LFGSS and Microcosm shutting down 16th March 2025 (the day before the Online Safety Act is enforced)

Lolz, but seriously... If you represent other small sites then journalists keep asking me for examples of others affected... You should make yourself known.

You must do away with the notion that Ofcom (or any government agency) has any interest in shutting down small websites. At worst, they are completely indifferent towards you, and at best they hold a sincere belief that small websites should be allowed to operate but find it difficult to provide legislative clarity to both small and large websites at the same time because legislating is hard. There is no evidence that Ofcom (or the government more broadly) have any interest in shutting down small websites, only the supposition based on a very cynical take that all legislation that can harm you is designed that way. There are so many easier ways to target you compared to this legislation.

The unregulated wild west web has been a breeding ground for bad things like CSAM for decades. Large companies have hidden from accountability for the conduct on their platform by shielding themselves with excuses based on "it's the internet, we can't control it, we can only do our best to regulate the content on our platforms" and as long as they are "doing their best" which is defined with hand-waving then they should be allowed to continue as-is regardless of what happens on their platform.

Ofcom want to put the boot into these platforms, they want the platforms to realise that Ofcom don't care about whether the platform is doing their "best" if their "best" is ineffective. Ofcom want platforms to realise that spending a notional amount on removing some CSAM from their platform is inexcusable when the platform is making billions of dollars. Facebook can afford to spend ten billion dollars per year on keeping their platform CSAM free. They choose not to. They choose to do their "best" because it keeps regulators happy and Facebook's conscience clear.

You may be someone who is extremely cautious about complying with the law and have serious concerns about any law that could target you, you may be someone who objects to this legislation on the basis of it being government overreach. That's fine. But to worry about this legislation as if Ofcom have one iota of interest in you and your website is being hysterical. And if you're concerned about this law because it could target you, why are you running any public service in the first place? You're a sitting duck for civil action.

If Ofcom wanted to take on small websites they have so many alternative options, by virtue of how this legislation has been written you can see that they specifically do not want to suppress small websites. For example, a much simpler implementation of this legislation would be to introduce a licensing system for running a website with heavy reporting requirements -- which would make it all but impossible to run a small website.

I, too, have run communities bigger than this one for decades, I have dealt with everything from banned members accosting me in public, death threats, lawsuits, grooming on my websites to illegal material distributed on my websites. I have written policies, taken action and engaged with law enforcement. I am sure you have done the same. The change in law does not change anything on a practical level for small websites. Look at Omegle for an example of how this law is not required to take down a website for the activities this legislation targets. Omegle was taken down by civil action, not government action.

I have no connection to illuminate tech. but it is quite easy to read between the lines. They're telling you that Ofcom have no interest in pursuing you, and that they're happy to do the basic performative compliance work on your behalf to stop the hysteria. illuminate tech. are politely saying, "you're being hysterical. If you really need some documents to make you feel comfortable with this law, we'll write them for you.".