Ofcom’s Investigation: Our Full Response and Position on UK Jurisdiction

[Sanctioned Suicide]

Here's the situation: On 8 April 2025, we received a formal letter from the UK communications regulator, Ofcom, informing us that they had officially opened an investigation into Sanctioned-Suicide.net under the UK's Online Safety Act 2023. While we typically do not comment on regulatory interactions, we feel it is necessary to inform the community of what is happening and how we are responding.

Timeline of Events & Our Response

Let's walk through the sequence that led to this point, so the situation is fully understood:

• March 3, 2025: Ofcom issued a legally binding information request under the Act, demanding a copy of our illegal content risk assessment by March 31. We responded and requested an extension, which they granted.
• March 27–April 1, 2025: We exchanged multiple emails with Ofcom. In these, we clearly stated that we do not operate in the UK, do not target UK users, and are not subject to UK law. We emphasized our platform is U.S.-based, with no infrastructure, operations, or revenue connected to the United Kingdom.
• April 1, 2025: Ofcom insisted that our site is still "capable of being used in the UK" and therefore within their scope, despite most UK ISPs already blocking access to us at the behest of the UK government. They also claimed that our platform posed a "material risk of significant harm" to UK users, though they failed to provide any concrete data or evidence to support this claim.
• April 4, 2025: We formally replied, reiterating that we would not comply with further requests and that their claims of jurisdiction were invalid. We requested they withdraw the information notice.
• April 7, 2025: They responded again, repeating their earlier assertions and pushing for compliance before the final deadline. We did not submit the requested material, and on April 8, 2025, they formally announced the investigation.

Ofcom's Allegations

In their opening letter, Ofcom claims we may have failed to comply with the following obligations under the Online Safety Act:

• Section 9: Conducting and keeping records of an "illegal content risk assessment"
• Section 10: Taking proactive safety measures to mitigate harm from "priority illegal content"
• Sections 20 & 21: Providing clear reporting and complaint mechanisms
• Section 23: Maintaining adequate documentation
• Section 102(8): Responding to an information notice

Their justification for opening this investigation is their belief that some UK residents may still be able to access the site, despite ISP-level blocks, and that content on the platform may present a risk of harm to those users.

Our Legal Position: No Jurisdiction

We have made it absolutely clear to Ofcom: Sanctioned-Suicide.net is not within the scope of UK law. Their continued insistence on jurisdiction is legally indefensible and raises serious concerns about regulatory overreach. To clarify:

• We are a U.S.-based platform. We have no offices, infrastructure, or staff in the UK.
• We are not commercially active in the UK. We generate no revenue from UK users and do not advertise or market our services there.
• Access from the UK is already severely restricted, with most major UK ISPs blocking access due to political pressure.
• We do not "target" the UK under any meaningful interpretation of the law.

Their standard—that a site being "capable of being accessed in the UK" constitutes a jurisdictional link—is dangerously broad. Under that logic, any site on the global internet could fall under Ofcom's purview, regardless of whether it targets the UK or not. This is not only unsustainable—it flies in the face of international legal norms and principles of digital sovereignty.

Selective Enforcement and Inconsistent Standards

We also question the proportionality and focus of Ofcom's actions.

There are numerous social media platforms operating within the UK and profiting from UK users that host massive volumes of self-harm or suicide-related content—often algorithmically recommended. These services are not subject to the same degree of scrutiny or threat of enforcement, despite their real-world influence and scale.

Meanwhile, Sanctioned-Suicide.net is a non-commercial, volunteer-run discussion platform with strict moderation rules against explicitly unlawful content. We do not profit from user activity, and we do not tolerate content that encourages or incites illegal acts. Yet we are being singled out for enforcement based on the premise that some UK residents may be circumventing government restrictions to access our site.

U.S. Law and Executive Order 14149

We have also pointed out to Ofcom that their actions may conflict with U.S. national policy.

In Executive Order 14149, issued by President Donald J. Trump, the United States declared:

"It is the policy of the United States to ensure that no United States agent or agency facilitates the censorship of American citizens. It is also the policy of the United States to use tariffs to combat digital censorship."

This means we are legally and constitutionally obligated to resist foreign attempts to suppress protected speech originating from U.S. soil. If Ofcom proceeds with threats of fines or attempts to pressure U.S.-based service providers to deplatform us or block our infrastructure, we will refer this matter to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, as well as Congressional oversight committees for diplomatic escalation and possible retaliatory trade actions.

