Demand a Change of Ownership at Sudomemo: Child Safety and a Better Future for Flipnote
The Issue
An Open Call for Change From an Anonymous, Well-Known Animator and Former Moderator
Why I Am Calling for a Change of Ownership
I am writing this petition anonymously as a well-known animator within the Sudomemo community and a former moderator. I have spent years connected to a community built around creativity, friendship, nostalgia, and a shared love of Flipnote Studio. I understand how much this platform means to its users, and I believe its future deserves to be protected.
For many of us, Sudomemo is much more than a website. It is a place where we discovered our creativity, developed our animation skills, shared our imagination, and formed friendships with people who understood our interests. The Nintendo DSi and Flipnote Studio represent an important part of our creative lives, and Sudomemo has helped keep that experience alive for a new generation of animators.
That is precisely why I believe the time has come for a serious change in ownership.
My primary demand is that Austin Burk, known within the community as Sudofox, relinquish ownership and control of Sudomemo in favor of an independent, accountable successor with a demonstrated commitment to child safety, transparent moderation, responsible governance, and the long-term interests of the community.
This is not simply a request for another statement, a temporary policy adjustment, or a promise to do better. I believe the community needs a meaningful change in who has ultimate authority over the platform and how that authority is exercised.
My concerns include the unresolved questions surrounding the 2017 controversy involving Burk, the handling of adult-topic discussions in community spaces accessible to younger users, examples of publicly accessible suggestive content, and the need for practical access to personal data and creative work.
These concerns do not all establish wrongdoing, and they should not be treated as interchangeable allegations. Each deserves to be examined on its own evidence. However, together they reinforce the importance of a governance structure that earns the confidence of its users and has credible mechanisms for addressing serious complaints.
A community should not have to rely exclusively on the judgment, promises, or discretion of one individual when questions arise about that individual's leadership.
Even when an owner has made substantial technical contributions, those contributions do not create a permanent entitlement to the community's trust. Trust has to be maintained through responsible decisions, meaningful safeguards, and accountability.
I recognize the work that has gone into maintaining Sudomemo and preserving an important part of digital animation history. Wanting new ownership does not mean denying that work or wishing for the platform to disappear.
Quite the opposite. I want Sudomemo to survive and thrive under leadership that can restore confidence, establish stronger safeguards, and give the community a more dependable future.
The central demand of this petition is a change of ownership, supported by independent oversight and enforceable standards. Internal reforms may be useful during a transition, but they should not replace the need to address the underlying question of who controls the platform and who holds that person accountable.
1. Why Sudomemo Matters to Us
My journey as a creative individual began with the Flipnote community. Like countless other creators, I found a place where I could experiment with animation, learn new techniques, develop my artistic identity, and share my ideas with an audience that appreciated them.
Flipnote Studio gave people the ability to turn a Nintendo DSi into a small creative studio. Sudomemo helped preserve that experience after the original Flipnote Hatena service disappeared, giving animators the opportunity to continue producing and sharing their work.
Behind every Flipnote is a person who has invested time, effort, and imagination into making something of their own. Some animations take only a few minutes to create, while others represent hours, days, or even weeks of work. Every creator has a different story, and every contribution helps shape the character of the community.
For many users, Sudomemo also contains years of memories. It is where they discovered artists they admire, received encouragement for their first animations, participated in collaborative projects, and formed friendships that extended beyond the platform.
That history deserves to be respected and preserved.
However, preserving a community does not mean refusing to acknowledge its problems. It does not mean that its leadership should be exempt from questions, that moderation should be beyond scrutiny, or that concerns about younger users should be dismissed simply because the platform has a meaningful history.
The more important a community becomes to its members, the greater the responsibility to manage it carefully.
I want Sudomemo to continue existing for years to come. I want future generations to discover Flipnote Studio, create their own animations, and experience the same excitement that made this platform special to so many of us.
But I also want those generations to inherit a platform with stronger accountability, clearer rules, and leadership that understands the responsibility of operating an online community accessible to minors.
We should not have to choose between preserving Sudomemo's history and changing the leadership responsible for its future. Both are possible, and both are worth pursuing.
2. The 2017 Controversy Involving Austin Burk: Questions That Deserve Answers
One of the central concerns behind this petition is the controversy that emerged publicly in 2017 involving Austin Burk, also known as Sudofox, the founder and a central leader of Sudomemo.
Publicly circulated historical accounts describe allegations involving requests for NSFW artwork from a user who was a minor, as well as reports of adult conversations with underage members of the community. The controversy was discussed in public posts and videos, including material associated with the Sudomemo Files.
These are serious allegations. They should be approached carefully, with attention to the available evidence and the distinction between allegations, responses, and established facts.
This petition is not intended to declare that every claim made during the controversy was proven. Nor is it intended to encourage harassment, expose private information, or target anyone involved.
However, the seriousness of the subject makes it important to ask what happened, how the concerns were addressed, and what lasting safeguards were established afterward.
When serious allegations concern someone who holds ultimate authority over an online community, there is an inherent problem with relying entirely on that same leadership to determine whether the matter has been adequately addressed.
Even a well-intentioned internal process can struggle to inspire confidence if the people responsible for reviewing a complaint are accountable to the very person being questioned.
The questions that matter include:
- What process was followed when the concerns were raised in 2017?
- What standards governed interactions between people in positions of authority and underage community members at the time?
- What safeguards, if any, were introduced as a result?
- What procedures exist today for investigating serious complaints involving administrators, moderators, or the owner?
- How can community members raise concerns about leadership without facing intimidation, retaliation, or conflicts of interest?
- What independent oversight exists when a complaint concerns the person with the greatest authority over the platform?
These are reasonable questions about governance and safeguarding. They deserve evidence-based answers, not speculation or personal attacks.
It is possible to acknowledge the complexity of the controversy and the wider disputes surrounding it without abandoning the need to examine the original concerns responsibly.
A fair examination should consider evidence, allow relevant responses, respect privacy, and identify practical lessons that can help protect users in the future.
However, an explanation alone may not be enough to restore confidence when the concerns involve the structure of leadership itself. This is one reason I believe a change of ownership is necessary.
The goal is not to punish someone indefinitely for a historical controversy. It is to ensure that the platform's future safety and accountability do not depend solely on the assurances of the person whose leadership has become a source of concern.
3. Why the Perception That the Controversy Was Brushed Under the Rug Matters
One of my central concerns is that, from the perspective of people who remain troubled by the 2017 events, there has not been enough accessible, lasting public accountability to restore confidence.
An issue can gradually disappear from public conversation without every underlying question being resolved. People may move on, discussions may become less frequent, and newer generations of users may know little about what happened.
That does not necessarily demonstrate that adequate safeguards were introduced or that all legitimate concerns were addressed.
This is why the distinction between moving forward and simply moving on matters.
Moving forward means learning from past problems, improving policies, establishing safeguards, and demonstrating that the same types of concerns will be treated seriously in the future.
Simply moving on risks leaving community members uncertain about what was learned, what changed, and whether the same standards apply to everyone.
For a community that includes younger users, those questions are especially important.
I am not asking Sudomemo to publish private conversations, disclose sensitive personal information, or reopen every historical dispute for public argument. There are legitimate reasons to protect the privacy of the people involved.
What I am asking for is a meaningful explanation of the safeguards and accountability mechanisms that resulted from the concerns raised in 2017.
Where information cannot reasonably be disclosed, Sudomemo should explain what it can about its procedures without compromising privacy or safety. Where stronger protections were introduced, the platform should be able to describe them. Where weaknesses remain, those weaknesses should be addressed.
The community should not be expected to rely entirely on reassurance or on the assumption that an old controversy no longer matters.
Trust cannot be restored through silence alone. It requires consistent action, clear standards, and a willingness to explain how serious concerns are handled.
This is also why I do not believe that another internal promise, standing alone, is a sufficient response. The community needs a governance structure capable of providing accountability even when the person whose decisions are being questioned is the owner.
A transfer of ownership to responsible, independent stewardship would create an opportunity to establish that structure, review existing safeguards, and demonstrate that meaningful accountability is a permanent feature of the platform rather than something dependent on individual discretion.
The passage of time should not be treated as a substitute for accountability. A change in ownership would provide a concrete opportunity to build a different foundation for trust.
