April 10th: The bill has been vetoed!
April 2nd: The politicians in Arizona are about to sign into law a bill that would mandate sites like e621 to either impose age verification on all users or be at a risk of lawsuits. Such system would be required to go through third party vendors, who in turn must go through a government database to verify every user's age. This is not only a major violation of privacy, but it also opens up a very real danger of identity theft through phishing schemes and other methods, not to mention that we would not be able to control any of that information to make sure it is permanently deleted after age verification is complete.
Unfortunately, Arizona is the state out of which e621 operates, which means that this law will almost certainly affect us if it is to pass. If want to help us ensure that this site can continue to serve you without being required to know who you are, please ask the Arizona governor to veto this bill.
Please, help us get the word out by letting others know about this issue.
For some further information on what the bill does have a look at https://action.freespeechcoalition.com/bill/arizona-hb-2586/
We still have a Discord server, come talk to us!
Want to advertise on e621? Click here!
cracky
Membermmm I'd hit that
vmc
MemberAmazing style!
pingpong101
MemberWhy would you hit her? Are you some kinda woman hater?
equimanthorn
MemberWanted as in I want her.
YinFox
Member[WANTED]
Reason: Apple Jacking your horse.
cracky
MemberIt mean hit as in I'd do her.... not actual hitting :P
pingpong101
MemberWhat do you mean you would "do her"? As in, do her a favor? Do you mean you would help her escape from the law or something?
cracky
Member.....-_- I WOULD DO HER: USE YOUR MIND AND WONDER ON WHAT DO MIGHT MEAN
pingpong101
MemberAh, how silly of me. You clearly are a beacon of law and order, and as such, you mean to do her in by having her arrested then hung like the criminal she is. I am sorry I was not getting what you were saying until now.
cracky
Memberyea what ever ya say
VanAshkevron
MemberObvious troll is obvious.
ikdind
MemberWell, to be fair, nobody gives a termite's crack what cracky will or won't hit. And not only did cracky not "get it", but he then insisted on clarifying that his comments were brrbrrdrrs in nature.
I agree with pingpong101's assessment (inferred though it may be) that such commentary isn't really necessary here, on a piece of artwork which, while containing an attractive female, doesn't actually have any nudity or sexual provocation beyond a little cleavage and midriff. To wit, I feel post #173446 and post #134376 are both more sexually provocative. They, too, are rated "Safe". And of course post #133091 is moreso than all of the above, but at least rates as "Questionable".
Genxral
Memberso much yes
Login to respond »