the factors taken into account when adding to the blocklist…
(For underage accounts, they must be clearly underage & uploading/seeking out CSAM)

• Indication of minor status & engagement/uploading of nsfw material irl or otherwise
• Links advertised publically as child porn
• Engaging with CSAM (this opperates on the assumption that a person would be able to discern the person is a minor through the single post they interact with alone based on the criteria here.)
• Account explicitly states intention to take advantage of real children sexually.
• Account following many sexualized minor accounts

Not Criteria for Being Added:

• Just Being A MAP

No matter your or my own stance on MAPs, merely being a MAP does not equal harm to children. For instance, there are MAPs who don’t wish harm on children or swear off contact with them entirely.

• ERP only account

Some accounts will use terms like “pedo mommy” or self-label as a pedo but make it explicit they dont condone irl contact, or irl attraction. I wont go after RP accounts.

• Semantics issues

Self describing as an “irl loli” or “irl shota” is not enough by itself. (loli in some circles is a word for a body type, not strictly to do with age.)

• Simply linking an encrypted messaging service

While yes it is very suspicious to have a Telegram, Teleguard, Session, or other messaging service linked it does not indicate intent by itself (its not a crime to want privacy)

• I am personally unsure

If I am personally unsure of what to make of an account I come across I will not add them to the list. Id rather let someone slip past than add someone who is innocent.

edit: this section used to be suspected dogwhistles and suspected lingo, but to avoid false positives/witch hunts based on incorrect assumptions I have decided to omit this. (in light of witch-hunts based on misunderstanding such as the recent Zako song misunderstanding I think its best to avoid facilitating the creation of false positives. I dont want someone being harrassed just because someone after reading this saw they have an emoji in their handle and it turns out theyre just a software engineer). Additionally ive decided to do several things to the article.

1. Omit content that would lead to wrongful assumptions even to innocent accounts listed on the “do not add” criteria.

2. Refine criteria to be even more even less “vibes” based. Some of the criteria makes assumptions or is frankily redundant.

3. I removed the site image. I personally havent seen the site pop up in months, so safe to say its gone for good atleast as far as I can tell on bluesky.

4. I ammended the MAP criteria after some talks with one of their community members (who will stay anonymous). Rest assured, this isnt a “MAPs are immune” clause, but more a “Yeah, just because theyre a MAP shouldnt mark them for immediate ban” clause.