4. Adult-Topic Discussions in the Sudomemo Discord Server
Another concern involves discussions of pornography in the Sudomemo Discord server, a community space associated with the platform and accessible to its members.
The records supplied for this petition identify the account Chocoblight as @sudofox, with the user ID 228643920014344194. Both messages were posted in the #💬-offtopic channel, and both displayed an Admin role indicator.
The relevant identifiers are provided below so the original messages can be distinguished from screenshots or paraphrased accounts.
First message: May 9, 2020
Displayed timestamp: 09/05/2020 19:25
Account: Chocoblight, identified as @sudofox
Role displayed: Admin
Server ID: 228644164122836994
Channel: #💬-offtopic
Channel ID: 476482887470809110
Message ID: 708746527710904330
The message stated:
"Did I not just say we can't talk about porn here"
This message explicitly refers to a restriction on discussing pornography in the channel.
Second message: May 27, 2025
Displayed timestamp: 27/05/2025 05:45
Account: Chocoblight, identified as @sudofox
Role displayed: Admin
Server ID: 228644164122836994
Channel: #💬-offtopic
Channel ID: 476482887470809110
Message ID: 1376783270502596618
The message stated:
"I'm five months clean from all porn usage"
This second message discusses the account holder's personal experience with pornography.
Taken together, the messages raise an important question: Why are discussions of pornography taking place in a community where users as young as thirteen may be present?
I recognize that these statements are not identical in context. The first appears to discourage pornography discussions, while the second refers to personal experience with pornography. The second statement does not, by itself, establish that the account holder shared explicit material, encouraged minors to view pornography, or violated a particular law or server rule.
Nevertheless, the messages raise a legitimate question about how adult-topic boundaries are communicated and applied in a community that may include younger users.
The concern is not that people should be shamed for discussing personal struggles, nor that every mention of pornography is automatically misconduct. It is that a mixed-age community should have clear expectations about which adult subjects belong in general discussion channels, how those expectations apply to people in positions of authority, and how the rules are enforced consistently.
The presence of an Admin role indicator is relevant because administrators can influence the culture and expectations of a community. It does not, by itself, establish the account holder's precise responsibilities at the time of either message or prove that either message breached a policy.
I am asking Sudomemo to clarify its standards for pornography-related discussions in general channels, explain how those standards apply to administrators and other community leaders, and describe what safeguards are used to keep discussions appropriate for younger members.
A new owner should be expected to review these standards, establish clear expectations, and introduce a credible process for handling complaints involving administrators or other senior figures.
The community should not have to rely on informal assurances about appropriate conduct. It should have clear rules, consistent enforcement, and a way to raise concerns when the people responsible for enforcing those rules are involved.
The question is not whether adults are allowed to have private experiences. The question is whether adult sexual topics belong in a mixed-age community and whether the people responsible for that community are setting appropriate boundaries.
5. Publicly Accessible Suggestive Content and the Need for Effective Moderation
My concerns are not limited to discussions in Discord. They also extend to publicly accessible content and the comments that appear alongside it on Sudomemo itself.
A specific example is the Flipnote titled "why she doin that", listed under Flipnote ID Q1K246, uploaded by the account Ⓡobert on September 3, 2026.
The page can be viewed here:
https://www.sudomemo.net/watch/79BE0B_190E164C0C699_004
In the screenshot provided with this petition, the page displays cartoon artwork that I consider suggestive. The surrounding comment section contains remarks that use sexualized language or frame the animation in sexual terms.
Examples visible in the captured page include:
holy gooner content
and
boing boing boing boing boing boing boing
The screenshot also shows other comments with displayed dates in October 2026.
I recognize that humor, parody, exaggerated cartoon artwork, and innuendo are not automatically pornography. Different viewers may disagree about whether a particular animation crosses the line from suggestive humor into inappropriate sexual content.
That is precisely why clear, consistently applied content rules matter.
The concern is that a page containing artwork viewers interpret sexually can also develop a comment section that amplifies that interpretation. Moderation should consider the overall context of the animation, its presentation, and the discussion taking place around it.
The screenshot shows the page being viewed while the browser is signed out, without a sign-in prompt blocking access to the displayed animation and comments at that point. This establishes what was visible in that particular capture, but it does not prove that no other safeguards exist elsewhere on the service.
It does, however, raise a legitimate question about what protections apply when potentially age-inappropriate content is accessible to younger viewers.
I am asking Sudomemo to review this example against its published content policy and explain how decisions about suggestive content and sexualized comments are made.
If the material falls within the platform's permitted standards, users should be able to understand why. If it crosses the line into prohibited content, those rules should be enforced consistently.
Sudomemo's published content policy distinguishes between permitted innuendo and more explicit or excessively crude material. Its Terms of Use also prohibit explicit sexual imagery or language, erotic roleplay, and soliciting sexual content.
Those distinctions require judgment and context. They also create a responsibility to enforce the standards fairly.
I want the platform to explain how such decisions are made, what users can report, and what steps are taken when a public page and its comment section may be inappropriate for younger audiences.
A new ownership structure should include a review of content moderation practices, accessible reporting mechanisms, and regular evaluation of whether published policies are being applied consistently.
This should not be used as an excuse to remove harmless creativity or target individual animators. It should be an opportunity to establish dependable standards and make moderation decisions more accountable.
A platform does not need to ban all suggestive humor to maintain appropriate boundaries. It needs clear rules, effective moderation, and a willingness to act when content crosses those boundaries.
6. Online Safety Laws and the Responsibility to Protect Children
Protecting younger users is not merely a matter of community preference. Across several jurisdictions, laws and regulatory frameworks have introduced or strengthened obligations intended to make online services safer for children.
There is no single online safety law that automatically applies worldwide, and the legal obligations of a particular platform depend on the countries involved, the type of service, the material concerned, and the relevant legal tests.
I am not claiming that the examples in this petition independently prove a legal violation. However, several frameworks demonstrate why online services should take age-appropriate safeguards seriously.
European Union: Digital Services Act
Article 28 of the European Union's Digital Services Act requires online platforms accessible to minors to implement appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure a high level of privacy, safety, and security for minors using their services.
The European Commission published guidelines on protecting minors under the Digital Services Act in July 2025. These address risks including harmful content, grooming, and cyberbullying. The guidelines exclude micro and small enterprises, and the applicable legal obligations depend on the service and relevant provisions.
The Act does not make every suggestive animation or sexual joke illegal. It establishes an important principle: platforms covered by the rules must take appropriate account of the safety of younger users.
United Kingdom: Online Safety Act
The United Kingdom's Online Safety Act child safety framework establishes duties for in-scope online services to assess whether children are likely to access them and implement appropriate protections where required.
Ofcom's framework includes children's access assessments, risk assessments, and measures to protect children from harmful content. Specific duties can include protections against children encountering pornography and, in relevant circumstances, highly effective age assurance.
Whether a particular Sudomemo service falls within the Act's scope, and which requirements apply, would need to be assessed under the relevant legal criteria. A suggestive drawing or sexualized comment does not automatically qualify as pornography under the Act.
Nevertheless, this framework illustrates the importance of assessing children's exposure to harmful and age-inappropriate material.
Australia: Online Safety Act and Age-Restricted Material Codes
Australia's online safety framework includes Age-Restricted Material Codes intended to address children's exposure to certain age-inappropriate material, including online pornography.
The codes took effect in phases, including December 27, 2025, and March 9, 2026, for different service categories.
Their application depends on the type of service, the material involved, and the relevant requirements. A suggestive cartoon or sexualized comment does not automatically qualify as prohibited age-restricted material.
These laws and regulatory frameworks are not interchangeable, and they do not establish a universal ban on sexual innuendo. They demonstrate the growing importance of child safety in the operation of online services.
I believe Sudomemo should assess its practices against the obligations that actually apply to its services and users, rather than waiting until concerns become larger controversies.
The platform should explain what safeguards it uses, how it considers younger audiences when reviewing content, and whether additional measures are warranted for material that may be inappropriate for children.
A new, independent owner should make legal compliance and child safety explicit governance priorities, with clear responsibility for implementation and ongoing review.
The goal is not to claim that every questionable post is illegal. The goal is to ensure that the platform takes its child safety responsibilities seriously, complies with applicable law, and provides meaningful protections.