Where We Stand

• We will not be submitting any internal documentation to Ofcom.
• We reject the assertion that the Online Safety Act applies to our platform.
• We will continue to moderate our site based on our own standards, not foreign laws we are not subject to.
• We have filed a formal procedural complaint under Section 9 of Ofcom's Online Safety Enforcement Guidance regarding:
  • Their baseless jurisdictional claim
  • Their failure to provide supporting evidence
  • Their use of intimidation tactics
  • Their selective enforcement
  • Their lack of transparency in cross-border regulatory matters

Final Word

We are committed to maintaining an open platform for discussion, subject to our own moderation standards and the laws that apply to us here in the United States.

We will not kowtow to foreign governments attempting to regulate American speech beyond their borders. The principles of digital sovereignty, free expression, and jurisdictional restraint matter—and we will defend them.

If Ofcom or the UK government escalates this further, we are prepared to meet the challenge head-on.

 

[gothbird]

Ofcom has completely overstepped here. Their entire case is built on the idea that because something can be accessed in the UK despite ISP blocks and no targeted operations it automatically falls under their control. Imperialism dressed up in legislation.

They can't admit the truth that people come here not because they're manipulated, but because they've been failed by every so called legitimate system. And now they want to bury the last place that lets people speak openly because it makes them look bad. Because it tells the truth about what suffering really looks like.

Ofcom's logic is terrifying. By their standard, any site with a .com domain and no UK presence could be targeted just for being visible in a browser. This isn't about protecting anyone. It's about control, censorship, and saving political face.

The hypocrisy is astounding: TikTok, Instagram, YouTube are all flooded with self-harm, suicide bait, and trauma as content and those platforms aren't being dragged through regulatory hell. Why? Because they make money. Because they're easy to manipulate behind closed doors. Because they play the game.

But this site? Volunteer run, U.S. based, non commercial, a refuge for people who've been told their pain is too inconvenient to talk about? That's a threat.

Good on the admin team for standing their ground. Jurisdiction matters. Free expression matters. And people deserve one space—just one—where the honesty isn't policed out of existence.

 

[SmokingCivet]

Here's the situation: On 8 April 2025, we received a formal letter from the UK communications regulator, Ofcom, informing us that they had officially opened an investigation into Sanctioned-Suicide.net under the UK's Online Safety Act 2023. While we typically do not comment on regulatory interactions, we feel it is necessary to inform the community of what is happening and how we are responding.

Timeline of Events & Our Response

Let's walk through the sequence that led to this point, so the situation is fully understood:

• March 3, 2025: Ofcom issued a legally binding information request under the Act, demanding a copy of our illegal content risk assessment by March 31. We responded and requested an extension, which they granted.
• March 27–April 1, 2025: We exchanged multiple emails with Ofcom. In these, we clearly stated that we do not operate in the UK, do not target UK users, and are not subject to UK law. We emphasized our platform is U.S.-based, with no infrastructure, operations, or revenue connected to the United Kingdom.
• April 1, 2025: Ofcom insisted that our site is still "capable of being used in the UK" and therefore within their scope, despite most UK ISPs already blocking access to us at the behest of the UK government. They also claimed that our platform posed a "material risk of significant harm" to UK users, though they failed to provide any concrete data or evidence to support this claim.
• April 4, 2025: We formally replied, reiterating that we would not comply with further requests and that their claims of jurisdiction were invalid. We requested they withdraw the information notice.
• April 7, 2025: They responded again, repeating their earlier assertions and pushing for compliance before the final deadline. We did not submit the requested material, and on April 8, 2025, they formally announced the investigation.

Ofcom's Allegations

In their opening letter, Ofcom claims we may have failed to comply with the following obligations under the Online Safety Act:

• Section 9: Conducting and keeping records of an "illegal content risk assessment"
• Section 10: Taking proactive safety measures to mitigate harm from "priority illegal content"
• Sections 20 & 21: Providing clear reporting and complaint mechanisms
• Section 23: Maintaining adequate documentation
• Section 102(8): Responding to an information notice

Their justification for opening this investigation is their belief that some UK residents may still be able to access the site, despite ISP-level blocks, and that content on the platform may present a risk of harm to those users.

Our Legal Position: No Jurisdiction

We have made it absolutely clear to Ofcom: Sanctioned-Suicide.net is not within the scope of UK law. Their continued insistence on jurisdiction is legally indefensible and raises serious concerns about regulatory overreach. To clarify:

• We are a U.S.-based platform. We have no offices, infrastructure, or staff in the UK.
• We are not commercially active in the UK. We generate no revenue from UK users and do not advertise or market our services there.
• Access from the UK is already severely restricted, with most major UK ISPs blocking access due to political pressure.
• We do not "target" the UK under any meaningful interpretation of the law.

