use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~3 users here now
SaidIt's main sub
The Saidit.net Terms and Content Policy (self.SaidIt)
submitted 11 months ago * by magnora7
view the rest of the comments →
[–]magnora7[S] 3 insightful - 1 funny3 insightful - 0 funny4 insightful - 0 funny4 insightful - 1 funny - 9 months ago (1 child)
Basically, as long as it's not going to cause legal trouble to saidit, it's fine
[–]cat-gun 2 insightful - 1 funny2 insightful - 0 funny3 insightful - 0 funny3 insightful - 1 funny - 8 months ago* (0 children)
Thanks! The problem is that it's hard to say whether it will cause legal trouble. Congress recently passed regulations called FOSTA/SESTA which create an exception to Section 230 that means website publishers would be responsible if third parties are found to be posting ads for prostitution — including consensual sex work — on their platforms. You can read more about it here:
Reddit closed a bunch of sex work related subreddits as a result, although they weren't especially consistent about it. They closed /r/hookers and /r/escorts, but /r/sexworkers and /r/sexworkersonly are still up. However, none of them allowed advertising. (In my opinion, Reddit closed /r/hookers and /r/escorts because they emphasized the client side, whereas /r/sexworkers /r/sexworkersonly emphasize the provider side).
IMHO, FOSTA/SESTA will eventually be struck down in the courts as an unconstitutional infringement on the first amendment. However, it may take a while for that to play out in the courts. Until then, there's legal uncertainty around the issue.