7. Why Internal Promises Are Not Enough
A central reason for demanding a change of ownership is that the community needs more than assurances from the same leadership whose decisions have become a source of concern.
Policies can be rewritten. Public statements can be issued. Individual moderation decisions can be reconsidered. These steps may be useful, but their long-term effectiveness depends on who controls them, who reviews their implementation, and who can intervene when the system fails.
If ultimate authority remains concentrated in the same hands, users may reasonably question whether serious complaints involving leadership can ever receive sufficiently independent scrutiny.
This is not an assertion that every internal decision is wrong. It is a recognition that accountability systems must be designed to work even when the complaint concerns the person at the top.
A new owner would have the opportunity to establish a more independent governance structure, including:
- Written safeguarding standards that apply to all users and leaders.
- A clearly documented process for escalating serious complaints.
- Independent review when complaints concern senior leadership.
- Regular assessment of moderation practices and child-safety protections.
- Public reporting on policy improvements without disclosing sensitive personal information.
- A transparent process for responding to reasonable community concerns.
- These measures should not depend on personal relationships, informal agreements, or the goodwill of a single person.
Nor should users have to wait for another major controversy before improvements are considered.
The point of changing ownership is to establish a credible new foundation for accountability. It is to ensure that decisions affecting safety, privacy, and community trust are made within a structure that can be questioned, reviewed, and improved.
A transfer of ownership would not automatically solve every issue. It would, however, create an opportunity to address the concentration of authority directly rather than merely asking the existing arrangement to supervise itself.
That is why I am calling for an actual transfer of ownership, not simply a promise of improved leadership.
8. The Case for Transferring Sudomemo to Independent Ownership
Austin Burk's position as Sudomemo's founder and owner gives him significant authority over the platform's direction, management, and governance.
This petition does not deny the technical work, effort, and resources that have gone into maintaining Sudomemo. Its contribution to preserving Flipnote creativity deserves recognition.
However, being responsible for creating and maintaining a platform does not mean that its ownership can never be questioned.
A platform with a long history, an established user base, and younger members has responsibilities that extend beyond maintaining its servers and keeping its features operational.
Ownership determines who has final authority over important decisions, including content policies, moderation standards, safeguarding procedures, data access, responses to serious complaints, and the conditions under which community members participate.
When concerns involve the leadership itself, the community needs credible ways to seek answers and challenge decisions without relying exclusively on that same leadership.
Given the history of the 2017 controversy and the broader questions raised in this petition, I believe a transfer of ownership is the strongest and most constructive path toward rebuilding confidence.
I am therefore explicitly calling for Austin Burk to relinquish ownership and control of Sudomemo to an independent, responsible successor.
That successor could be a suitable organization, a qualified stewardship group, or another independent owner with the technical competence and governance structure required to maintain the platform responsibly.
The essential requirement is not the identity or branding of the successor. It is that the new ownership be demonstrably committed to user safety, independent accountability, privacy, transparency, and the continued preservation of the Flipnote community.
The successor should be selected and evaluated according to clear criteria, including:
- Independent oversight. Serious complaints involving owners, administrators, and moderators must have a credible route for independent review.
- Child safety. The platform must maintain proportionate, age-appropriate safeguards and consistently enforce rules against exploitative or otherwise prohibited content and behavior.
- Transparent moderation. Policies must be clear, reporting must be accessible, and the handling of serious concerns must be subject to appropriate review.
- Responsible data management. Users must have clear information about their data rights and a practical way to preserve their eligible creative work and account information.
- Community representation. Users must have meaningful opportunities to communicate concerns and contribute feedback about decisions affecting the platform.
- Continuity and preservation. A transfer must protect Sudomemo's technical operation, archives, creative history, and users' privacy.
- Accountability for the future. The successor must establish procedures that continue to function regardless of who occupies individual leadership positions.
This is not a demand to shut down Sudomemo, delete its history, or deprive its users of the creative space they value. It is a demand to preserve that space under different ownership.
An orderly transition can be planned to protect the platform's technical infrastructure, maintain service continuity, and ensure that the community is not unnecessarily disrupted.
The platform's existing strengths should be preserved. Its governance should be improved.
I do not believe that popularity, technical contributions, or years of ownership should be treated as reasons to dismiss legitimate concerns about accountability. Those achievements can be acknowledged while still recognizing that a new ownership structure may better serve the community's long-term interests.
The community deserves a future in which accountability is built into the structure of ownership, rather than left to the discretion of the owner.
9. Why a Change of Ownership Must Be the Primary Demand
I want to be particularly clear about the purpose of this petition.
My request is not merely for Austin Burk to publish a new statement, revise a few policies, or promise more transparency. Those measures may have value, but they do not directly address the underlying concern about concentrated authority and independent accountability.
My primary demand is that ownership of Sudomemo be transferred to an independent successor capable of safeguarding the platform's users and preserving its creative legacy.
This demand follows from the central concerns outlined in this petition.
First, the 2017 controversy raises continuing questions for community members about how serious concerns involving leadership were addressed and what lasting safeguards were established.
Second, the supplied Discord records raise questions about how discussions involving pornography are handled in a community space accessible to younger users, including expectations for people displaying an Admin role.
Third, the publicly accessible Flipnote example raises questions about how suggestive content and sexualized comments are evaluated under the platform's published policies.
Fourth, users have a legitimate interest in practical access to their own creative work and eligible account-associated data.
These issues involve different facts and should be assessed separately. None of the screenshots alone proves that a crime occurred, and this petition does not claim otherwise.
However, they collectively support the need for a governance structure that can demonstrate accountability, enforce standards consistently, and respond credibly when concerns arise.
Changing ownership is not a guarantee that every problem will disappear. A new owner must also meet high standards, establish appropriate safeguards, and remain accountable to the community.
But independent ownership would create an opportunity to separate oversight from the individual whose leadership is being questioned. It would allow the platform to establish more credible procedures for serious complaints and to make accountability a structural responsibility rather than an informal promise.
A change of ownership is therefore not a symbolic gesture. It is the concrete outcome I am asking the community to support.
I am not presenting a transfer as an optional alternative to doing nothing. I am calling for a transfer as the central reform, accompanied by the policies and governance mechanisms needed to make that transition meaningful.
If the current owner believes in Sudomemo's future and the wellbeing of its users, then arranging a responsible transfer to a qualified successor should be considered a serious way to demonstrate that commitment.
Sudomemo should not have to disappear for its ownership to change. It should be able to preserve everything valuable about its history while establishing a more accountable future under independent leadership.
10. What We Are Asking Sudomemo to Do
This petition calls for specific, practical reforms.
1. Transfer ownership to an independent successor
Make a good-faith effort to arrange the transfer of Sudomemo's ownership and ultimate control to an independent, responsible successor with a demonstrated commitment to child safety, transparency, privacy, and accountable governance.
The transition should be planned carefully to preserve the platform's operations, archives, and creative community.
2. Establish independent oversight
Ensure that serious complaints involving the owner, administrators, and moderators can be reviewed independently, without conflicts of interest.
3. Address the 2017 controversy responsibly
Provide an appropriate public explanation of the steps taken in response to concerns raised in 2017, describe relevant safeguarding improvements, and explain what accountability mechanisms exist today. Protect the privacy of everyone involved and distinguish documented facts from disputed allegations.
4. Strengthen protections for younger users
Review existing safeguards and implement clear, proportionate measures against sexual exploitation, inappropriate adult interactions, and content that violates the platform's rules.
5. Review suggestive content and sexualized comments
Assess examples such as Flipnote Q1K246 against the published content policy. Explain the applicable standards and apply them consistently without indiscriminately restricting harmless creativity.
6. Clarify adult-topic boundaries in mixed-age spaces
Establish clear expectations for discussions involving pornography and other adult subjects in Discord spaces associated with Sudomemo, particularly general channels accessible to thirteen-year-olds.
7. Improve moderation transparency
Publish clear rules, provide accessible reporting procedures, and establish fair methods for reviewing or appealing moderation decisions.
8. Introduce a practical personal-data export process
Give users a secure, accessible way to preserve their own Flipnotes and other eligible account-associated information, subject to applicable legal, technical, and privacy requirements.
9. Create meaningful opportunities for community feedback
Give users appropriate ways to raise concerns and contribute suggestions about moderation, safeguarding, data access, governance, and the platform's future.
