New BBC article

[Kore]

Just FYI in case anyone hadn't seen

Suicide forum blocked to most UK users after Ofcom pressure https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67374129

 

[Darkover]

this is false information from the bbc because anyone can still view this forum from within the uk without registering first

 

[Pluto]

Translation: BBC is the new Tantacrul, patting itself on the back for directing thousands more people to this "pro-suicide" website.

 

[Forever Sleep]

Glad I found this place before all this happened. Wonder how many people already use VPN's though. If they think it's going to put young people off- I think they're wrong. The younger generations know way more about technology and the internet than them probably.

Trying to shut down a website won't stop people being suicidal in the first place! Writing articles/making videos warning people about the 'dangers' of this place simply sign posts it for people who want this information. And we're usually at a stage where we're desperate to get that information by that point.

I reckon at least half of us are here because we found out via media like Tantacrul's YouTube video, The New York Times article and this new BBC article. I think these people are so naive. Worse- they're irresponsible not considering the consequences. Funnily enough- I agree with them to an extent. Giving someone the information to CTB effectively and relatively peacefully I imagine does increase the chances that they will have the confidence to do it. And- they've just given them the lead to find this place. Had it not been for them, I wonder how many of us would have found this place. I don't think I would have. It doesn't exactly come at the top of a Google search! Of course- I'm eternally grateful. I expect a lot of us are. It's not going to have the effect they want it to though- I doubt. They simply don't understand suicidal people.

 

[penguinl0v3s]

Translation: BBC is the new Tantacrul, patting itself on the back for directing thousands more people to this "pro-suicide" website.

Sucks because it attracts pro-lifers though. Iirc there was a time when the majority of site traffic was from people searching for methods.

 

[Pluto]

Sucks because it attracts pro-lifers though. Iirc there was a time when the majority of site traffic was from people searching for methods.

That may be true, but what aggravates me is the absolute hypocrisy.

1) By their own simplistic claims, this website causes suicides to occur. No use arguing this point right now.
2) They claim to have conducted in-depth analyses of this website.
3) All of our publicly visible polls show an overwhelming correlation between mass exposure of this website and crowds of new people signing up after effortlessly finding it.
4) BBC have to be aware of this blatant Streisand Effect after so many infamous examples (NY Times, Tantacrul, etc.).
5) Therefore, by their own logic, they are causing innumerable preventable fatalities, especially by writing multiple articles on the same subject.
6) The only conclusion I can draw is that they willingly have blood on their hands, while hypocritically claiming to be on a crusade to prevent suicides, for the sake of click-bait sensationalism.

 

[Pluto]

I'M NOT DONE.

 

[WAITING TO DIE]

I never take any mainstream news seriously because most of the media is owned by people who have a sinister agenda.
They feed the general public with a great deal of misinformation and disinformation in order to give people a false version of reality and to keep certain truths from being revealed.

 

[Orbitc]

Translation: BBC is the new Tantacrul, patting itself on the back for directing thousands more people to this "pro-suicide" website.

I'm starting to suspect that Tantacrul in reality is Kenneth Law's advertising account)))

 

[Kore]

Totally agree with most of you. As someone mentioned about half of people here because of media exposure, I can at least agree that's how I found my way here!

The first BBC article like a month ago or whenever. And despite google not showing the site as a top search, Wikipedia did! I found SaSu in all of 5 minutes after reading the BBC article condemning the site. I was even fully against it at first, thinking it really was a toxic place that was pushing and encouraging minors to kill themselves lmao… I looked for the site out of morbid curiosity, thinking surely a place that bad can't exist on the clear net… and man was I pleasantly surprised to find out the true nature of SaSu.

The BBC seem like they spent 10 minutes on the forums, skimming over the countless recoveries and focusing on the absolute worst of the community or threads. And I mean let's be honest, humans suck, and places like this do attract some of the worst of us, but those very few are not representative of the community as a whole.

