[ bananas / boku / dawa / desu / kashira / otousama / unyuu / yakult ] [ jum / md / ro / peach / w ] [ a / do / fi / gif / h / loli / media / moonspeak / nipa / o / ot / pro / r / rp / touhou / tr / v / vic ] [ sugg ]
Okay guise, don't mean to make people panic about this, but Desuchan's only got about 3 months of paid hosting left.This is a call to everyone of Desuchan. We need to band together to help offset the cost of the server for this year, so Desuchan can continue to exist. If you have anything you can spare, please donate it via this link. All proceeds go towards keeping the server online and Desuchan alive.Ads will also be up soon to help offset the cost, but it's very doubtful that they'll cover the complete costs. Until now, Weedy's been covering the server costs, but he lost his job. http://desuchan.net/donate.html DONATE PLOX
Okay guise, don't mean to make people panic about this, but Desuchan's only got about 3 months of paid hosting left.
This is a call to everyone of Desuchan. We need to band together to help offset the cost of the server for this year, so Desuchan can continue to exist. If you have anything you can spare, please donate it via this link. All proceeds go towards keeping the server online and Desuchan alive.
Ads will also be up soon to help offset the cost, but it's very doubtful that they'll cover the complete costs. Until now, Weedy's been covering the server costs, but he lost his job.
http://desuchan.net/donate.html DONATE PLOX
loli haet poverty
Mods here delete threads I try to start, so whatever...let it die.
how much does the host needs for a year?
>>2542Something like ~1300 CAD iirc there's a post floating around with the amount, not sure which board.
Well, any donations are fine. Every little bit counts.>>2540I'd wager it's because they're troll threads. I don't see any reason why regular threads should be deleted. If you'd like to dicuss the particulars, you can pop on IRC. Last edited 08/10/12(Sun)12:50.
Well, any donations are fine. Every little bit counts.
>>2540I'd wager it's because they're troll threads. I don't see any reason why regular threads should be deleted. If you'd like to dicuss the particulars, you can pop on IRC.
Last edited 08/10/12(Sun)12:50.
>>2534This picture makes me BAAAAAAAAWWWWWWW.
I cried too. I fucking cried.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) Last edited by moderator 08/11/08(Sat)05:23.
I cried too. I fucking cried.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
Last edited by moderator 08/11/08(Sat)05:23.
>>3908As did I. ;~;
>>2534 Source? $ coming soon. Thanks.
Testing...
There's was a swimsuit here, its' gone now. Last edited 08/11/21(Fri)16:40.
There's was a swimsuit here, its' gone now.
Last edited 08/11/21(Fri)16:40.
Leather belt?
Break time for now, more later.
>>53094 strength 4 stam leather belt?
Just wondering what I can and cant post here. Specifically Toddlerkon and oppai loli.thanks
Just wondering what I can and cant post here. Specifically Toddlerkon and oppai loli.
thanks
Scat and gore are forbidden in all boards(/bananas/ allows RM guro, though). No rule against toddlers or oppai loli, but people here don't like it.
>Scat and gore are forbiddenno worries there cant stand the stuff>No rule against toddlers or oppai loli, but people here don't like it.Well thats a damn shame but if people dont like it I wont post any here.cheers
>Scat and gore are forbidden
no worries there cant stand the stuff
>No rule against toddlers or oppai loli, but people here don't like it.
Well thats a damn shame but if people dont like it I wont post any here.
cheers
i do, in fact, enjoy some good todler, and will trade pics via email when i get my computer back from my friend...btw, thnx for the faplicious pic
magdragoon17@aim.com
I spy with my eye 4chan subbing MoetanPuts the "lol" in loliMy image capture didnt work so i had to use my camera. Oh well. What else puts the "lol" in loli for you?
I spy with my eye 4chan subbing Moetan
Puts the "lol" in loli
My image capture didnt work so i had to use my camera. Oh well. What else puts the "lol" in loli for you?
oh god, this might work!
Overtly powerful lolis who act like they're imposing but are just adorable.
Here is an animated clip of that scene to really get the "Delicious flat chests..." feeling, lol
As a newcomer to Desuchan, and a lolicon myself, I'd like to make my first /loli/ thread. I'd like to see some cute, NON-HENTAI, SFW lolis in either swimsuits, pajamas, or nighties. Panties are okay, as long as it's nothing TOO explicit. And in keeping with Desuchan rules, here's a few pics of mine to start things off.
As a newcomer to Desuchan, and a lolicon myself, I'd like to make my first /loli/ thread. I'd like to see some cute, NON-HENTAI, SFW lolis in either swimsuits, pajamas, or nighties. Panties are okay, as long as it's nothing TOO explicit.
