This report documents a series of recent events at the girl-love site Visions of Alice (VoA) surrounding staff actions, member bans, and the migration to the newly formed alternative site, Girls Are The Best (GATB). It is compiled from firsthand accounts, preserved communications, and corroborating evidence provided by multiple individuals directly involved.
The purpose of this report is to provide an accurate, transparent, and chronological account of what occurred, so that the record is clear and verifiable. It is not intended to slander, defame, or harm any individual's reputation. Where conclusions are drawn, they are based on documented events and reasonable interpretations of those events. Where subjective perspectives are included, they are attributed to the person who provided them, if permission was granted to do so.
Our aim is to replace rumor and speculation with a factual narrative, allowing readers to evaluate the situation for themselves.
Because the VoA administration has framed recent events as a "war" and strictly prohibits any mention of GATB, it is not possible to present a fair account of what transpired within their platform. Attempts to clarify or correct the record there are subject to aggressive censorship. For this reason, the following report is being published externally, so that an accurate record of events is available.
AgeOldTragedy
Arin
beamer
Desire
Evident617
Josef K.
Revolution
rogercrane
saltwater
Wildly
Wyvern
Prior to the events described, Arin was a highly regarded, nine-year member of VoA, having served various essential functions throughout the years. To understand why starlet_Luver ultimately banned Arin, it is necessary to review the history between them. starlet_Luver never explained this context publicly, but later disclosed it in a private email. What follows shows how starlet_Luver's erroneous interpretation of an otherwise ordinary incident became the basis for a permanent ban.
Arin had long been regarded as a capable moderator, yet starlet_Luver later portrayed him as a "dishonorable drunk" who did not care about the community. He pointed to an evening in the chatroom when Arin had been drinking and allegedly said he did not care about members.
Arin remembers the event quite differently. For him, it was an ordinary evening of chatting and handling routine duties such as checking links. He recalls drinking, but only moderately. A newly promoted member joined at the time, and since he was already engaged in conversation, he left the welcoming to other staff present, which was a common practice.
At the time, Arin was feeling half-hearted about his duties. Largely due to personal circumstances, he believed he lacked the "spare energy" to commit fully and was considering taking a temporary break, motivated by a desire to do what was best for the community. When starlet_Luver entered chat and began berating him about drinking and not welcoming members, that criticism convinced him to follow through on his intention to step back from staff responsibilities.
In short, there is a stark contrast between starlet_Luver's account and Arin's recollection. Where starlet_Luver framed the episode as evidence of disloyalty, Arin saw himself as stepping back reluctantly, with the community's best interests in mind.
On June 24, Arnghel (a senior member) started a thread criticizing the lack of activism on the forum, prompted by the recent departure of uwuux (also a senior member), who had left after expressing similar frustrations and criticizing staff and members, calling them "scared, passive, spineless, weak, pathetic." Arnghel's first language is not English, and his post was difficult to interpret. starlet_Luver and doodah, his lead admin, read it as containing a threat.
The relevant portion of Arnghel's post is quoted below:
Not be a 'scared, passive, spineless, weak, pathetic' for this place means to destroy this place.
We don't have a place outside of Tor to not be a 'scared, passive, spineless, weak, pathetic'.
I would be ready to destroy this place in case it would lead to our revolution, but it lead to nothing for now.
Arnghel's use of "destroy" does not describe his own intent but the possible consequence of bold action. His post instead expresses a desire for change and criticizes uwuux's departure, not the forum itself.
The sequence of responses was as follows:
doodah posted in the staff section expressing concern about the "threatening" nature of Arnghel's post.
Josef K. responded in the staff section, explaining in detail why the interpretation was likely mistaken.
doodah, without acknowledging that response, posted in the public thread condemning Arnghel's "threatening" tone.
starlet_Luver posted in the same thread, stating that staff did not appreciate threats.
Arin posted in the thread, asking, "What about this post is a threat?" This is the entirety of his post.
Josef K. responded to Arin publicly, stating the post was likely a misinterpretation of unclear wording.
The posts by Arin and Josef K. were deleted without warning or explanation.
During the ensuing arguments in the staff section, starlet_Luver conceded that Arnghel's post was in fact not a threat.
On June 25, following the deletions, a private message chain was initiated among staff that included starlet_Luver, doodah, Desire (then an admin), Arin, and Josef K. Due to time zone differences, Josef K. did not see the exchange until much later, when it was nearly over.
The conversation began when Arin asked why his post, which had simply posed a question about how Arnghel's post was threatening, had been deleted without warning or explanation.