10. Publish measurable commitments to improvement
Explain which reforms will be implemented, how their effectiveness will be assessed, and how the community will be informed of progress.
These reforms should be established under a governance structure that can hold its own leadership accountable. A transfer of ownership without meaningful safeguards would be incomplete, just as policy changes without addressing ownership would leave the central concern unresolved.
Our primary demand is a new owner. The accompanying reforms are the standards that new ownership must uphold.
11. What Responsible New Ownership Should Look Like
Changing owners is only worthwhile if the successor is prepared to operate Sudomemo responsibly.
I am not calling for ownership to be handed to an unqualified individual or transferred without consideration of the technical and operational responsibilities involved.
The successor should have the capability to maintain the platform and the willingness to build a governance structure that protects users and respects their contributions.
A responsible transition should include the following commitments.
First, preserve the platform and its history. Sudomemo's archives, creative work, and community identity should be treated as valuable parts of digital animation history. A transfer should prioritize continuity and preservation.
Second, establish independent complaint procedures. Serious complaints involving people with authority should be reviewed through a process that is not controlled solely by the person being questioned.
Third, make child safety a defined responsibility. Appropriate safeguards should be implemented, periodically assessed, and updated as the platform and applicable legal requirements evolve.
Fourth, apply published policies consistently. Moderation standards should be clear, understandable, and enforceable regardless of a user's popularity or position.
Fifth, respect users' privacy and data rights. Personal information should be handled responsibly, and users should have clear, practical ways to exercise applicable rights and preserve their own work.
Sixth, communicate with the community. Users should receive reasonable information about policy changes and significant governance decisions, while sensitive personal information remains protected.
Finally, make accountability durable. Safeguards should be built into how Sudomemo is managed, rather than depending entirely on the personality, judgment, or goodwill of any individual owner.
A well-planned transfer can preserve the work that has made Sudomemo meaningful while giving the community a stronger foundation for the future.
The objective is not to replace one individual with another who has unchecked power. It is to move toward independent ownership with meaningful oversight and clearly defined responsibilities.
That is the standard I believe Sudomemo deserves.
12. Why I Am Speaking Out Anonymously
I have chosen to remain anonymous for personal reasons. I want the focus of this petition to remain on the issues themselves rather than on my identity.
As a well-known animator and former moderator, I recognize that speaking publicly about a community's leadership can be complicated. People can become more interested in identifying the person raising a concern than in evaluating the concern itself.
Difficult conversations can quickly become personal disputes, and legitimate questions can become lost amid arguments about people's motives.
That is not what I want for Sudomemo.
I am not asking anyone to accept every statement in this petition without question. Serious claims should be assessed against the available evidence, and people should be given a fair opportunity to respond.
Anonymity does not make a claim true, but neither should it automatically make a legitimate concern unworthy of consideration.
The focus should remain on safeguarding, transparent procedures, consistent standards, and the practical changes needed to protect the community.
I am speaking out because I believe that caring about Sudomemo means caring about the people who use it, including younger members and those who may feel uncomfortable raising concerns themselves.
I do not want the community to descend into harassment, retaliation, or endless personal conflict. I want it to be able to examine its history honestly, address its weaknesses, and move toward a more responsible future.
The identity of the person raising these questions should not matter more than whether the questions deserve answers.
13. A Community Worth Protecting
Sudomemo has given so many people the opportunity to create, share, and connect. It has helped preserve the spirit of Flipnote Studio and the Nintendo DSi for people who did not want that creative experience to disappear.
That history is worth preserving.
But preserving a community is not the same as preserving every aspect of its existing leadership or refusing to question its decisions.
We should be able to celebrate the animations, friendships, and creative achievements that make Sudomemo special while acknowledging that stronger safeguards and more meaningful accountability may be necessary.
We should be able to ask difficult questions about the 2017 controversy without harassment or sensationalism.
We should be able to expect the same rules to apply to ordinary users and people in positions of authority.
We should be able to discuss whether adult topics belong in spaces accessible to thirteen-year-olds.
We should be able to expect published content policies to be enforced consistently.
We should be able to preserve our creative work and trust that serious safety concerns will be handled responsibly.
And we should be able to look toward Sudomemo's future knowing that the people responsible for the platform understand the responsibilities that come with managing a community that includes younger users.
These expectations are not incompatible with creative freedom. They are part of creating an environment in which creative freedom can flourish responsibly.
I want future generations to experience the excitement of sharing their first Flipnotes, receiving encouragement from other artists, and finding a community where their creativity is valued.
I want established animators to feel confident that their work and personal information are treated responsibly.
I want younger users to have appropriate protections and clear boundaries around adult content.
And I want people who raise legitimate concerns to know that they will be taken seriously and treated fairly.
I believe Sudomemo can have that future, but I also believe that achieving it requires more than asking the current ownership to make incremental adjustments.
A responsible transfer of ownership, combined with independent oversight and stronger safeguards, offers a concrete path toward a new beginning.
We can preserve Sudomemo without preserving the existing ownership structure. We can honor its history while demanding a different future.
14. Please Sign and Share This Petition
I am asking fellow animators, former and current users, long-time community members, younger creators, and everyone who cares about the Flipnote community to support this petition.
By signing, you are calling for a transfer of Sudomemo's ownership to independent, responsible stewardship, alongside stronger safeguards for younger users, more consistent moderation, appropriate boundaries around adult discussions, accessible personal-data exports, and meaningful accountability.
You do not need to agree with every criticism of the platform to recognize that these questions deserve responsible answers.
You do not need to know my identity to consider whether the proposed reforms would benefit the community.
And you do not need to abandon Sudomemo to want it to improve.
I am not calling for the destruction of a platform that has meant so much to so many people. I am calling for a change of ownership because I believe its users deserve a safer, more transparent, and more accountable future.
The 2017 controversy should not be used as an excuse for harassment or endless personal conflict. But the passage of time should not be treated as a substitute for accountability, either.
Publicly accessible suggestive content, adult-topic discussions in mixed-age spaces, and questions about leadership oversight deserve to be approached with care, evidence, and a willingness to improve.
The future of Sudomemo should not depend entirely on the decisions of one person. It should rest on independent stewardship, consistent policies, meaningful oversight, and respect for the people who give the platform its value.
I am asking the current owner to recognize that the community's future may be better served by transferring ownership to a qualified successor committed to these principles.
I am asking the community to support that transition and insist on standards that protect the platform's creative legacy and the people who rely on it.
And I am asking future leadership to treat this responsibility seriously, with safeguards that remain effective regardless of who holds authority.
We should not have to choose between the community we love and the accountability needed to protect it. We can demand both.
Please sign and share this petition to demand a change of ownership at Sudomemo.
Let's protect the creators.
Let's protect younger users.
Let's preserve the creative spirit of Flipnote Studio and the Nintendo DSi.
Let's demand independent, responsible ownership.
And let's work toward a future in which Sudomemo earns the trust of its community through transparency, responsible leadership, and meaningful action.
The past should be acknowledged. The present should be accountable. The future should be safer for everyone.
Sources and Further Reading
Sudomemo's Official Policies:
- Sudomemo Terms of Use
- Sudomemo Content Policy
- Sudomemo Frequently Asked Questions
- Sudomemo Privacy Policy
Examples Discussed in This Petition:
- Sudomemo Flipnote: "why she doin that", ID Q1K246
- Discord messages dated May 9, 2020, and May 27, 2025, identified by the message IDs and channel information listed in Section 4.
- The supplied screenshots showing the displayed account, role indicator, message text, and timestamps.
Online Safety Laws and Guidance:
- European Union Digital Services Act, Regulation (EU) 2022/2065
- European Commission: Guidelines on the Protection of Minors Under the Digital Services Act
- Ofcom: Protection of Children Duties Under the UK Online Safety Act
- Australian eSafety Commissioner: Online Safety Industry Codes and Standards
Historical Background:
- Sudomemo's 2017 statement
- Sudomemo Files (archive)
- Sudomemo Files (live)
- Community-maintained history of Sudomemo
These historical sources are provided to help readers examine the controversy independently. They are not all official sources or legal findings. Readers should distinguish allegations, responses, and documented facts, and consult original material where available.
The legal materials describe different obligations and scopes of application. They are included for context, not as a claim that the examples in this petition automatically establish a legal violation.