Their standard—that a site being "capable of being accessed in the UK" constitutes a jurisdictional link—is dangerously broad. Under that logic, any site on the global internet could fall under Ofcom's purview, regardless of whether it targets the UK or not. This is not only unsustainable—it flies in the face of international legal norms and principles of digital sovereignty.

Selective Enforcement and Inconsistent Standards

We also question the proportionality and focus of Ofcom's actions.

There are numerous social media platforms operating within the UK and profiting from UK users that host massive volumes of self-harm or suicide-related content—often algorithmically recommended. These services are not subject to the same degree of scrutiny or threat of enforcement, despite their real-world influence and scale.

Meanwhile, Sanctioned-Suicide.net is a non-commercial, volunteer-run discussion platform with strict moderation rules against explicitly unlawful content. We do not profit from user activity, and we do not tolerate content that encourages or incites illegal acts. Yet we are being singled out for enforcement based on the premise that some UK residents may be circumventing government restrictions to access our site.

U.S. Law and Executive Order 14149

We have also pointed out to Ofcom that their actions may conflict with U.S. national policy.

In Executive Order 14149, issued by President Donald J. Trump, the United States declared:



This means we are legally and constitutionally obligated to resist foreign attempts to suppress protected speech originating from U.S. soil. If Ofcom proceeds with threats of fines or attempts to pressure U.S.-based service providers to deplatform us or block our infrastructure, we will refer this matter to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, as well as Congressional oversight committees for diplomatic escalation and possible retaliatory trade actions.

Where We Stand

• We will not be submitting any internal documentation to Ofcom.
• We reject the assertion that the Online Safety Act applies to our platform.
• We will continue to moderate our site based on our own standards, not foreign laws we are not subject to.
• We have filed a formal procedural complaintunder Section 9 of Ofcom's Online Safety Enforcement Guidance regarding:
  • Their baseless jurisdictional claim
  • Their failure to provide supporting evidence
  • Their use of intimidation tactics
  • Their selective enforcement
  • Their lack of transparency in cross-border regulatory matters

Final Word

We are committed to maintaining an open platform for discussion, subject to our own moderation standards and the laws that apply to us here in the United States.

We will not kowtow to foreign governments attempting to regulate American speech beyond their borders. The principles of digital sovereignty, free expression, and jurisdictional restraint matter—and we will defend them.

If Ofcom or the UK government escalates this further, we are prepared to meet the challenge head-on.

You guys are beasts. Thanks for standing up for us.

 

[lucyanne]

As a 'citizen' of the UK let me say fight them all the way.
Also as someone who is native to the UK let me tell you the so called independent regulatory bodies like ofcom are not so independent as people may think.

 

[genie]

This honestly makes me sick and infuriated. I've been reading articles (obviously they don't name this site) and they are completely ignorant and dangerous. They want to shut the site down. I'm sorry if they've lost loved ones due to CTB, but do they not know they are further perpetrating in harm?
Banning this site would be harmful. It's the only place we can talk openly and it actually helps me not want to CTB, but if I did I would at least be informed on the best ways to leave should I so choose. Without this place we would have nowhere. The generic "suicide help" forums do not help at all. You get the same uncaring people with apathetic responses such as "things will get better", "you're so young you have so much to live for". Change the record, you don't care. You don't understand. This forum does care. This forum does understand. As a citizen of the UK I am ashamed of Ofcom and this over reach and the fact this could be banned in the UK or other countries because of it is diabolical. This needs to be fought as this will do real harm and further isolate us.

 

[voc_89]

I haven't been on this site for months. I owe it to the admins, mods and community for that. For the stories, interactions, feedback that helped me regain some sense of direction when all i saw was fog. I wouldn't be here if it wasn't for u guys (strange on a catch the bus forum). I owe u so much. When i saw that email my heart sunk. U guys do so much more good than any self-righteous twat out there whose answer to suicide ideation is.... once u have life u have everything (fk off). I am so sorry I cannot contribute to this cause (due to AML/CFT policies any cryptocurrency actions in my country is flagged). But I owe u guys EVERYTHING. I stand with u 1000000000000% Cause u guys were the only people who told me it was okay to be me. Thank you..... always

 

[Mocha]

Thank you all for fighting the good fight, and standing your ground on freedom of expression.