Desire responded first. He checked the usual locations for such actions—staff reports and "removed posts"—and found nothing. There were no staff reports filed (contrary to standard protocol), and the post had not been moved to the "removed posts" section as per normal practice. Since starlet_Luver had not followed this standard procedure, Desire assumed there had been a mix-up, suggesting Arin's post had never been posted.
doodah then joined the discussion, noting that there was an automatically recorded staff log entry for the deletion.
starlet_Luver entered the conversation, ordering Arin to drop the matter and stating that any further opinions on it would be treated as an attempt to disrupt the operation of the forum.
In response, Arin responded with a measured critique of how the site was being managed. He pointed out:
The failure to adhere to standard moderation procedures.
The confusion caused by bypassing those procedures.
That the complete deletion of his post was improper in the absence of a compelling reason, given that the post merely asked a question.
doodah attempted to justify starlet_Luver's failure to follow protocol by citing his heavy workload and a desire to avoid "drama."
Arin replied that if causing drama were a valid ground for removal, then the public posts by starlet_Luver and doodah, which accused Arnghel of making a "threat," would also have been subject to removal.
Afterward, Arin entered the chatroom and told Desire that it might be the last time he was in chat, intending to leave the site voluntarily. He reflects in hindsight that his decision to walk away would have ended the matter peacefully. After new chat messages failed to come in for an extended period of time, Arin at first thought that chat was simply quiet. He then thought that perhaps he had lost his connection and tried reloading, only to be redirected to the login screen. He logged in again and discovered that he had been banned. He was still able to see his private messages, as banned members are able to do so depending on the method of the banning, and saw a final message from starlet_Luver, stating that he would not tolerate questioning of the running of the site.
After Arin's ban on June 25, Wyvern (then a moderator) initiated a protest in the staff-only section. Wyvern cited starlet_Luver's failure to follow established procedures when deleting Arin's post from Arnghel's thread. Wyvern described starlet_Luver's conduct as "dictatorial."
Josef K. replied in agreement, stating the matter had been "poorly handled from start to finish."
starlet_Luver responded to both moderators without addressing the procedural concerns, stating he was "done with people questioning my or the Admins' judgement on how best to run this site." He cited the forum's two-decade history as evidence of the admins' sound judgment.
Josef K. replied that staff members should be free to raise objections, adding that longevity did not guarantee infallibility. He apologized for contradicting the admins in the public thread.
starlet_Luver replied that objections should be made privately, not in front of the forum. He criticized Josef K. for posting publicly before awaiting a staff response, but affirmed respect for him and stressed the need for "trust" in leadership.
Josef K. countered that respect would have required starlet_Luver to address his objection before posting in the disputed thread. He also questioned the certainty with which starlet_Luver and doodah had interpreted the original post as a threat, noting it was written in broken English.
starlet_Luver reiterated his criticism of Josef K.'s timing and acknowledged that the post had not, in fact, posed the threat he initially assumed. He said the admins' public replies were intended both for the original poster and to signal to other members that threats were unacceptable.
Desire entered the discussion, agreeing with Wyvern's initial protest. He contested the treatment of persistent disagreement as a major offense and remarked disapprovingly that similar situations had occurred before.
starlet_Luver responded: "If you feel you do not wish to be on the team you have a choice to leave."
Wyvern replied at length, criticizing starlet_Luver's leadership style, which he said was alienating staff and creating unease. He argued that staff should not fear being banned for raising objections and urged resolving conflicts with "patience and care." He apologized for calling starlet_Luver a dictator, attributing the remark to stress. He said the actions taken were "unfair and excessive" and cited his seven years on staff as evidence of his commitment to the forum. He noted that he was speaking on behalf of Arin, a personal friend, but that he has done so even for individuals whom he disliked.
starlet_Luver responded by accusing Wyvern of prioritizing an individual over the protection of the site. He stated that the forum's welfare outweighed that of any single member and reiterated his view that believing anyone knows better than starlet_Luver and doodah was "foolish," again citing the forum's longevity.
Josef K. replied that starlet_Luver appeared not to have understood Wyvern's points and repeated concerns about the negative impact on staff morale. He urged listening to opposing views "thoughtfully and with respect."
starlet_Luver maintained that questioning the admins could not be tolerated.
Josef K.'s final message on June 26 again requested "respectful and considerate" treatment.
On June 25, around the time of Arin's ban, starlet_Luver appeared briefly in the chatroom to consult the staff about site matters and then left. Shortly thereafter, Lily_Breeze raised the first recorded inquiry regarding Arin's ban, stating that the ban had occurred roughly an hour earlier.
beamer and Evident617 expressed surprise and curiosity over the ban. Wildly offered to share Arin's Session ID with beamer, marking the first reference to arranging off-site contact. In a separate communication, Arin explained that he had thought the ban might be temporary, but offered his Session ID in case members wanted to reach out to him.
starlet_Luver re-entered chat. beamer began pressing for an explanation, asserting that members had a right to know. starlet_Luver replied curtly, "He was ban because I ban him. That is all you need to know."