And in keeping with Desuchan rules, here's a few pics of mine to start things off.
Yes, we do see panties, but she is in the water, so...
I'm liking this thread Bump for moar~
>>5263Cute, but a little too old for a loli.
ITT: Cute not pedo
ITT: Mass naked child events
Okay, SOMEONE explain to me how this is supposed to be attractive in ANY way? Last edited 08/11/12(Wed)11:59.
Okay, SOMEONE explain to me how this is supposed to be attractive in ANY way?
Last edited 08/11/12(Wed)11:59.
>>5119To what is the question directed at? If you don't like this thread then hide it, no-one's forcing it onto you. Last edited 08/11/12(Wed)13:09.
>>5119To what is the question directed at? If you don't like this thread then hide it, no-one's forcing it onto you.
Last edited 08/11/12(Wed)13:09.
very cool thread
>>5119It's not supposed to be. We're all dadaists.
bump
old but related
What about Eila Ilmatar Juutilainen?
Attention /loli/! The rules have changed, your beloved board is in great danger!following those newshttp://www.heise.de/newsticker/Strafgesetzbuch-kennt-ab-morgen-den-Begriff-Jugendpornographie--/meldung/118381german law will be updated, and EVERY MATERIAL THAT DEPICTS CHILDREN UNER 18 INVOLVED INTO SEXUAL ACTIONS, EITHER REAL OR FICTIONAL (includes virtual/3D animation and drawn) ARE CONSIDERED NOW AS CHILDPORNOGRAPHY AND HENCE ILLEGAL.unfortunately, Desuchans host is german and it won't take long until they found /loli/ and take it down!EDIT: forgot to mention: even if the model is 18+ and looks underage, it will be considered CP :| Last edited 08/11/06(Thu)05:04.
Attention /loli/! The rules have changed, your beloved board is in great danger!following those newshttp://www.heise.de/newsticker/Strafgesetzbuch-kennt-ab-morgen-den-Begriff-Jugendpornographie--/meldung/118381german law will be updated, and EVERY MATERIAL THAT DEPICTS CHILDREN UNER 18 INVOLVED INTO SEXUAL ACTIONS, EITHER REAL OR FICTIONAL (includes virtual/3D animation and drawn) ARE CONSIDERED NOW AS CHILDPORNOGRAPHY AND HENCE ILLEGAL.
unfortunately, Desuchans host is german and it won't take long until they found /loli/ and take it down!
EDIT: forgot to mention: even if the model is 18+ and looks underage, it will be considered CP :|
Last edited 08/11/06(Thu)05:04.
"I am not a lawyer, but..."don't knock the OP too hard.. I just saw this and I have to say that the article on heise.de sure enough is slightly misleading and written in a somewhat spectacular panic-inducing way.it took me a while to wade and sift through all the panicked and aggravated replies, but the more informed posts as well as articles on other sites like the aforementioned press release by the BMJ lead me to suspect that the changes indeed do not cover lolicon. To quote the relevant passage from http://www.bmj.de/enid/916e4cc4821d88a0a4d871c0d81b855e,c4ef2a706d635f6964092d0935323239093a095f7472636964092d0935323933/Pressestelle/Pressemitteilungen_58.html>Strafbar ist künftig vor allem das Verbreiten jugendpornografischer Schriften, ebenso deren Besitz, sofern echte Jugendliche dargestellt werden. Dagegen bleibt der Besitz von fiktiver Jugendpornografie (z. B. Computeranimationen) und von pornografischen Abbildungen von Erwachsenen, die lediglich so aussehen wie Jugendliche (sog. Scheinjugendliche), weiterhin straflos.>Der Begriff der Schriften umfasst neben bildlichen Darstellungen auch Tonträger (z.B. Hörbücher) und pornografische Texte. Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
"I am not a lawyer, but..."
don't knock the OP too hard.. I just saw this and I have to say that the article on heise.de sure enough is slightly misleading and written in a somewhat spectacular panic-inducing way.
it took me a while to wade and sift through all the panicked and aggravated replies, but the more informed posts as well as articles on other sites like the aforementioned press release by the BMJ lead me to suspect that the changes indeed do not cover lolicon. To quote the relevant passage from http://www.bmj.de/enid/916e4cc4821d88a0a4d871c0d81b855e,c4ef2a706d635f6964092d0935323239093a095f7472636964092d0935323933/Pressestelle/Pressemitteilungen_58.html
>Strafbar ist künftig vor allem das Verbreiten jugendpornografischer Schriften, ebenso deren Besitz, sofern echte Jugendliche dargestellt werden. Dagegen bleibt der Besitz von fiktiver Jugendpornografie (z. B. Computeranimationen) und von pornografischen Abbildungen von Erwachsenen, die lediglich so aussehen wie Jugendliche (sog. Scheinjugendliche), weiterhin straflos.