26
The Issue
An Open Call for Change From an Anonymous, Well-Known Animator and Former Moderator
Why I Am Calling for a Change of Ownership
I am writing this petition anonymously as a well-known animator within the Sudomemo community and a former moderator. I have spent years connected to a community built around creativity, friendship, nostalgia, and a shared love of Flipnote Studio. I understand how much this platform means to its users, and I believe its future deserves to be protected.
For many of us, Sudomemo is much more than a website. It is a place where we discovered our creativity, developed our animation skills, shared our imagination, and formed friendships with people who understood our interests. The Nintendo DSi and Flipnote Studio represent an important part of our creative lives, and Sudomemo has helped keep that experience alive for a new generation of animators.
That is precisely why I believe the time has come for a serious change in ownership.
My primary demand is that Austin Burk, known within the community as Sudofox, relinquish ownership and control of Sudomemo in favor of an independent, accountable successor with a demonstrated commitment to child safety, transparent moderation, responsible governance, and the long-term interests of the community.
This is not simply a request for another statement, a temporary policy adjustment, or a promise to do better. I believe the community needs a meaningful change in who has ultimate authority over the platform and how that authority is exercised.
My concerns include the unresolved questions surrounding the 2017 controversy involving Burk, the handling of adult-topic discussions in community spaces accessible to younger users, examples of publicly accessible suggestive content, and the need for practical access to personal data and creative work.
These concerns do not all establish wrongdoing, and they should not be treated as interchangeable allegations. Each deserves to be examined on its own evidence. However, together they reinforce the importance of a governance structure that earns the confidence of its users and has credible mechanisms for addressing serious complaints.
A community should not have to rely exclusively on the judgment, promises, or discretion of one individual when questions arise about that individual's leadership.
Even when an owner has made substantial technical contributions, those contributions do not create a permanent entitlement to the community's trust. Trust has to be maintained through responsible decisions, meaningful safeguards, and accountability.
I recognize the work that has gone into maintaining Sudomemo and preserving an important part of digital animation history. Wanting new ownership does not mean denying that work or wishing for the platform to disappear.
Quite the opposite. I want Sudomemo to survive and thrive under leadership that can restore confidence, establish stronger safeguards, and give the community a more dependable future.
The central demand of this petition is a change of ownership, supported by independent oversight and enforceable standards. Internal reforms may be useful during a transition, but they should not replace the need to address the underlying question of who controls the platform and who holds that person accountable.
1. Why Sudomemo Matters to Us
My journey as a creative individual began with the Flipnote community. Like countless other creators, I found a place where I could experiment with animation, learn new techniques, develop my artistic identity, and share my ideas with an audience that appreciated them.
Flipnote Studio gave people the ability to turn a Nintendo DSi into a small creative studio. Sudomemo helped preserve that experience after the original Flipnote Hatena service disappeared, giving animators the opportunity to continue producing and sharing their work.
Behind every Flipnote is a person who has invested time, effort, and imagination into making something of their own. Some animations take only a few minutes to create, while others represent hours, days, or even weeks of work. Every creator has a different story, and every contribution helps shape the character of the community.
For many users, Sudomemo also contains years of memories. It is where they discovered artists they admire, received encouragement for their first animations, participated in collaborative projects, and formed friendships that extended beyond the platform.
That history deserves to be respected and preserved.
However, preserving a community does not mean refusing to acknowledge its problems. It does not mean that its leadership should be exempt from questions, that moderation should be beyond scrutiny, or that concerns about younger users should be dismissed simply because the platform has a meaningful history.
The more important a community becomes to its members, the greater the responsibility to manage it carefully.
I want Sudomemo to continue existing for years to come. I want future generations to discover Flipnote Studio, create their own animations, and experience the same excitement that made this platform special to so many of us.
But I also want those generations to inherit a platform with stronger accountability, clearer rules, and leadership that understands the responsibility of operating an online community accessible to minors.
We should not have to choose between preserving Sudomemo's history and changing the leadership responsible for its future. Both are possible, and both are worth pursuing.
2. The 2017 Controversy Involving Austin Burk: Questions That Deserve Answers
One of the central concerns behind this petition is the controversy that emerged publicly in 2017 involving Austin Burk, also known as Sudofox, the founder and a central leader of Sudomemo.
Publicly circulated historical accounts describe allegations involving requests for NSFW artwork from a user who was a minor, as well as reports of adult conversations with underage members of the community. The controversy was discussed in public posts and videos, including material associated with the Sudomemo Files.
These are serious allegations. They should be approached carefully, with attention to the available evidence and the distinction between allegations, responses, and established facts.
This petition is not intended to declare that every claim made during the controversy was proven. Nor is it intended to encourage harassment, expose private information, or target anyone involved.
However, the seriousness of the subject makes it important to ask what happened, how the concerns were addressed, and what lasting safeguards were established afterward.
When serious allegations concern someone who holds ultimate authority over an online community, there is an inherent problem with relying entirely on that same leadership to determine whether the matter has been adequately addressed.
Even a well-intentioned internal process can struggle to inspire confidence if the people responsible for reviewing a complaint are accountable to the very person being questioned.
The questions that matter include:
- What process was followed when the concerns were raised in 2017?
- What standards governed interactions between people in positions of authority and underage community members at the time?
- What safeguards, if any, were introduced as a result?
- What procedures exist today for investigating serious complaints involving administrators, moderators, or the owner?
- How can community members raise concerns about leadership without facing intimidation, retaliation, or conflicts of interest?
- What independent oversight exists when a complaint concerns the person with the greatest authority over the platform?
These are reasonable questions about governance and safeguarding. They deserve evidence-based answers, not speculation or personal attacks.
It is possible to acknowledge the complexity of the controversy and the wider disputes surrounding it without abandoning the need to examine the original concerns responsibly.
A fair examination should consider evidence, allow relevant responses, respect privacy, and identify practical lessons that can help protect users in the future.
However, an explanation alone may not be enough to restore confidence when the concerns involve the structure of leadership itself. This is one reason I believe a change of ownership is necessary.
The goal is not to punish someone indefinitely for a historical controversy. It is to ensure that the platform's future safety and accountability do not depend solely on the assurances of the person whose leadership has become a source of concern.
3. Why the Perception That the Controversy Was Brushed Under the Rug Matters
One of my central concerns is that, from the perspective of people who remain troubled by the 2017 events, there has not been enough accessible, lasting public accountability to restore confidence.
An issue can gradually disappear from public conversation without every underlying question being resolved. People may move on, discussions may become less frequent, and newer generations of users may know little about what happened.
That does not necessarily demonstrate that adequate safeguards were introduced or that all legitimate concerns were addressed.
This is why the distinction between moving forward and simply moving on matters.
Moving forward means learning from past problems, improving policies, establishing safeguards, and demonstrating that the same types of concerns will be treated seriously in the future.
Simply moving on risks leaving community members uncertain about what was learned, what changed, and whether the same standards apply to everyone.
For a community that includes younger users, those questions are especially important.
I am not asking Sudomemo to publish private conversations, disclose sensitive personal information, or reopen every historical dispute for public argument. There are legitimate reasons to protect the privacy of the people involved.
What I am asking for is a meaningful explanation of the safeguards and accountability mechanisms that resulted from the concerns raised in 2017.
Where information cannot reasonably be disclosed, Sudomemo should explain what it can about its procedures without compromising privacy or safety. Where stronger protections were introduced, the platform should be able to describe them. Where weaknesses remain, those weaknesses should be addressed.
The community should not be expected to rely entirely on reassurance or on the assumption that an old controversy no longer matters.
Trust cannot be restored through silence alone. It requires consistent action, clear standards, and a willingness to explain how serious concerns are handled.
This is also why I do not believe that another internal promise, standing alone, is a sufficient response. The community needs a governance structure capable of providing accountability even when the person whose decisions are being questioned is the owner.
A transfer of ownership to responsible, independent stewardship would create an opportunity to establish that structure, review existing safeguards, and demonstrate that meaningful accountability is a permanent feature of the platform rather than something dependent on individual discretion.
The passage of time should not be treated as a substitute for accountability. A change in ownership would provide a concrete opportunity to build a different foundation for trust.
4. Adult-Topic Discussions in the Sudomemo Discord Server
Another concern involves discussions of pornography in the Sudomemo Discord server, a community space associated with the platform and accessible to its members.
