So let me start off by saying that I recognize that there was initially a genuine problem with people who didn’t want NSFW content being exposed to it.
Some of this was due to the fact that not all content was being correctly flagged as NSFW, and some of it was because a lot of users didn’t realize that individual users can choose to completely block an entire instance - which is not only a very easy and fast solution, but also does not require an all-or-nothing approach of defederating from NSFW instances.
A number of changes were made, but some of those lingering changes have meant that people who do want to see NSFW content are not because:
-
Even having subscribed to several NSFW subs, they are effectively completely missing from my feed.
-
Most NSFW thumbnails are blurred.
Both of these behaviors should not be occurring if a user has chosen in their settings to NOT hide NSFW content.
However, I will also say that the blurred state is something that deserves its own user setting (i.e. so that a user can choose to NOT hide NSFW, but still want them blurred or not) - preferably with the granularity to set it for various sub-types of NSFW (e.g. porn, gore, etc…).
Nope. Content is mirrored and hosted locally, so it’s the admin’s choice and responsibility.
Moreover, listening to choruses of “individual choice” are how you end up providing a server for people who feel no responsibility to their neighbours and communities. Structural issues require more than “Fuck you, I can do what I want.”
You can choose to use a different instsnce if you don’t like what the admin’s doing. Or you can start your own. That’s how you can do what you want.
Edit: I do love the downvotes from the “I can do what to want” crowd, knowing that they’re also the “my property, my rules” crowd. Except when they’re the ones using someone else’s shit, of course.
It’s not a coherent ideology.
I don’t get your reasoning. There’s no downside to letting users choose.
And I find the ‘love it or leave it’ approach distasteful.
I generally like what the admin is doing, in large part because he listens to user feedback, which I was providing.
Of course you’re entitled to your opinion.
edit: wait it does makes sense in a way to avoid hosting illegal content, if the instance doesn’t have the manpower to moderate effectively. nevermind. still think those issues should be discussed collectively.
You should become accustomed to having multiple accounts, ones for different instances, because this is the fediverse and essentially just semi-interlinked forums. If you want forum specific content that is generally considered spicy, go to that forum directly rather than complain that every other forum not handle your need for spicy content in an effective way for all parties.
This isnt some faceless megacorp. You are so used to one source for all your content due to reddit, but you should not expect one instance to provide you with all your desired content. Can you imagine how many man hours need to be put into effectively handling spicy content, across all instances? Or, you can just go to the spicy content forums.
Yes, there is a need for better handling multiple accounts seamlessly, its definitely under development in several apps. In the meantime it’s just something to deal with.
Personally I’m very happy with no porn and gore. But I think loss of user agency is what made internet the hell it is now, and alternatives should keep it in mind.
Peertube does have some basic granularity: allow sensitive content or not, blur sensitive thumbnails or not.
It’s work no doubt, but I doubt it’s the Herculean task some make it out to be.
In the end it’s for Ernest to decide, I see no problem in making suggestions one way the other. And I don’t understand why you would.
For what it’s worth, I haven’t browsed reddit in years except for specific technical stuff, you may be assuming a little bit too much based on a single comment.
edit: thinking about it a little more, one case where I’d advocate banning sensitive content entirely is if it is used as a vector of attack against the instance, by posting illegal, or repulsive content to drive traffic away.
@dedale@kbin.social @Daydreamy@beehaw.org @ShadowRunner@kbin.social @Hillock@kbin.social @Kichae@kbin.social
The Internet wouldn’t be what it is today were it not for porn.
Porn gave us VHS.
Porn gave us Laser Discs.
Porn gave us DVDs.
Porn gave us BluRay.
Porn gave us the Internet.
Porn gave us Internet Video.
Porn gave us Streaming Video.
Porn gave us Usenet.
Porn gave us IRC.
Porn gave us Reddit.
Porn gave us the Fediverse.
Where there is technology, there is porn.
This has nothing to do with complaining about how other forums handle this.
This is about how kbin handles it, and kbin is designed to incorporate multiple forums from multiple instances. In other words, we’re talking about how kbin should be able to do what it’s designed to do even better.
The downside is investing tons of time making and testing code that ultimately accomplishes nothing that wouldn’t also be achieved by making your own instance.
Except here it’s not about writing a new functionality as much as getting the UI to do what it says it does.
I downvoted you because I think your argument is off the mark, not because I’m an “individual choice” or “I can do what I want” nutjob. I believe is strong moderation.
Allowing a setting to not blur photos will not destory communities. It seems like most people in this thread who would like a setting for this agree that blurring NSFW photos should be the default because that is what is best for the community. Asking for a setting to suit their own tastes is perfectly reasonable. Even within a community, people can have individual needs or tastes and they should be accommodated when reasonable.
They’re not asking that all NSFW photos be shown for everybody. They’re asking that they be allowed to customize their own experience without affecting anybody else. Telling them to fuck off is pretty exclusive and non-community oriented behavior.