Wildly challenged the decision, noting that Arin was a veteran member and former member of the staff, unlikely to break rules. Tensions escalated when beamer criticized starlet_Luver's communication style, prompting starlet_Luver to tell him to leave. beamer called starlet_Luver a "jerk" and was kicked from the chat 14 seconds later.
Wildly explained to others that beamer's anger stemmed from the unexplained ban of Arin. AgeOldTragedy defended beamer with a strongly worded rebuke aimed at starlet_Luver. Within a couple of minutes, starlet_Luver sent private messages to AgeOldTragedy, asserting that the staff decide how the site is run, and that anyone who objects is free to leave. starlet_Luver sent two additional private messages over the next several minutes, warning AgeOldTragedy not to "test" him.
beamer returned (reportedly having been un-kicked by rogercrane, then a moderator) and shared his Session ID for anyone who wished to get in touch off-site. The ID was swiftly deleted, presumably by starlet_Luver, and then starlet_Luver repeated that dissatisfied members were free to leave. The situation escalated again when Wildly accused starlet_Luver of acting like an "authoritarian dictator." starlet_Luver responded with a ban threat, which he acted upon moments later: Wildly was kicked from chat 13 seconds after asking if he would be told why.
beamer demanded to know the reason for Wildly's ban, but starlet_Luver signed out shortly after, citing travel obligations. Extrapolating from the chat logs and later activity, beamer was banned from the site around the same time for one day.
With starlet_Luver gone, one anonymous user commented that they had seen this behavior from him before, suggesting it was triggered by personal frustrations. Wildly re-entered chat (also reportedly un-kicked), suggesting the creation of an alternative platform like VoA.
Additional users joined over time, with discussion turning again to off-site contact. saltwater, then tech admin, entered shortly thereafter and explicitly authorized members to exchange contact information, providing an email address for assistance in case starlet_Luver "bans everyone." Members began sharing email addresses and Session IDs. Wildly mentioned the formation of a group chat for the first time, after which conversation subsided.
In a separate communication, Arin would later explain that he had started the group chat because of the "overwhelming number of new contacts" seeking information about the situation.
The group chat's discussions shifted from anger and confusion to preparation for relocation. The newly created site was quietly made accessible to group chat members, who began registering accounts and exploring its early features. On July 4, starlet_Luver was calmly notified of the site's existence and given the opportunity to become a member. The chatroom and the staff section on VoA saw no further protest or questioning during this time.
To further understand the decision of many members to leave, it is also necessary to consider long-standing reports of abusive behavior by starlet_Luver. Reports characterize his behavior as manipulative, deceptive, and at times threatening. Individuals have expressed fear of retaliation or have cited direct experiences of mistreatment. A recurring theme in these reports is the use of alternating extremes: profuse expressions of approval and praise when members conform to his expectations, and hostile, demeaning speech when they challenge or disappoint him. This dynamic has created an environment in which participation is contingent on personal loyalty to starlet_Luver rather than adherence to fair or transparent standards. The cumulative effect has been the departure of numerous long-standing members, many of whom explicitly cite starlet_Luver's conduct as the determining factor in their decision to leave.
On July 14, during an email exchange with Revolution, starlet_Luver heavily implied that saltwater was involved in the arrests or disappearances of four members of the community. The connections were unfounded and purely speculative, but starlet_Luver presented them in a way that made Revolution fearful of saltwater. starlet_Luver is also reported to have made the same claims to doodah, who was unconvinced and strongly opposed that view.
Amid this heightened anxiety, starlet_Luver asked Revolution for his login credentials to GATB. Revolution complied, later saying he was unsure why he agreed but speculating that it may have been to find out what was going on. Within a day or two, starlet_Luver used these credentials to access the new site's chatroom without participants' knowledge. It is presumed this is how he learned that Wyvern and Josef K. had discussed staff-only matters there.
On July 17, Wyvern and Josef K. were demoted from staff. In a private message, starlet_Luver said this was because they had discussed staff matters on GATB, which he regarded as a violation of a "pact." He also told them he could not keep people on his staff who were also staff on a site created out of "hate for [him]," an assertion that is disputed by the site's founding members.
Later, Desire and rogercrane were also demoted due to the "conflict of interest" entailed in being a staff member on both sites.
On August 2, the day after GATB's official launch, starlet_Luver posted a public statement on the original forum and another site. It contained multiple factual inaccuracies and misleading statements.