The records supplied for this petition identify the account Chocoblight as @sudofox, with the user ID 228643920014344194. Both messages were posted in the #💬-offtopic channel, and both displayed an Admin role indicator.
The relevant identifiers are provided below so the original messages can be distinguished from screenshots or paraphrased accounts.
First message: May 9, 2020
Displayed timestamp: 09/05/2020 19:25
Account: Chocoblight, identified as @sudofox
Role displayed: Admin
Server ID: 228644164122836994
Channel: #💬-offtopic
Channel ID: 476482887470809110
Message ID: 708746527710904330
The message stated:
"Did I not just say we can't talk about porn here"
This message explicitly refers to a restriction on discussing pornography in the channel.
Second message: May 27, 2025
Displayed timestamp: 27/05/2025 05:45
Account: Chocoblight, identified as @sudofox
Role displayed: Admin
Server ID: 228644164122836994
Channel: #💬-offtopic
Channel ID: 476482887470809110
Message ID: 1376783270502596618
The message stated:
"I'm five months clean from all porn usage"
This second message discusses the account holder's personal experience with pornography.
Taken together, the messages raise an important question: Why are discussions of pornography taking place in a community where users as young as thirteen may be present?
I recognize that these statements are not identical in context. The first appears to discourage pornography discussions, while the second refers to personal experience with pornography. The second statement does not, by itself, establish that the account holder shared explicit material, encouraged minors to view pornography, or violated a particular law or server rule.
Nevertheless, the messages raise a legitimate question about how adult-topic boundaries are communicated and applied in a community that may include younger users.
The concern is not that people should be shamed for discussing personal struggles, nor that every mention of pornography is automatically misconduct. It is that a mixed-age community should have clear expectations about which adult subjects belong in general discussion channels, how those expectations apply to people in positions of authority, and how the rules are enforced consistently.
The presence of an Admin role indicator is relevant because administrators can influence the culture and expectations of a community. It does not, by itself, establish the account holder's precise responsibilities at the time of either message or prove that either message breached a policy.
I am asking Sudomemo to clarify its standards for pornography-related discussions in general channels, explain how those standards apply to administrators and other community leaders, and describe what safeguards are used to keep discussions appropriate for younger members.
A new owner should be expected to review these standards, establish clear expectations, and introduce a credible process for handling complaints involving administrators or other senior figures.
The community should not have to rely on informal assurances about appropriate conduct. It should have clear rules, consistent enforcement, and a way to raise concerns when the people responsible for enforcing those rules are involved.
The question is not whether adults are allowed to have private experiences. The question is whether adult sexual topics belong in a mixed-age community and whether the people responsible for that community are setting appropriate boundaries.
5. Publicly Accessible Suggestive Content and the Need for Effective Moderation
My concerns are not limited to discussions in Discord. They also extend to publicly accessible content and the comments that appear alongside it on Sudomemo itself.
A specific example is the Flipnote titled "why she doin that", listed under Flipnote ID Q1K246, uploaded by the account Ⓡobert on September 3, 2026.
The page can be viewed here:
https://www.sudomemo.net/watch/79BE0B_190E164C0C699_004
In the screenshot provided with this petition, the page displays cartoon artwork that I consider suggestive. The surrounding comment section contains remarks that use sexualized language or frame the animation in sexual terms.
Examples visible in the captured page include:
holy gooner content
and
boing boing boing boing boing boing boing
The screenshot also shows other comments with displayed dates in October 2026.
I recognize that humor, parody, exaggerated cartoon artwork, and innuendo are not automatically pornography. Different viewers may disagree about whether a particular animation crosses the line from suggestive humor into inappropriate sexual content.
That is precisely why clear, consistently applied content rules matter.
The concern is that a page containing artwork viewers interpret sexually can also develop a comment section that amplifies that interpretation. Moderation should consider the overall context of the animation, its presentation, and the discussion taking place around it.
The screenshot shows the page being viewed while the browser is signed out, without a sign-in prompt blocking access to the displayed animation and comments at that point. This establishes what was visible in that particular capture, but it does not prove that no other safeguards exist elsewhere on the service.
It does, however, raise a legitimate question about what protections apply when potentially age-inappropriate content is accessible to younger viewers.
I am asking Sudomemo to review this example against its published content policy and explain how decisions about suggestive content and sexualized comments are made.
If the material falls within the platform's permitted standards, users should be able to understand why. If it crosses the line into prohibited content, those rules should be enforced consistently.
Sudomemo's published content policy distinguishes between permitted innuendo and more explicit or excessively crude material. Its Terms of Use also prohibit explicit sexual imagery or language, erotic roleplay, and soliciting sexual content.
Those distinctions require judgment and context. They also create a responsibility to enforce the standards fairly.
I want the platform to explain how such decisions are made, what users can report, and what steps are taken when a public page and its comment section may be inappropriate for younger audiences.
A new ownership structure should include a review of content moderation practices, accessible reporting mechanisms, and regular evaluation of whether published policies are being applied consistently.
This should not be used as an excuse to remove harmless creativity or target individual animators. It should be an opportunity to establish dependable standards and make moderation decisions more accountable.
A platform does not need to ban all suggestive humor to maintain appropriate boundaries. It needs clear rules, effective moderation, and a willingness to act when content crosses those boundaries.
6. Online Safety Laws and the Responsibility to Protect Children
Protecting younger users is not merely a matter of community preference. Across several jurisdictions, laws and regulatory frameworks have introduced or strengthened obligations intended to make online services safer for children.
There is no single online safety law that automatically applies worldwide, and the legal obligations of a particular platform depend on the countries involved, the type of service, the material concerned, and the relevant legal tests.
I am not claiming that the examples in this petition independently prove a legal violation. However, several frameworks demonstrate why online services should take age-appropriate safeguards seriously.
European Union: Digital Services Act
Article 28 of the European Union's Digital Services Act requires online platforms accessible to minors to implement appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure a high level of privacy, safety, and security for minors using their services.
The European Commission published guidelines on protecting minors under the Digital Services Act in July 2025. These address risks including harmful content, grooming, and cyberbullying. The guidelines exclude micro and small enterprises, and the applicable legal obligations depend on the service and relevant provisions.
The Act does not make every suggestive animation or sexual joke illegal. It establishes an important principle: platforms covered by the rules must take appropriate account of the safety of younger users.
United Kingdom: Online Safety Act
The United Kingdom's Online Safety Act child safety framework establishes duties for in-scope online services to assess whether children are likely to access them and implement appropriate protections where required.
Ofcom's framework includes children's access assessments, risk assessments, and measures to protect children from harmful content. Specific duties can include protections against children encountering pornography and, in relevant circumstances, highly effective age assurance.
Whether a particular Sudomemo service falls within the Act's scope, and which requirements apply, would need to be assessed under the relevant legal criteria. A suggestive drawing or sexualized comment does not automatically qualify as pornography under the Act.
Nevertheless, this framework illustrates the importance of assessing children's exposure to harmful and age-inappropriate material.
Australia: Online Safety Act and Age-Restricted Material Codes
Australia's online safety framework includes Age-Restricted Material Codes intended to address children's exposure to certain age-inappropriate material, including online pornography.
The codes took effect in phases, including December 27, 2025, and March 9, 2026, for different service categories.
Their application depends on the type of service, the material involved, and the relevant requirements. A suggestive cartoon or sexualized comment does not automatically qualify as prohibited age-restricted material.
These laws and regulatory frameworks are not interchangeable, and they do not establish a universal ban on sexual innuendo. They demonstrate the growing importance of child safety in the operation of online services.
I believe Sudomemo should assess its practices against the obligations that actually apply to its services and users, rather than waiting until concerns become larger controversies.
The platform should explain what safeguards it uses, how it considers younger audiences when reviewing content, and whether additional measures are warranted for material that may be inappropriate for children.
A new, independent owner should make legal compliance and child safety explicit governance priorities, with clear responsibility for implementation and ongoing review.
The goal is not to claim that every questionable post is illegal. The goal is to ensure that the platform takes its child safety responsibilities seriously, complies with applicable law, and provides meaningful protections.
7. Why Internal Promises Are Not Enough
A central reason for demanding a change of ownership is that the community needs more than assurances from the same leadership whose decisions have become a source of concern.