 

[ijustwishtodie]

I reckon at least half of us are here because we found out via media like Tantacrul's YouTube video, The New York Times article and this new BBC article. I think these people are so naive. Worse- they're irresponsible not considering the consequences. Funnily enough- I agree with them to an extent. Giving someone the information to CTB effectively and relatively peacefully I imagine does increase the chances that they will have the confidence to do it. And- they've just given them the lead to find this place. Had it not been for them, I wonder how many of us would have found this place. I don't think I would have. It doesn't exactly come at the top of a Google search! Of course- I'm eternally grateful. I expect a lot of us are. It's not going to have the effect they want it to though- I doubt. They simply don't understand suicidal people

Funnily enough, I found this forum by just searching "pro suicide forums documentary" and this site came on the top. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe this site is pro suicide at all, just pro voluntary death but I used their language intentionally to find a place like this and here I am now thanks to all the media covering this place

 

[gbi2]

Well, I guess what they have done is block them having access to the site. If they continue to report on the site and what is being discussed then we know they are still accessing it somehow, which will show they think the law they called for shouldn't apply to them.

I would put a chargeing scale upon sign up. People visiting in an entirely non commercial capacity is free, anyone ever expecting to make money or use the data for an purpose other than personal use has to pay something like £5000. The money will be used for site funding and a fund to help people who are in recovery.

 

[RichardFirst]

Ah the BBC, paragons of integrity...and incidentally filled to the brim with perverts and assorted nonces.

That organisation needs to be shut down.

 

[pthnrdnojvsc]

The media are evil liars. This is not a pro-suicide forum as the media and BBC say in their headlines.
This is a pro-choice forum

The government nor the media have no right to block or censor websites. They are evil oppressors

 

[Forever Sleep]

Funnily enough, I found this forum by just searching "pro suicide forums documentary" and this site came on the top. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe this site is pro suicide at all, just pro voluntary death but I used their language intentionally to find a place like this and here I am now thanks to all the media covering this place

That's interesting. To be fair, I never even considered there would be a place like this before I read about it in The New York Times article. So, I guess I wasn't looking for it so much as methods.

 

[bessops1976]

Glad I signed up as a member. I find comfort coming here

 

[rashlan]

What infuriates me so much is the blatant disregard for causation over correlation. "50 deaths linked" is not only correlation over causation, but intentional language to invoke the perception of encouragement. They could have said "50 known suicidal individuals were known to have visited the site", and if they even did a modicum of research of those individuals it might have said "50 known users saved a horrific and painful mutilation or death".

Those 50 were already ready to ctb, there are plenty of ways to ctb, and without this resource most will end up taking the painful route or ending up in incredible pain with an unsuccessful attempt. All the BBC accomplished here is to ensure more suffering and more strain on the NHS.

What irritates me more is that this is a also forum for discussion on recovery, not mentioned once. The BBC article should have read:

"BBC shutters help forum that mitigated suffering"

 

[Kore]

not only correlation over causation, but intentional language to invoke the perception of encouragement. They could have said "50 known suicidal individuals were known to have visited the site",

I mean, cmon... its the press. Of course they will attempt to create the most sensational and shocking wording possible, AND its fairly well known that 'bad' news gets much more attention than 'good' news. I mean think of it from a (non-suicidal) BBC reporter when they first stumbled on the site? Fucking gold mine! I can spin the absolute shit out of this place, my article is about to make the headlines!!

I love free speech, but hate what the media has become.

 

[Heading to Darkness]

Translation: BBC is the new Tantacrul, patting itself on the back for directing thousands more people to this "pro-suicide" website.

yup thats how i found it and happy i did

 

[アホペンギン]

Instead of censoring attempting to shut down a specific website which is mainly concerning the topic of suicide is a very bad move. They completely disregard the REAL reasons of the victims' suicides and immediately blame a website just existing for their deaths. It is much easier to blame a website rather than blaming the terrible people in this world.

Just shutting down a website won't immediately make the suicide rates drop or even disappear. And showing the name of the website and what it is about will obviously bring more vulnerable people here, including minors which they try to avoid.

 

[RichardFirst]

The media are evil liars. This is not a pro-suicide forum as the media and BBC say in their headlines.
This is a pro-choice forum

The government nor the media have no right to block or censor websites. They are evil oppressors

Precisely this. I have never, in two years of using this forum ever heard anything tell someone else that they should CTB. We merely help each other.