Claim: All ex-staff agreed Arin had broken the rules.
Finding: False. No consultation occurred before the ban. Several staff explicitly objected, noting there was no rule against disagreeing with admins in private.
Claim: The ex-staff defended him because "he is their friend."
Finding: False. Colleagues felt strongly that starlet_Luver's action was an unjustified abuse of power. Wyvern stated in the staff section that he had even spoken on behalf of individuals whom he disliked.
Claim: Former staff "broke their oath" not to share staff matters externally.
Finding: Partially true. Some staff discussions were shared. Omitted is the context: members were alarmed by bans and threats, and ex-staff saw disclosure as necessary for transparency.
Claim: Josef K. was "caught red-handed" scraping posts "illegally."
Finding: Misleading. Josef K. explained immediately that the purpose was to archive his own posts, having lost the desire to remain an active member of the forum. starlet_Luver initially accepted this explanation, offering to help obtain them for him, asking for "a week or so to do that for you." A week later, with no archive delivered, Josef K. sent a reminder and received no reply. In his August statement, starlet_Luver reframed the event in more negative and speculative terms.
Claim: The decision to create GATB was made by all of its staff members.
Finding: False. The decision to create the new site was made by saltwater alone.
Claim: GATB was created "out of anger and frustration over a decision [starlet_Luver] made to remove a member of [VoA] for violating a forum rule."
Finding: False. Work on GATB was already underway as far back as December 2024 (easily confirmed by WHOIS records), several months before Arin's ban.
Claim: starlet_Luver has "always had reservations" about saltwater.
Finding: Implausible. If this were true, it would have been grossly negligent to hand over server access and member information to such an individual.
Claim: saltwater "erased vital data" from VoA and "made alterations that prevented VoA from functioning properly."
Finding: False. No vital data was erased, and VoA is functioning properly.
Claim: Members of GATB were responsible for a DDoS attack against VoA on July 24.
Finding: Unsubstantiated. A true DDoS would cause site disruption, but no such evidence exists. The only reported issue was an increase in bot activity. This coincided with starlet_Luver disabling an existing Cloudflare CAPTCHA, which had been preventing such traffic for over a year, making increased bot activity a predictable outcome. He later reintroduced bot protection, and the surge of activity subsided. Moreover, there are many posts and chats from the very beginning stating that GATB does not want to fight and discourages such behavior. For these reasons, there is no factual basis for attributing the surge in bot traffic to GATB members.
Furthermore, GATB has issued a strongly worded statement to its members that malicious actions against other sites will not be tolerated.
Member: AgeOldTragedy
History:
2024-01-18 → Registered
2024-12-22 → Promoted to Chat Mod
2025-07-06 → Resigned
Current Status: Senior Member
Member: Arin
History:
2016-05-23 → Registered
2019-01-11 → Promoted to Chat Mod
2019-09-04 → Promoted to GMod
2020-04-15 → Changed to Chat Helper
2023-04-19 → Promoted to Gmod
2025-06-25 → Permanently Banned
Current Status: Banned
Member: Desire
History:
2007-06-11 → Registered
2015-06-08 → Promoted to GMod
2020-09-26 → Promoted to Admin
2021-07-23 → Changed to Chat Helper
2021-09-17 → Promoted to GMod
2023-04-23 → Promoted to Admin
2025-07-?? → Demoted
Current Status: Chat Admin
Member: Josef K.
History:
2010-11-12 → Registered
2012-01-13 → Promoted to GMod
2012-08-12 → Changed to E-Zine Team
2014-03-28 → Changed to Senior Member
2015-10-17 → Changed to E-Zine Team
2023-08-22 → Promoted to GMod
2025-07-16 → Demoted
Current Status: E-Zine Team
Member: rogercrane
History:
2010-12-29 → Registered
2012-01-13 → Promoted to Chat Mod
2018-09-15 → Promoted to GMod
2023-04-20 → Changed to Chat Mod
2024-01-07 → Changed to Chat Admin
2024-03-03 → Promoted to GMod
2025-07-?? → Demoted
Current Status: Chat Mod
Member: saltwater
History:
2019-08-03 → Registered
2020-03-15 → Promoted to E-Zine Team
2021-07-23 → Promoted to Chat Mod
2021-12-25 → Promoted to GMod
2022-06-27 → Promoted to Admin
2023-04-19 → Changed to Tech Admin
2025-07-?? → Permanently Banned
Current Status: Banned
Member: Wyvern
History:
2016-10-23 → Registered
2018-03-19 → Promoted to Chat Mod
2023-04-19 → Promoted to GMod
2025-07-16 → Demoted
Current Status: Senior Member
