>>44567
>>44568
I saw him there mentioning the Dost. I think Josh was right when he put it this way:
>Due to the context of this website, any pictures of children - including those which are otherwise decent and legal - inherently fail the Dost standard and will not be permitted
But there's also other considerations, where this line fails, because then what about memes like success kid or that fleeing yellow raincoat girl? Or reaction images? What about screenshots of movie with children on it? There could be many other instances when such rule is hard to follow.
And yet, just a comment could turn anything actually innocent to a rule 34 situation.
It's a catch 22.
Best would be not allowing dumps, and beyond that case by case examination, but there's a limit one can do voluntarily, and there are people out there who will test your perseverance just for the fun of it.
It's not easy to moderate chans. Their strong suit the relative privacy and anonymity they provide to the users, but that makes them vulnerable too.
I wonder how it goes at normie social media like Facebook. Chief difference ofc, those guys got payed, while these chans are run by the love of those who create and maintain them (maybe not 4chan).