• Staff wanted!



I have no feelings
Because pedophilia is a sensitive topic to all of us, I'd like to share my piece of mind with the whole staff. It's only my opinion, I don't mind making a thread so we all can discuss it, bring our points of view, suggest changes to fight pedophilia.

I want to start that I'm glad we added that lolicon rule after discussions and I'm opening the door for more discussions. Especially after the Chodo things, I'm wondering what we can do.

1) I don't think we should have groups about dark web knowing that dark web is 80% of pedophilia. If they want to talk about dark web, these threads should be public and monitored (that we can all watch and get notified). The problem with groups is people barely post in them, so we naturally focus more on the main page of GG (threads + shoutbox) because that's what everybody sees when they get on GG. I feel like private groups about dark webs are also invitation to getting CP/codes via PMs and all.
>>>My concern with groups : (I know we can always increase moderation in groups, but I feel like it will never be enough). So, nuking specific groups?
I might be biased because I'm not a big fan of groups to begin with.

2) Maybe discussions about pedophilia should be reduced as members should not ideolize well known pedophiles (even if they're joking). It's not a good look for GoreGrish imo. We can joke about Mickael Jackson being a pedophile but what's in spoiler is a big no no to me.
I can understand people wanting to discuss pedophilia, wanting to show disgust, wanting to name them... but the other problem is probably more personal to me, but when they do it, they advertise their shit (there's nothing we can do about it). I think I remember members getting banned because they would publicly say they would try to find DD's vid a few years ago. But anyway, I'm derailing.
>>>So basically, saying the names of known pedos during conversations, that's fine, as long as it doesn't degenerate into praising and shit, even if it's sarcasm. I wouldn't joke with that like security not joking with bomb jokes at the airport. Revising rule 4? Thighten it? Not just CP, lolicon and calling another member the P word being bannable and reportable

I remember we added this to our rules "staff reserve the right to exercise personal discretion and ban a member for any reason, even if no specific rule has technically been violated", but we can be less tolerant with jokes towards pedophilia.

I don't know if other members would like to add their piece of mind, offer suggestions. As I said it's only my opinion, I wanted to get it off my chest and open the door to express some concerns.
Last edited:


~*I Squirt Blonde~*
Not sure about this?
"but we can be less tolerant with pedophilia".

We have never been tolerant when it comes to CP here. However lines have been slippery lately.
There's a difference between having a discussion and being falsely accused of being a pedophile.

My thing with groups..staff should always keep an eye on them that is why I changed permissions. I'm not sure if y'all have even checked on them daily..I know myself I haven't as much as I should.

The real problem is PM's. We only have attachments and tbh I'm not too keen on having staff being able to read them.. because not all abuse it.
If we disable certain groups..I gurantee PM's will be more used for the sole purpose of being shady. We can control in groups, better than PM's.

I am gonna bring up something that a member came to me about..

The "Call me a Pedo" has been used and abused.. especially by those in chat. IMO yes it's bait and everyone should know the rules..but does that send a conflicting message?

I'm not opposed to tightening up rule 4..making it more crystal clear and adding in things..like if there's proof that someone is a pedo to call them out without repercussions.


I have no feelings
Not sure about this?
"but we can be less tolerant with pedophilia".
I brought a few edits to my post while you were answering, I specified “we can be less tolerant with jokes towards pedophilia”. I would even add not only with joke, but praise. I believe there are inoffensive jokes meanwhile some can be more unsettling. I was wondering if we should get stricter on that aspect.

I’m also thinking of Chodo’s participation in a thread about dark web/pedophiles : https://goregri.sh/threads/wallow-and-swallow.59589/
I remember this thread was pointed out, was discussed and was reported before and we came to the conclusion that Chodo wasn’t condoning with pedophilia. I’m wondering if we could do something to prevent it again.


I have no feelings
I think after ALL this ...threads like that should be deleted
So, should we delete + warn users?

And when you say “threads like that should be deleted”... you mean threads about dark web and pedophilia? Because if so, I might go review all the other dark web, DD’s (and stuff like that) threads a bit later and delete them.

Or I can link them all here and we see what we do with them.


I have no feelings
a) threads asking about dark web, asking for links, how to get there etc.
1. https://goregri.sh/threads/dark-web-links-searching.67044/ (op could be getting links via PMs)
2. https://goregri.sh/threads/deep-web-discussion.52557/
3. https://goregri.sh/threads/the-truthful-dark-web-discussion.64619/ (hi ivan)
4. https://goregri.sh/threads/does-anyone-have-any-deep-web-links-for-gore-sites.67193/ (lol deep web)
5. https://goregri.sh/threads/red-rooms.70105/

b) suspect activity in groups
1. https://goregri.sh/group-posts/13789/?page=1 (now deleted)

c) pedophilia threads
1. https://goregri.sh/threads/what-do-you-think-of-pedophiles.61390/ (the thread could be fine, but I’ll read all posts later)
2. https://goregri.sh/threads/rapey-co.61507/ (not sure if it’s a good idea to bring attention to that website)

OT: btw Ivan likes to bring the dark web, Peter scully and DD’s up for some reason https://goregri.sh/threads/if-you-c...-would-you-do-it-be-creative-too.63178/page-5 and I see him bounding with Chodo https://goregri.sh/group-posts/15509/?page=1

Should we delete Amanda Todd’s thread? The autopsy image is fake but since it’s about a teenager... https://goregri.sh/threads/possible-fake-amanda-todd-on-the-slab.20163/

I might update my post later
Last edited:


I have no feelings
Jack’s GAMING discord server. Why would you even need to state that rule for average gamers?

Last edited:
I've been on here for only a few days and have seen numerous posts asking about the Dark or Deep Web. Some asking about DD. At anyone's very first time hearing about the Dark/Deep Web, it'll peak their curiosity. It did mine. BUT. After, I read what it is actually for. My curiosity left completely. I accept asking questions. People don't always fully understand what they are asking about at first. Referring to the DW, After questions are answered, no one should have an ongoing interest in it. It is ONLY for active criminals and Pedophiles. The other thing. I found out about it because some sick jerk posted about in a Horror Group I am in claiming it was the scariest horror movie he has ever seen. Needless to say. The Internet Movie Database did not have that 'movie' on it. They might of just heard about it, heard about the gore aspect of it asking around about it on here not fully being aware of the extent. Same thing, no ongoing interest to be displayed after. Because Then we know, there is a problem.