Policies can be rewritten. Public statements can be issued. Individual moderation decisions can be reconsidered. These steps may be useful, but their long-term effectiveness depends on who controls them, who reviews their implementation, and who can intervene when the system fails.
If ultimate authority remains concentrated in the same hands, users may reasonably question whether serious complaints involving leadership can ever receive sufficiently independent scrutiny.
This is not an assertion that every internal decision is wrong. It is a recognition that accountability systems must be designed to work even when the complaint concerns the person at the top.
A new owner would have the opportunity to establish a more independent governance structure, including:
- Written safeguarding standards that apply to all users and leaders.
- A clearly documented process for escalating serious complaints.
- Independent review when complaints concern senior leadership.
- Regular assessment of moderation practices and child-safety protections.
- Public reporting on policy improvements without disclosing sensitive personal information.
- A transparent process for responding to reasonable community concerns.
- These measures should not depend on personal relationships, informal agreements, or the goodwill of a single person.
Nor should users have to wait for another major controversy before improvements are considered.
The point of changing ownership is to establish a credible new foundation for accountability. It is to ensure that decisions affecting safety, privacy, and community trust are made within a structure that can be questioned, reviewed, and improved.
A transfer of ownership would not automatically solve every issue. It would, however, create an opportunity to address the concentration of authority directly rather than merely asking the existing arrangement to supervise itself.
That is why I am calling for an actual transfer of ownership, not simply a promise of improved leadership.
8. The Case for Transferring Sudomemo to Independent Ownership
Austin Burk's position as Sudomemo's founder and owner gives him significant authority over the platform's direction, management, and governance.
This petition does not deny the technical work, effort, and resources that have gone into maintaining Sudomemo. Its contribution to preserving Flipnote creativity deserves recognition.
However, being responsible for creating and maintaining a platform does not mean that its ownership can never be questioned.
A platform with a long history, an established user base, and younger members has responsibilities that extend beyond maintaining its servers and keeping its features operational.
Ownership determines who has final authority over important decisions, including content policies, moderation standards, safeguarding procedures, data access, responses to serious complaints, and the conditions under which community members participate.
When concerns involve the leadership itself, the community needs credible ways to seek answers and challenge decisions without relying exclusively on that same leadership.
Given the history of the 2017 controversy and the broader questions raised in this petition, I believe a transfer of ownership is the strongest and most constructive path toward rebuilding confidence.
I am therefore explicitly calling for Austin Burk to relinquish ownership and control of Sudomemo to an independent, responsible successor.
That successor could be a suitable organization, a qualified stewardship group, or another independent owner with the technical competence and governance structure required to maintain the platform responsibly.
The essential requirement is not the identity or branding of the successor. It is that the new ownership be demonstrably committed to user safety, independent accountability, privacy, transparency, and the continued preservation of the Flipnote community.
The successor should be selected and evaluated according to clear criteria, including:
- Independent oversight. Serious complaints involving owners, administrators, and moderators must have a credible route for independent review.
- Child safety. The platform must maintain proportionate, age-appropriate safeguards and consistently enforce rules against exploitative or otherwise prohibited content and behavior.
- Transparent moderation. Policies must be clear, reporting must be accessible, and the handling of serious concerns must be subject to appropriate review.
- Responsible data management. Users must have clear information about their data rights and a practical way to preserve their eligible creative work and account information.
- Community representation. Users must have meaningful opportunities to communicate concerns and contribute feedback about decisions affecting the platform.
- Continuity and preservation. A transfer must protect Sudomemo's technical operation, archives, creative history, and users' privacy.
- Accountability for the future. The successor must establish procedures that continue to function regardless of who occupies individual leadership positions.
This is not a demand to shut down Sudomemo, delete its history, or deprive its users of the creative space they value. It is a demand to preserve that space under different ownership.
An orderly transition can be planned to protect the platform's technical infrastructure, maintain service continuity, and ensure that the community is not unnecessarily disrupted.
The platform's existing strengths should be preserved. Its governance should be improved.
I do not believe that popularity, technical contributions, or years of ownership should be treated as reasons to dismiss legitimate concerns about accountability. Those achievements can be acknowledged while still recognizing that a new ownership structure may better serve the community's long-term interests.
The community deserves a future in which accountability is built into the structure of ownership, rather than left to the discretion of the owner.
9. Why a Change of Ownership Must Be the Primary Demand
I want to be particularly clear about the purpose of this petition.
My request is not merely for Austin Burk to publish a new statement, revise a few policies, or promise more transparency. Those measures may have value, but they do not directly address the underlying concern about concentrated authority and independent accountability.
My primary demand is that ownership of Sudomemo be transferred to an independent successor capable of safeguarding the platform's users and preserving its creative legacy.
This demand follows from the central concerns outlined in this petition.
First, the 2017 controversy raises continuing questions for community members about how serious concerns involving leadership were addressed and what lasting safeguards were established.
Second, the supplied Discord records raise questions about how discussions involving pornography are handled in a community space accessible to younger users, including expectations for people displaying an Admin role.
Third, the publicly accessible Flipnote example raises questions about how suggestive content and sexualized comments are evaluated under the platform's published policies.
Fourth, users have a legitimate interest in practical access to their own creative work and eligible account-associated data.
These issues involve different facts and should be assessed separately. None of the screenshots alone proves that a crime occurred, and this petition does not claim otherwise.
However, they collectively support the need for a governance structure that can demonstrate accountability, enforce standards consistently, and respond credibly when concerns arise.
Changing ownership is not a guarantee that every problem will disappear. A new owner must also meet high standards, establish appropriate safeguards, and remain accountable to the community.
But independent ownership would create an opportunity to separate oversight from the individual whose leadership is being questioned. It would allow the platform to establish more credible procedures for serious complaints and to make accountability a structural responsibility rather than an informal promise.
A change of ownership is therefore not a symbolic gesture. It is the concrete outcome I am asking the community to support.
I am not presenting a transfer as an optional alternative to doing nothing. I am calling for a transfer as the central reform, accompanied by the policies and governance mechanisms needed to make that transition meaningful.
If the current owner believes in Sudomemo's future and the wellbeing of its users, then arranging a responsible transfer to a qualified successor should be considered a serious way to demonstrate that commitment.
Sudomemo should not have to disappear for its ownership to change. It should be able to preserve everything valuable about its history while establishing a more accountable future under independent leadership.
10. What We Are Asking Sudomemo to Do
This petition calls for specific, practical reforms.
1. Transfer ownership to an independent successor
Make a good-faith effort to arrange the transfer of Sudomemo's ownership and ultimate control to an independent, responsible successor with a demonstrated commitment to child safety, transparency, privacy, and accountable governance.
The transition should be planned carefully to preserve the platform's operations, archives, and creative community.
2. Establish independent oversight
Ensure that serious complaints involving the owner, administrators, and moderators can be reviewed independently, without conflicts of interest.
3. Address the 2017 controversy responsibly
Provide an appropriate public explanation of the steps taken in response to concerns raised in 2017, describe relevant safeguarding improvements, and explain what accountability mechanisms exist today. Protect the privacy of everyone involved and distinguish documented facts from disputed allegations.
4. Strengthen protections for younger users
Review existing safeguards and implement clear, proportionate measures against sexual exploitation, inappropriate adult interactions, and content that violates the platform's rules.
5. Review suggestive content and sexualized comments
Assess examples such as Flipnote Q1K246 against the published content policy. Explain the applicable standards and apply them consistently without indiscriminately restricting harmless creativity.
6. Clarify adult-topic boundaries in mixed-age spaces
Establish clear expectations for discussions involving pornography and other adult subjects in Discord spaces associated with Sudomemo, particularly general channels accessible to thirteen-year-olds.
7. Improve moderation transparency
Publish clear rules, provide accessible reporting procedures, and establish fair methods for reviewing or appealing moderation decisions.
8. Introduce a practical personal-data export process
Give users a secure, accessible way to preserve their own Flipnotes and other eligible account-associated information, subject to applicable legal, technical, and privacy requirements.
9. Create meaningful opportunities for community feedback
Give users appropriate ways to raise concerns and contribute suggestions about moderation, safeguarding, data access, governance, and the platform's future.
10. Publish measurable commitments to improvement
Explain which reforms will be implemented, how their effectiveness will be assessed, and how the community will be informed of progress.
