Skip to main content

Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
(+2)(-1)

Wow, that's not right at all, Discord is really censoring artistic freedom, their is no minors being "depicted" because they are drawings, and are not real,  you have an actual legal case here, I would definitely fight discord to get the server reinstated, if they can't show exactly what picture they find to be depicting "children"  then what they are doing is going against our and yours first amendment rights. I wouldn't let this slide so easily. What they did here is an abuse of power because of something they personally don't like., until they can give legitimate proof their were minors being depicted which they can't because their were non. Then they have no choice but to reinstate it, look up Ashcroft vs free speech coalition.

(1 edit)

Free speech does not apply to private businesses. That's only for public or federal property. It's the reason Google and YouTube can censor and cherrypick as they please. It's not a public park, it's a private website.


Welcome to oligopolies.

(4 edits)

Well Discord, allows "Cub", which is basically worse then loli in my opinion. Discord selectively enforces their rules on things they don't like but allow niche things like cub which is basically baby  animal Pron, even though its fictional, they don't follow their own sets of rules. https://www.reddit.com/r/discordapp/comments/ak3g4j/we_do_not_consider_cub_to_be...

Also the fact, your server never actually violated any of Discords policies. Since the server was up for 2 years at least, its obvious someone who was trigger happy, banned  it. How I see, it is a wrongful termination of the server. And since they're vague in their reasoning for banning it, it is without a doubt hypocritical for Discord to ban the server, when they themselves can't even name any actual policy the server broke, and since their were no actual pictures "depicting minors' since drawings are not real, and their actually needs to be a child to "depict" other then that since their is no actual child involved, they have no argument, and they won't be able to defend that position they are keeping. Because they are making claims that simply do not exist.