>>5875
> Advertising something that illegal is probably not that easy either.


Isn't it rather melodramatic to call it illegal? It's just fiction. What kind of world would we live in if words became crimes?

>>5877
> Webhosting for $2/month is not going to be even close to what is needed for a large (or even moderately sized) erotica site.


Certainly it wouldn't start large. It would need to build up a user base, and $30/month is quite extreme for a site that hardly anyone uses. Yet even if it were small it would have the charm of being a functional website that works as it is supposed to, which would put it far above ASSTR.

Perhaps if it became successful and was generating significant ad revenue it could be migrated to a more serious host.

> The cheaper webhosts are less likely to permit that kind of content.


We'd better carefully examine the terms of service of each webhost, rather than rely upon what is likely. It seems odd that a web hosting service would even care what kind of content is on their websites. It would be easier and cheaper for them to have a policy of not worrying about that.

> I would even set up a replacement site myself, but the thing is I don't think people would actually use it.


ASSTR is a great service in principle. It's only fault is that it's broken. Give people an ASSTR that actually works and people will surely use it. Not many at first, but given time it will grow, so long as ASSTR never revives itself.

> People are too used to ASSTR since it's achieved critical mass a long time ago.


Of course people want ASSTR, but they can't have it. That's why we should consider alternatives.

> Honestly I think the best we can do is make sure we archive it, and offer our assistance to them financially.


Is there any reason to think that money would fix ASSTR's problems? It seems to just have no one maintaining the site.