>Der Begriff der Schriften umfasst neben bildlichen Darstellungen auch Tonträger (z.B. Hörbücher) und pornografische Texte.
>>5132(continued) Too lazy to translate, but it pretty much explicitly says that the possession of lolicon remains not chargeable (because it doesn't show actual youths - it's fictional); the same even goes for pornographic depictions of adults who look underage (even though the Heise article suggests the opposite). The only thing that might affect /loli/ itself is "Strafbar ist künftig vor allem das Verbreiten jugendpornografischer Schriften, ebenso deren Besitz, sofern echte Jugendliche dargestellt werden." (Chargeable will be especially the distribution of youth pornography, as well as its possession, if it depicts real youths.) - I'm not sure whether this means that the distribution of youth pornography is generally chargeable, or only if it depicts real youths (non-fictional). The construction of that sentence is a bit ambiguous.§ 184c is consistent with this, you can read the updated version at http://www.bgblportal.de/BGBL/bgbl1f/bgbl108s2149.pdf>>5131 Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>5132(continued)
Too lazy to translate, but it pretty much explicitly says that the possession of lolicon remains not chargeable (because it doesn't show actual youths - it's fictional); the same even goes for pornographic depictions of adults who look underage (even though the Heise article suggests the opposite).
The only thing that might affect /loli/ itself is "Strafbar ist künftig vor allem das Verbreiten jugendpornografischer Schriften, ebenso deren Besitz, sofern echte Jugendliche dargestellt werden." (Chargeable will be especially the distribution of youth pornography, as well as its possession, if it depicts real youths.) - I'm not sure whether this means that the distribution of youth pornography is generally chargeable, or only if it depicts real youths (non-fictional). The construction of that sentence is a bit ambiguous.
§ 184c is consistent with this, you can read the updated version at http://www.bgblportal.de/BGBL/bgbl1f/bgbl108s2149.pdf
>>5131
oh lol, heise."um sie [...] zu verwenden oder einem anderen eine solche Verwendung zu ermöglichen" OH LOOK HOW THEY OMIT THE MOST IMPORTANT PART in that clowny article. The relevant paragraph expressly states that "Verwendung" (use/usage) in this context refers to redistribution and public display.So basically the heise news clown gave the law a whole new meaning by editing out an important constraint, and then wrote an article on said changed meaning.
oh lol, heise.
"um sie [...] zu verwenden oder einem anderen eine solche Verwendung zu ermöglichen" OH LOOK HOW THEY OMIT THE MOST IMPORTANT PART in that clowny article. The relevant paragraph expressly states that "Verwendung" (use/usage) in this context refers to redistribution and public display.
So basically the heise news clown gave the law a whole new meaning by editing out an important constraint, and then wrote an article on said changed meaning.
Somehow, being unsure of what the outcome might be is worse than knowing for sure that it's going to happen. I've read the translations by the German-speaking users here, and the consensus is: at best, the law is pretty ambiguous on lolicon. Last edited 08/11/12(Wed)20:59.
Somehow, being unsure of what the outcome might be is worse than knowing for sure that it's going to happen. I've read the translations by the German-speaking users here, and the consensus is: at best, the law is pretty ambiguous on lolicon.
Last edited 08/11/12(Wed)20:59.
So we seem to have less to worry about than we thought at first. However, I would like to thank the OP for being alert and bringing this to our attention.Also, don't mess with Megu. We oldfags have something called solidarity.Any further abuse of either LuMi or Megu over this will result in a ban. Last edited 08/11/13(Thu)00:35.
So we seem to have less to worry about than we thought at first. However, I would like to thank the OP for being alert and bringing this to our attention.Also, don't mess with Megu. We oldfags have something called solidarity.Any further abuse of either LuMi or Megu over this will result in a ban.
Last edited 08/11/13(Thu)00:35.
>>5143If this issue has been more or less settled, can we please get this thread un-stickied? It's taking up a little too much space at the top and it's distracting people from the donation thread. Last edited 08/11/13(Thu)01:08.
>>5143
If this issue has been more or less settled, can we please get this thread un-stickied? It's taking up a little too much space at the top and it's distracting people from the donation thread.
Last edited 08/11/13(Thu)01:08.
What the hell is wrong with megu?
>>5117No one talks about Megu like that and gets away with it!!
>>5162>If all you ever do here is be negative, why do you stay? All the posts you ever do are something to degrade me. I'm rather curious as to WHY you stay here if you hate it/me so much.
>>5162
>If all you ever do here is be negative, why do you stay? All the posts you ever do are something to degrade me. I'm rather curious as to WHY you stay here if you hate it/me so much.