These reforms should be established under a governance structure that can hold its own leadership accountable. A transfer of ownership without meaningful safeguards would be incomplete, just as policy changes without addressing ownership would leave the central concern unresolved.
Our primary demand is a new owner. The accompanying reforms are the standards that new ownership must uphold.
11. What Responsible New Ownership Should Look Like
Changing owners is only worthwhile if the successor is prepared to operate Sudomemo responsibly.
I am not calling for ownership to be handed to an unqualified individual or transferred without consideration of the technical and operational responsibilities involved.
The successor should have the capability to maintain the platform and the willingness to build a governance structure that protects users and respects their contributions.
A responsible transition should include the following commitments.
First, preserve the platform and its history. Sudomemo's archives, creative work, and community identity should be treated as valuable parts of digital animation history. A transfer should prioritize continuity and preservation.
Second, establish independent complaint procedures. Serious complaints involving people with authority should be reviewed through a process that is not controlled solely by the person being questioned.
Third, make child safety a defined responsibility. Appropriate safeguards should be implemented, periodically assessed, and updated as the platform and applicable legal requirements evolve.
Fourth, apply published policies consistently. Moderation standards should be clear, understandable, and enforceable regardless of a user's popularity or position.
Fifth, respect users' privacy and data rights. Personal information should be handled responsibly, and users should have clear, practical ways to exercise applicable rights and preserve their own work.
Sixth, communicate with the community. Users should receive reasonable information about policy changes and significant governance decisions, while sensitive personal information remains protected.
Finally, make accountability durable. Safeguards should be built into how Sudomemo is managed, rather than depending entirely on the personality, judgment, or goodwill of any individual owner.
A well-planned transfer can preserve the work that has made Sudomemo meaningful while giving the community a stronger foundation for the future.
The objective is not to replace one individual with another who has unchecked power. It is to move toward independent ownership with meaningful oversight and clearly defined responsibilities.
That is the standard I believe Sudomemo deserves.
12. Why I Am Speaking Out Anonymously
I have chosen to remain anonymous for personal reasons. I want the focus of this petition to remain on the issues themselves rather than on my identity.
As a well-known animator and former moderator, I recognize that speaking publicly about a community's leadership can be complicated. People can become more interested in identifying the person raising a concern than in evaluating the concern itself.
Difficult conversations can quickly become personal disputes, and legitimate questions can become lost amid arguments about people's motives.
That is not what I want for Sudomemo.
I am not asking anyone to accept every statement in this petition without question. Serious claims should be assessed against the available evidence, and people should be given a fair opportunity to respond.
Anonymity does not make a claim true, but neither should it automatically make a legitimate concern unworthy of consideration.
The focus should remain on safeguarding, transparent procedures, consistent standards, and the practical changes needed to protect the community.
I am speaking out because I believe that caring about Sudomemo means caring about the people who use it, including younger members and those who may feel uncomfortable raising concerns themselves.
I do not want the community to descend into harassment, retaliation, or endless personal conflict. I want it to be able to examine its history honestly, address its weaknesses, and move toward a more responsible future.
The identity of the person raising these questions should not matter more than whether the questions deserve answers.
13. A Community Worth Protecting
Sudomemo has given so many people the opportunity to create, share, and connect. It has helped preserve the spirit of Flipnote Studio and the Nintendo DSi for people who did not want that creative experience to disappear.
That history is worth preserving.
But preserving a community is not the same as preserving every aspect of its existing leadership or refusing to question its decisions.
We should be able to celebrate the animations, friendships, and creative achievements that make Sudomemo special while acknowledging that stronger safeguards and more meaningful accountability may be necessary.
We should be able to ask difficult questions about the 2017 controversy without harassment or sensationalism.
We should be able to expect the same rules to apply to ordinary users and people in positions of authority.
We should be able to discuss whether adult topics belong in spaces accessible to thirteen-year-olds.
We should be able to expect published content policies to be enforced consistently.
We should be able to preserve our creative work and trust that serious safety concerns will be handled responsibly.
And we should be able to look toward Sudomemo's future knowing that the people responsible for the platform understand the responsibilities that come with managing a community that includes younger users.
These expectations are not incompatible with creative freedom. They are part of creating an environment in which creative freedom can flourish responsibly.
I want future generations to experience the excitement of sharing their first Flipnotes, receiving encouragement from other artists, and finding a community where their creativity is valued.
I want established animators to feel confident that their work and personal information are treated responsibly.
I want younger users to have appropriate protections and clear boundaries around adult content.
And I want people who raise legitimate concerns to know that they will be taken seriously and treated fairly.
I believe Sudomemo can have that future, but I also believe that achieving it requires more than asking the current ownership to make incremental adjustments.
A responsible transfer of ownership, combined with independent oversight and stronger safeguards, offers a concrete path toward a new beginning.
We can preserve Sudomemo without preserving the existing ownership structure. We can honor its history while demanding a different future.
14. Please Sign and Share This Petition
I am asking fellow animators, former and current users, long-time community members, younger creators, and everyone who cares about the Flipnote community to support this petition.
By signing, you are calling for a transfer of Sudomemo's ownership to independent, responsible stewardship, alongside stronger safeguards for younger users, more consistent moderation, appropriate boundaries around adult discussions, accessible personal-data exports, and meaningful accountability.
You do not need to agree with every criticism of the platform to recognize that these questions deserve responsible answers.
You do not need to know my identity to consider whether the proposed reforms would benefit the community.
And you do not need to abandon Sudomemo to want it to improve.
I am not calling for the destruction of a platform that has meant so much to so many people. I am calling for a change of ownership because I believe its users deserve a safer, more transparent, and more accountable future.
The 2017 controversy should not be used as an excuse for harassment or endless personal conflict. But the passage of time should not be treated as a substitute for accountability, either.
Publicly accessible suggestive content, adult-topic discussions in mixed-age spaces, and questions about leadership oversight deserve to be approached with care, evidence, and a willingness to improve.
The future of Sudomemo should not depend entirely on the decisions of one person. It should rest on independent stewardship, consistent policies, meaningful oversight, and respect for the people who give the platform its value.
I am asking the current owner to recognize that the community's future may be better served by transferring ownership to a qualified successor committed to these principles.
I am asking the community to support that transition and insist on standards that protect the platform's creative legacy and the people who rely on it.
And I am asking future leadership to treat this responsibility seriously, with safeguards that remain effective regardless of who holds authority.
We should not have to choose between the community we love and the accountability needed to protect it. We can demand both.
Please sign and share this petition to demand a change of ownership at Sudomemo.
Let's protect the creators.
Let's protect younger users.
Let's preserve the creative spirit of Flipnote Studio and the Nintendo DSi.
Let's demand independent, responsible ownership.
And let's work toward a future in which Sudomemo earns the trust of its community through transparency, responsible leadership, and meaningful action.
The past should be acknowledged. The present should be accountable. The future should be safer for everyone.
Sources and Further Reading
Sudomemo's Official Policies:
- Sudomemo Terms of Use
- Sudomemo Content Policy
- Sudomemo Frequently Asked Questions
- Sudomemo Privacy Policy
Examples Discussed in This Petition:
- Sudomemo Flipnote: "why she doin that", ID Q1K246
- Discord messages dated May 9, 2020, and May 27, 2025, identified by the message IDs and channel information listed in Section 4.
- The supplied screenshots showing the displayed account, role indicator, message text, and timestamps.
Online Safety Laws and Guidance:
- European Union Digital Services Act, Regulation (EU) 2022/2065
- European Commission: Guidelines on the Protection of Minors Under the Digital Services Act
- Ofcom: Protection of Children Duties Under the UK Online Safety Act
- Australian eSafety Commissioner: Online Safety Industry Codes and Standards
Historical Background:
- Sudomemo's 2017 statement
- Sudomemo Files (archive)
- Sudomemo Files (live)
- Community-maintained history of Sudomemo
These historical sources are provided to help readers examine the controversy independently. They are not all official sources or legal findings. Readers should distinguish allegations, responses, and documented facts, and consult original material where available.
The legal materials describe different obligations and scopes of application. They are included for context, not as a claim that the examples in this petition automatically establish a legal violation.
The Decision Makers
Supporter Voices
Petition Updates
Share this petition
Petition created on 27 October 2026