[c=#004A59][b]Thanks to all of you who help in keeping our community safe! [/b] By way of reporting: Legitimate offences/incidents, illegal activity, suspected predators and other offenders.
Do know that you have played a valuable part in not only keeping users safe on this website, but also, victims and potential victims of serious crimes, in the real (offline) world, are now much safer and no longer endangered by these identified serious offenders.[/c]
[sep]
[b][u]RE: Complaints/Concerns[/u][/b]
[quote]Reports on this post for "Harassing Users".[/quote]
Not a problem, you are correct in that the username should not be posted here. (Our apologies for that.)
The post was simply quickly Copy + Pasted, exactly is, as a new post, so that other related offenders may come across it as well. (but not to make an Admin Announcement of it)
It would be good if attention remained focused on more serious matters.
The "user" is actually on here illegally in the first place, after already being Suspended/Banned from using our services.
[sep]
[quote]Also are you sure they were fully convicted? And by life, actually means life (and not just 20 years or less)?[/quote]
We've mentioned numerous times, that we work & communicate directly with Law Enforcement, Government Agencies and Child Protection services.
Why would we* not sure of the status of these cases?
[i](Again, we would not be negligent as to publicly state this, if it were untrue. It seems as though many still doubt these claims.)[/i]
[b]We are either updated on these cases directly by law enforcement, or by assisting divisions (such as Child Protection Services).[/b]
The incarceration status of these offenders are typically publicly logged, and some may also appear published in articles.
We can see that this ex-SW user, for example, is still incarcerated (and will be for life).
[i](Tiny segments of article + Incarceration Status)[/i]
Some convicted ex-SW user's sentences can be "40 to 80 years", for example, but at the offender's age, it is basically a [u]Life Sentence[/u].
[quote]Why would be not sure of the status of these cases?[/quote] Huh? Are you meaning to say "we" instead of "be"?
I justed asked, because I've heard a lot of false claims and stories where someone got in trouble (and should ha e gotten in trouble) for something but really they've walking around free, after a stupid technically or overturned ruling let them walk around free.
And because you broke the rules naming a username, but you haven't posted links to the reports/stories of the bad guys (which would be more interesting, more believable and I believe (I could be wrong, but I believe) would be within the rules, as it's simple reporting on a story and not naming the said user (though the story might or might not).
We have openly discussed the topic of "predators on SW" many times publicly with users. (I won't search for links right now) The same users that repeatedly attack us and spread false information, have already been informed that we correctly handle abuse reports.
It appears to us (after trying to work with them countless amounts of times) that their focus/concern isn't greatly on protecting minors from abuse, but rather defaming the site admins.
I'm not sure what you are referring too otherwise, about someone getting in trouble.
There are a lot of reports coming in, and we don't always have the full side to every story/situation, but we try to do our best.
Some users may be very crafty at creating stories and deceiving others as well.
@SW-Admin I'm still talking about the convictions and incarceration as mentioned above...
No need for the SW links... I don't need to see more talk, I want to see the action!
Links to the news stories of their convictions would be nice.
I think you're writing a ton to prove a point, when you could simply post links and say thing is what happens when you try to be a child predator on SW.
I am really disappointed with this post, I have always respected the help that admin has given me since I have been a member of SW but this seems to be a real attempt to threaten the user with another ban if he does not remove his review from Trustpilot.
There are many other users, previously banned that have new accounts that have not had such posts made by admin about them.
We live in a society where we should be able to challenge authority without fear of reprisal. For all intents, his motive was to make SW a better place for the community, and most importantly to protect the minors that are on this site. Using the adage "what we permit, we promote" would mean that permitting stories with child abuse, be it fictional or not will be seen as promoting those behaviours.
I take pride in my friend not shying away from difficult conversations, for having the strength to speak out against those with child abuse fantasies. I hope you can take a step back and not make it so personal but recognise that sometimes these discussions should happen and sometimes authority needs to be challenged.
Yes. Any other user would get a warning on their profile for that. He's admitted he shouldn't have named and shamed Kirie but I don't see a warning on the SW-Admin account reflecting that.
I suspect he's also potentially libelling Kirie by making this post about child abuse issues and attempting to portray Admin as being the good guys throughout despite Kirie's track record of speaking out against it.
It's everything you expect from a classic case of passive aggressive behaviour IMO and does absolutely nothing to enhance Admin's reputation. @InOtterWords