 

[6138]

This is a complete overreach, I genuinely don't understand how a British organisation can impose any sort of censorship over a US-Based one? All they can do is regulate their own country, and maybe petition a US representative to do something, etc, they have zero authority over a US-based site.

This is a sign of the increasing censorship of not only the right to die "movement" (If there is such a thing) but our society in general. Freedom of speech used to be the language of the internet, and now, anyone even uttering those words is viewed with skepticism at best, scorn at worst.

I suspect Ofcom is blowing smoke here, hoping SS will implement a server-side block which prevents access from UK-based IP's or something, but if not, and if Ofcom succeeds in imposing penalties on a US-based website, this will represent a paradigm shift, something that could forever change the way we use the internet.

A suicide related site is controversial, sure, many people would love to see it go, but this is not the final step, it's simply the first link in the chain. Today the topic is suicide, tomorrow they are policing what we can and cant say about politics, religion, gender, race, and who knows what else. Only that will follows the narrative is allowed, step out of line, and you lose your voice.

This one is serious, and I am very glad that the admins here are brave enough to stand up and fight against a powerful goverment institution. A "nastygram" like that would scare a lot of people into compliance.

 

[Nemaki Arber]

Thank you for standing your ground, nobody is manipulated into joining this forum, if anything the more this forum appears in the news and in content creators' videos the more waves of new members we have.

If the help systems in place were proper, actually improved our quality of life or gave us the ACTUAL choice to die with dignity and no pain if we're not able to fix the issues that kills our quality of life, we wouldn't be seeing such large increase in member count each times, if anything the amount of inactive legitimate accounts would quickly be more than the amount of active users. But the government needs more miserable worker ants and refuses to give us this liberty over our own body. The only way to even get legally euthanized is to either be terminally ill or be on death row which I know in the past has definitely pushed people to commit death row worthy crimes in order to be killed. We don't want that now do we? And I'm not encouraging anyone to commit crimes but I'm stating a fact. But these people can't think of details like that, all they can think of is how THEY feel, not how we feel without getting their panties in a twist.

If any of you OFCOM or BBC spies are reading this, hi, we're not pro-suicide, we're pro-choice, we encourage and embrace recovery, we also get sad when beloved members leaves this realm, we do not force help on people who suffer because we of all people understands most how it is to be in their shoes, if you truly want to help suicidal people then help us change the system, don't attack us or try to take us down, if professional help and the mentality around suicide didn't suck we wouldn't have this forum to begin with, if we had the liberty to choose when to die and with dignity not as many people would be traumatized and have to watch their loved ones die while trying to help them or finding their corpse. Everyone wins in the end if we change the system to actually help instead and give us a real choice instead of forcing useless help down our throat.

As a way to explain why I agree with giving us the choice to live or die : I am a grown adult nearing my 30s and have struggled with suicidal ideation, poor mental health and failed attempts my entire life, I cannot work or do anything outside of being alone in my apartment and occasionally get on my computer if I even have the energy, my failed attempts have left me disabled and potentially with a failing liver that I've began to show early stage 1 symptoms for which is going to be a slower and painful death than euthanisia if it were accessible to me, I've also been suffering from a chronic fatigue disorder since the very beginning of my life and even before becoming disabled due to an attempt I've always been physically weak and unable to stand for long periods of time without being in immense pain and getting dizzy, my body and brain have resisted all treatments, all medications, and all attempts at getting my life back in my control by going to school or trying to work despite how badly I want things to get better for me, even now I'm still trying things that may improve my life and give me the will to continue, I want to live in the end but the system and the current way our society works is incompatible with my psychological and physical limitations, self inflicted or not. I have nobody in my life to speak about suicide with which is a very present topic in my life and have even been called all the names under the sun for expressing suicidal feelings to people I should've been able to trust when I felt I really needed help with them and just didn't want to be alone in it, this forum gave me a safe space to be in and allowed to vent my grievances without the worry of being too graphic or saying words that any other forums would flag and ban me for or delete my post, meaning I can't receive help or encouragement in the end because of censorship that you wish to push onto us. I find comfort in this place when I feel like I need to talk to people who really understands what it's like without shoving down the usual "it gets better don't do it" down my throat.

Sorry for the wall of text, I want to prove that this place has good to it and we're not just people saying "Lol ok you should kys", we offer empathy and understanding around a very taboo topic in our society in a way that is rarely found outside of our community, we've helped alot of desperate souls feel less alone and find hope that maybe not everything is all bad and have helped them carry on with life longer that they would've otherwise, but we also respect the choice of those that do not agree with that sentiment instead of isolating them and making them feel even more misunderstood by other humans and I think that is very important to preserve in this fucked up world.

