There’s a difference between making an assumption and asking a question. I asked if you were a mod (see the question mark). You seem to know a fair amount of the behind the scenes workings of this message board. I was unaware that it was common practice for mods to restore posts after they have been deleted. Apologies.
To get back to some common ground, as I mentioned earlier, I’ve come around to your way of thinking that the sexual portions of the police report (that obviously should have been redacted to a much greater extent so that her identity would be impossible to reveal) along with the subsequent promotion of it would most likely fall under online sexual abuse or harassment and not child porn. She provided those intimate details under the belief that the interview would be in strict confidence and that her identity would never be divulged. Did she consent to it being disseminated nationwide? Besides being a victim in other ways (which she may contest), she has also clearly been a victim of online sexploitation. If not, what specific aspects do you disagree with?
We evidently have differing viewpoints on the degree of the sexploitation that has taken place. You think I must be insincere because you think it’s just not any biggie. In my opinion the voluminous amounts and types of porn that you almost certainly consume has desensitized you so that your internal compass that is supposed to point towards basic decency is broken. People with an ongoing porn habit often (unbeknownst to them) have been significantly conditioned towards the sexual objectification people (likely women and children, in your case). At this point, you can’t even begin to imagine a person being disgusted by the sexploitation that has occurred because to you it’s just a complete nothing burger compared to the extent and frequency of degeneracy required to maintain your dopamine level.