 

[Meditation guide]

UK to it's citizenry:

STAY ALIVE ALL YOU SLAVES AND SUFFER -- AND YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO READ ANYTHING WE DON'T WANT YOU TO READ!

At least we have the U.S. Constitution which may block this kind of censorship hopefully.

UK joins Italy Brazil and Australia as a nanny state.

 

[HouseofMortok]

That may be true, but what aggravates me is the absolute hypocrisy.

1) By their own simplistic claims, this website causes suicides to occur. No use arguing this point right now.
2) They claim to have conducted in-depth analyses of this website.
3) All of our publicly visible polls show an overwhelming correlation between mass exposure of this website and crowds of new people signing up after effortlessly finding it.
4) BBC have to be aware of this blatant Streisand Effect after so many infamous examples (NY Times, Tantacrul, etc.).
5) Therefore, by their own logic, they are causing innumerable preventable fatalities, especially by writing multiple articles on the same subject.
6) The only conclusion I can draw is that they willingly have blood on their hands, while hypocritically claiming to be on a crusade to prevent suicides, for the sake of click-bait sensationalism.

I was going to write something along the same lines as #6 But that's tin foil territory for us site users no? Almost as if they are in league with a lobby of some kind that wants to actually promote and see an increase in suicides, majority are going to be people they see as unproductive lay out abouts, people that don't fall in line with the narrative(s), whilst like you say, crusader claiming.

 

[MeltingBrain]

. If they think it's going to put young people off- I think they're wrong. The younger generations know way more about technology and the internet than them probably....And we're usually at a stage where we're desperate to get that information by that point.

Hear Hear

 

[ringo99]

It's like these idiots have never heard of the Streisand effect or the law of unintended consequences. SaSu offers suggestions on how to ctb safely to reduce the chances of dying in pain or worse living in agony after a failed attempt. It also offers a recovery section for those who are no longer suicidal. Just like pregnant women trying to get abortions, cutting off safe and legitimate access will only push them into looking for more dangerous and illegal avenues which carry much more risk.

Suicide has multiple variables. Solving for one without bothering to fix the others in parallel does nothing at all.

 

[Pluto]

I was going to write something along the same lines as #6 But that's tin foil territory for us site users no? Almost as if they are in league with a lobby of some kind that wants to actually promote and see an increase in suicides, majority are going to be people they see as unproductive lay out abouts, people that don't fall in line with the narrative(s), whilst like you say, crusader claiming.

To be clear, I'm not a conspiracist accusing them of a population control agenda.

This used to be a small, difficult-to-find website populated only by people in advanced stages of suicidal ideation. By giving it mainstream exposure, by their own logic they are knowingly causing an increase in suicides.

Their motivation is almost certainly click-bait sensationalism based on an unbalanced, ill-informed and antagonistic interpretation of the website's purpose. Yet without knowing better, readers will believe that the BBC are good actors on a moral crusade. The ironic reality is that this is careless, irresponsible and unethical journalism at its worst.

 

[Meditation guide]

I see four times the number of site visitors, members and guests as before this site was ever publicized with negative news articles. They can't stop this site from existing and can't stop people from using VPNs. This is indeed having the opposite effect that they intended.

There are always other although more painful and gruesome ways to ctb people will find when they can't take the pain any more. If U.K. wanted to be compassionate they would realize that suicides are never going to stop happening and provide people with the freedom and personal autonomy of choice to decide when they want to end their lives. Yes it's always tragic but so much more when people jump off tall buildings, throw themselves in front of trains, drown themselves, hang themselves and shoot themselves.
Why does the U.K. want to force violent methods on people, when people just want out? So many lead lives of pain, disability and desperation. No, help is NOT available for the majority.

 

[SilentSadness]

Most of them know shutting their ears and blocking the site won't do anything, but I'm pretty sure that's not the point. The government is sadly full of self centred people looking to advance their own position at any cost. I guess this site seems like an easy target.

 

[𝗟𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗹𝘆]

50 UK deaths? I wonder how many people were pushed to suicide by their goverment... AND I OOP

Wondering what they will do when they find out that suicide rate won't go any lower after banning SaSu