Much love everyone

 

[Corvette90]

This is a complete overreach, I genuinely don't understand how a British organisation can impose any sort of censorship over a US-Based one? All they can do is regulate their own country, and maybe petition a US representative to do something, etc, they have zero authority over a US-based site.

This is a sign of the increasing censorship of not only the right to die "movement" (If there is such a thing) but our society in general. Freedom of speech used to be the language of the internet, and now, anyone even uttering those words is viewed with skepticism at best, scorn at worst.

I suspect Ofcom is blowing smoke here, hoping SS will implement a server-side block which prevents access from UK-based IP's or something, but if not, and if Ofcom succeeds in imposing penalties on a US-based website, this will represent a paradigm shift, something that could forever change the way we use the internet.

A suicide related site is controversial, sure, many people would love to see it go, but this is not the final step, it's simply the first link in the chain. Today the topic is suicide, tomorrow they are policing what we can and cant say about politics, religion, gender, race, and who knows what else. Only that will follows the narrative is allowed, step out of line, and you lose your voice.

This one is serious, and I am very glad that the admins here are brave enough to stand up and fight against a powerful goverment institution. A "nastygram" like that would scare a lot of people into compliance.

you are so right. It's the thin edge of the wedge. It's so very dystopian. Just makes me want to exit from this horrible world more.

 

[Douggy82]

Sounds like a shakedown. They have infinite resources. I've heard of government deep states intentionally targeting people and entities they know are innocent just to "make them defend themselves". They know it costs money.

Wouldn't surprise me if the American government is involved. They know they can't do anything, so they use other countries.

 

[EternalShore]

Thank you for giving us a safe place to talk about these sorts of topics, vent, empathize with/help others, and receive help ourselves, SS! ^_^ Make sure to win! >w< I love this place lots and lots! ^_^
It'd be soooo epic if Trump actually sees this going on and actually puts tariffs on the UK for what they're doing to you guys tho! xDDD

 

[leloyon]

As a subject of the Anglo government, I have plenty to say, but all I will say is that I have both a VPN and Tor Browser and that any attempts by Ofcom can kindly and politely eat shit.
I had to use these to visit SaSu once, it didn't stop me, I'll do it again. Fuck this country, it's a police state.
EDIT: Well I was gonna leave it at that but then I decided to look up the news about this and came across the Samaritans (suicide hotline) patting Ofcom on the back.
This forum is a source of support for the people using it, and if the mental health system that Samaritans is part of was competent then maybe people wouldn't be coming here. Pigs, the lot of them.
What kind of look is it that people routinely speak out against the dogshit excuse of a mental health system here, that leaves those suffering from serious mental issues waiting for weeks, months, years to get help even when they're desperately fighting tooth and nail to get it, and then those involved with the system are too busy chatting shit about an internet forum, an internet forum that does a much better job at helping those truly suffering than Samaritans ever could.
But no, let's just wait until a schizophrenic who has been failed over and over by the mental health system goes out on a stabbing rampage because he couldn't get help, because not even schizophrenia is considered urgent enough for them to take your suffering seriously. Again. How many times has that exact situation played out? Can at least think of two off the top of my head (Valdo Calocane and Daniel Gonzalez), and that's already too many, those are just the high-profile ones.

 

[SilentSadness]

No one in the UK except for the government wanted the Online Safety Act to pass, and now they're abusing that act in order to "protect" people in the UK from themselves by removing access to information. Haha! They should just admit that the law has nothing to do with what they're doing at this point, they're just exercising their limitless power.

 

[6138]

you are so right. It's the thin edge of the wedge. It's so very dystopian. Just makes me want to exit from this horrible world more.

As a subject of the Anglo government, I have plenty to say, but all I will say is that I have both a VPN and Tor Browser and that any attempts by Ofcom can kindly and politely eat shit.
I had to use these to visit SaSu once, it didn't stop me, I'll do it again. Fuck this country, it's a police state.
EDIT: Well I was gonna leave it at that but then I decided to look up the news about this and came across the Samaritans (suicide hotline) patting Ofcom on the back.
View attachment 163668This forum is a source of support for the people using it, and if the mental health system that Samaritans is part of was competent then maybe people wouldn't be coming here. Pigs, the lot of them.
What kind of look is it that people routinely speak out against the dogshit excuse of a mental health system here, that leaves those suffering from serious mental issues waiting for weeks, months, years to get help even when they're desperately fighting tooth and nail to get it, and then those involved with the system are too busy chatting shit about an internet forum, an internet forum that does a much better job at helping those truly suffering than Samaritans ever could.
But no, let's just wait until a schizophrenic who has been failed over and over by the mental health system goes out on a stabbing rampage because he couldn't get help, because not even schizophrenia is considered urgent enough for them to take your suffering seriously. Again. How many times has that exact situation played out? Can at least think of two off the top of my head (Valdo Calocane and Daniel Gonzalez), and that's already too many, those are just the high-profile ones.

