File talk:Sektietits.jpg

this should prob be deleted. its more than just a "bra pic" you can literally see thru to the nips and she claims to have been 15 when it was taken.https://archive.today/wvgyW --Talk to me|Contribs 18:53, 25 November 2014 (EST)

Her blog post is tl;dr, could you either put the quote here or give some specific directions to about where it falls in the text? Talk | Contribs 20:45, 25 November 2014 (EST)

	“	We’d been flirting since we met on IRC. I had made bad decisions when I was naive and 15, so he had a private picture of me. Later, after we broke up, he published this picture online. As far as I know, it’s still on his personal website. It can be found in other places.(<--links to ED page) I wonder if they realize they are hosting...	„

--Talk to me|Contribs 21:32, 25 November 2014 (EST)

Well fuck, that's a vague accusation at best. I'm all for purging potential kiddie porn from ED, but we'd have to delete any nude picture of her where we can't verify her age. What makes you think it's this one specifically? Talk | Contribs 21:37, 25 November 2014 (EST)

gee i dont know maybe the fact that its the only actual nude on the page?--Talk to me|Contribs 21:46, 25 November 2014 (EST)

Yeah, realized I was stupid for saying that without bothering to actually check the article context; for some reason I just assumed the article had a gallery of nudes. Guess I'll flush it for being kiddie porn. Talk | Contribs 21:52, 25 November 2014 (EST)

Now that's interesting, I can't flush it because when I visit the page I'm treated as if logged out; logging back in does not seem to help. Not to mention the talk page hasn't been updating with our conversation, and I've been having to read it through the edit window; hell the file shows a redlink for the talk page tab when I look at it. Talk | Contribs 21:54, 25 November 2014 (EST)

Okay, here is why I believe Randi to be making up shit. If she had said, 17, she might have been correct, but she flat out lied when she claims she was 15. Granted it is a scan in, but scanners were not that common in 96-97. Secondly, she would have had to develop the picture herself. You can't go in and do that as a minor. Maybe it could have been a polaroid camera, but I don't think the colors match that. Still she would need a scanner. I think she is a lying shit. Also note how she didn't even try to explain where it was taken, just that she supposedly was 15. And when we look at the file size, and that it would be a thumbnail, she wouldn't have been able to send it in fucking 96. So, I believe her to be lying. CobaltCat 09:50, 26 November 2014 (EST)

doesn't matter whether you think shes lying, we have to take her claims at face value bc of liability, if shes not lying then it is CP which is illegal (and fucked up) and could get ED in trouble. Also, it was uploaded for revenge which violates the "no revenge porn" rule.--Talk to me|Contribs 08:38, 29 November 2014 (EST)

Currently I am awaiting response from the guy who allegedly uploaded the picture, but since I only have his Facebook and Twitter. He would also have been underage when he received the pictures, if we are to believe Randi, btw. CobaltCat 09:06, 29 November 2014 (EST)

• I'll remove it as a sign of good faith. Age can't be verified, but she also will no longer be able to use it to vilify and claim whoever is sharing the page is "sharing CP". --Mantequilla (talk) 11:28, 29 November 2014 (EST)