As a subject of the Anglo government, I have plenty to say, but all I will say is that I have both a VPN and Tor Browser and that any attempts by Ofcom can kindly and politely eat shit.
I had to use these to visit SaSu once, it didn't stop me, I'll do it again. Fuck this country, it's a police state.
EDIT: Well I was gonna leave it at that but then I decided to look up the news about this and came across the Samaritans (suicide hotline) patting Ofcom on the back.
View attachment 163668This forum is a source of support for the people using it, and if the mental health system that Samaritans is part of was competent then maybe people wouldn't be coming here. Pigs, the lot of them.
What kind of look is it that people routinely speak out against the dogshit excuse of a mental health system here, that leaves those suffering from serious mental issues waiting for weeks, months, years to get help even when they're desperately fighting tooth and nail to get it, and then those involved with the system are too busy chatting shit about an internet forum, an internet forum that does a much better job at helping those truly suffering than Samaritans ever could.
But no, let's just wait until a schizophrenic who has been failed over and over by the mental health system goes out on a stabbing rampage because he couldn't get help, because not even schizophrenia is considered urgent enough for them to take your suffering seriously. Again. How many times has that exact situation played out? Can at least think of two off the top of my head (Valdo Calocane and Daniel Gonzalez), and that's already too many, those are just the high-profile ones.

This is the real danger that arises from unrestrained censorship. What Ofcom and the person above are saying is just plain wrong, and anyone here realises that, but of course, noone sees this from our perspective.

People only see the perspective that they are supposed to see, Ofcom, the Samaritans, the UK government, etc. I'm sure if any ordinary person came across this debate, maybe even one of us here, if we hadn't found this site, we would be totally on their side too. We'd be thinking "Wow, I hope they shut that site down, it sounds awful!" because we are only seeing this from the perspective of the people who are trying to shut it down.

I don't post here much anymore, but this place is one of the most supportive communities I have ever been a part of. I've had so much abuse on reddit, twitter, youtube, facebook, etc. I've had death threats, people threatening to find where I live and beat me up, been called all the slurs you can think of, etc, etc, I have NEVER had that happen here, not once, and yet were are the extremists? We are the ones who are posting "harmful" content?

Censorship without oversight is dangerous, because you are relying on the people doing the censoring to tell you if it needs to be done or not. As far as I'm aware ofcom don't even mention the name of our site, so people can't check it out for themselves, they just have to take their word for it.

As I said in another comment, this goes beyond the suicide debate. Anything can be labelled as "harmful" and censored, and noone will know if it was *actually* harmful or not. With our super-sensitive society today there is a LOT of content that some people would deem "harmful" that really, honestly, isn't. So we all just have to put our blind faith in the a UK-based organisation to police the entire worlds internet, and hope they have our best interests at heart? Yeah, not happy with that.

 

[Wilt-On-High]

Thank you guys for going against these OFCOM CUNTS!
SaSu is the only place where me and others can speak freely without judgement or fear of being dragged to the mental hospital.

 

[Lime]

Just tell them to fuck off.. why even bother responding to the UK. That's what any other site receiving this does lmao

 

[FinalBossu]

Just a few weeks ago I saw a post from Tom Fulp on Newgrounds about how they have to require UK users to provide an ID, also thanks to this Online Safety Act. Please remind these fuckers that as of July 4th 1776, we are no longer subject to their government and their laws. Did they miss the memo? Do we need to have another war over this? No? Then they can fuck off and leave us alone already.

 

[artificialpasta]

I have found solace here but my view will be unpopular to many of you.

This is not a surprise at all, and regardless of the outcome we can expect more legal woes to come. The biggest problem is that children and young teenagers can access the site so easily. Even if you don't personally believe this to be a problem (though I truly think it is), it's a framing that is non-negotiable to the public. In its current form I predict SS will not permanently stay on the open web.

This is not X or 4chan, this is a forum designed for suicide instruction. I'm not confident the US government, who you plan to refer this case to (?), will find that agreeable.

I could be wrong, I probably won't be around long enough to know

 

[leloyon]

No one in the UK except for the government wanted the Online Safety Act to pass, and now they're abusing that act in order to "protect" people in the UK from themselves by removing access to information. Haha! They should just admit that the law has nothing to do with what they're doing at this point, they're just exercising their limitless power.

That's just everything the government does. The UK is a fucking nanny state, and you know what? The people will let it happen. I reckon the only reason I have any form of critical thinking skills or guts is due to being Irish, it feels like its in the Anglo blood and DNA to just blindly let authority fuck everyone.
It's real demoralising to see across the pond, where in France they riot over any government overreach, and then looking back here, where everyone just lets themselves get fucked time and time again.

People only see the perspective that they are supposed to see, Ofcom, the Samaritans, the UK government, etc. I'm sure if any ordinary person came across this debate, maybe even one of us here, if we hadn't found this site, we would be totally on their side too. We'd be thinking "Wow, I hope they shut that site down, it sounds awful!" because we are only seeing this from the perspective of the people who are trying to shut it down.

I don't post here much anymore, but this place is one of the most supportive communities I have ever been a part of. I've had so much abuse on reddit, twitter, youtube, facebook, etc. I've had death threats, people threatening to find where I live and beat me up, been called all the slurs you can think of, etc, etc, I have NEVER had that happen here, not once, and yet were are the extremists? We are the ones who are posting "harmful" content?

Censorship without oversight is dangerous, because you are relying on the people doing the censoring to tell you if it needs to be done or not. As far as I'm aware ofcom don't even mention the name of our site, so people can't check it out for themselves, they just have to take their word for it.

As I said in another comment, this goes beyond the suicide debate. Anything can be labelled as "harmful" and censored, and noone will know if it was *actually* harmful or not. With our super-sensitive society today there is a LOT of content that some people would deem "harmful" that really, honestly, isn't. So we all just have to put our blind faith in the a UK-based organisation to police the entire worlds internet, and hope they have our best interests at heart? Yeah, not happy with that.

It's basic propaganda. Demonise your opponent and strawman them, make it so that no one can even figure out what points they make.

I could be wrong, I probably won't be around long enough to know

This forum allows free speech, the only way you "won't be around long enough to know" is if you get banned for actually breaking the rules, or you leave. ┐(￣ヘ￣;)┌

 

[SnowWhite]

It's worth noting in the past months that Ofcom has received flak from the networks like the BBC for it's perceived "failure" in regards to enacting the highly controversial Online Safety Act. Combine that with them losing a case against GB News a couple weeks back, I could have guessed something like this would happen.

They seem so desperate for a 'win'. The lack of neutral reporting, while shameful, comes as no surprise having seen how the BBC has reported on this site before, and how many news networks cite the BBC as a source.

Recently we've seen people concerned in the UK that Ofcom may drum up fears about this site to justify online ID's for whatever Ofcom deems "adult" content, including resources LGBT+ peoples.

 

[artificialpasta]

This forum allows free speech, the only way you "won't be around long enough to know" is if you get banned for actually breaking the rules, or you leave. ┐(￣ヘ￣;)┌

I don't mean as a member of the forum :P

 

[ForgottenAgain]

I'm sorry if this was asked before, I'm sure it was, but is there any way of donating that doesn't involve crypto currency?

 

[Adûnâi]

Wait, free speech means you support Trump? No, I'm not trolling, it's just it's commonly believed that Dems hate free peach but Republicans love it. Hence Andrew Anglin and such. Please don't ban me, I'm not trolling, just musing on the irony as most forum members here hate the Orange Imperator.

Overall, I'm surprised the site is hosted in America though because while the First Amendment is American, most countries in the world don't seem to care about speech, free or not (unless it concerns their current dictator like in Türkiye or Indonesia).

Or maybe it's because the website is in English, and all English people are controlled from London, the capital of Great Britain?

 

[SnowWhite]

Wait, free speech means you support Trump? No, I'm not trolling, it's just it's commonly believed that Dems hate free peach but Republicans love it. Hence Andrew Anglin and such. Please don't ban me, I'm not trolling, just musing on the irony as most forum members here hate the Orange Imperator.

Overall, I'm surprised the site is hosted in America though because while the First Amendment is American, most countries in the world don't seem to care about speech, free or not (unless it concerns their current dictator like in Türkiye or Indonesia).

Or maybe it's because the website is in English, and all English people are controlled from London, the capital of Great Britain?

With all due respect I suspect you've missed the point. Ofcom is a British regulator, that is threatening action that would restrict access for UK users of the site. The Online Safety Act is being used as the "justification", an act that is highly controversial in the UK but grossly under reported by UK media and not discussed (in my opinion) publicly enough by our members of parliament before it's enactment.

The act was passed by the nation's centre-right/right party, the conservatives, in 2023 but came into force on the 9th of April this year, which is now why we're seeing Ofcom use it as a "justification" to exert influence over ISP's. The act is flawed on many levels that listing them all would probably be a longer document than the act itself. Ofcom in theory is supposed to be an apolitical independent 'watchdog' body to counter bias via television, however the OSA gives them increased power over ISP's services in the UK.

Ofcom is using intimidation and using the flaws and poor terminology in the OSA to their advantage. They recently went against GB News (Think Fox but british), they've gone against left aligned networks previously too.

Ultimately this is not a left vs right issue, this is an authoritian issue that many argue goes against the spirit, in some ways even the letter, of the UK's freedom of expression laws. I care not what flavour you like your politics, this is an issue across the political spectrum and my concern is that other nations may attempt to follow suit, with similar acts.

 

[anagram]

UK can go 1984 in their own country but don't expect everyone else in the world to follow you. REALITY CHECK FOR BRITAIN: Your imperialist glory days are OVER. The fact many commit suicide in your country says more about your government, systems and institutions than it does our website and community. Every hour a man commits suicide in your country. Deal with it.

 

[SnowWhite]

I feel we're missing the point so I'll leave you with one final point. My concern IS NOT that "other nations look up to the UK so will blindly enforce similar laws" as that's simply untrue. My concern IS that other nations who already have interest in enacting similar laws may use the OSA as a flawed example of a structure that is in force and "working" (politicians are quite experienced in stretching the definition of success).

Why is that a concern I have? Because the OSA was inspired by the EU's Digital Service Act. It's a reasonable concern that nations seeking to exert more control on how their citizens interact with the internet will use the OSA as an example, in the same way the UK used the DSA as an example, and now they have one more example to point at and morph to fit whichever narrative they need.

That might not be the case for every single government in every single nation, my point is that it doesn't need to be, it's one more flawed example that may inspire more flawed examples, and further the issue that we're facing right now.

 

[Adûnâi]

Ofcom is a British regulator, that is threatening action that would restrict access for UK users of the site.

Excuse me, but this suicide forum is already banned in England? So how is it different? People from the Kingdom literally have to use VPN?

The act was passed by the nation's centre-right/right party, the conservatives, in 2023 but came into force on the 9th of April this year

Charles' kingdom is in full control of liberals, the conservatives have more Bipocs than the labourists, for crying out loud. I agree that authoritarianism is an issue, but right-wingers are all about free speech, see 4chan or Unz or Anglin or Substack.

But yeah let's not talk about that, it's too divisive. It's just I felt I had to say it because nobody else will.

 

[SnowWhite]

People from the Kingdom literally have to use VPN?

Currently this only applies to customers of some Internet Service Providers, Ofcom's usage of OSA is seeking to make this the case for ALL isp's.

I agree that authoritarianism is an issue, but right-wingers are all about free speech, see 4chan or Unz or Anglin or Substack.

These are some good examples and places where I've had some of the more mature discussions across the political alignment (Can't speak for Anglin or unz though haven't used them) But we are seeing some right wing movements that are seeking to limit the access to LGBT+ resources and speeches, so it isn't as simple as that in my experience.

But yeah let's not talk about that, it's too divisive. It's just I felt I had to say it because nobody else will.

Yeah I fear we may be taking the conversation of topic. I did however want to thank you for your maturity regarding quite a divisive topic though

 

[Walpurgisnacht]

They always test their new boot on the neck of the most marginalized and misunderstood in society...
We aren't allowed community, the state will ensure we are always dependent on them, and not each other; that's how control is maintained. Because they can always exercise power over us, but we cannot exercise power over each other, that's what threatens their control.

Because what this is really about, what it's always about, is they want a population of obedient, efficient worker drones.
If we divest from the state's total control of our bodies, and we demand a right to control of our own lives, dignity and of full bodily autonomy (which necessarily includes the right to die,) that's potential decades of labour our bodies are still useful to them for, that they could've otherwise extracted from us.

We aren't people to them, we're machines; and if we are given a right to die, that precludes total autonomy of self, which is a huge threat to the system built on the extraction of labour and value from our (everyone's) bodies for the ultra-rich.

---

Also, isn't Rain based in the UK?
I hope she doesn't get harassed because of this...