Forums / Maintenance / Suggest Ideas

So as some of you know there are new rules being enforced and bans have been implemented over nsfw content. I have seen other forums that putting things in NSFW buttons is fine and I do agree this site shouldn't have REAL PORN but under these new rule enforcements even a pic of dickbutt will be deleted and get you a warning. I for one do not welcome this kind of censorship here. I feel that putting it in a NSFW button leaves it up to you, the user, to choose if you are going to click on it or not and if you are offended that's your own fault and furthermore if you do get offended easily then this may not be the site for you. There are plenty of safe content on cheezeburger go look at some lolcats if you want a safe site.
The mods here are following the rules laid out by a few mods who think that the shipping thread was getting out of control. If you don't like it don't go in that thread and don't be a bitch and complain about it either. It has come to a point where this needs to be fixed MODS and rules need to be in place that we can all follow. Are we going to allow some Frenchie to determine what the rules are? (Yes Tomberry is one of the main culprits in these new rules) Or do we the users wnat to have a say in this?
TL;DR
This is not porn

No porn or gore. External links to sites containing such content or ads will be censored at the discretion of moderators, unless it is absolutely vital to meme research discussions and accompanied by a clear [NSFW] warning label.

Read the "discretion of moderators" part again. We know what can be allowed and what should be banned on sight, don't worry.

but some mods find it ok like Abra and yourself where other mods will delete and warn get your shit together and lets have rules we can follow. I have gotten things deleted just for having a nipple showing. it was in a NSFW labeled thread in a NSFW button and it wasn't porn. It was deleted by Abra "just following the rules, sorry". You yourself has drawn dicks in the pony thread and other drawing threads that under these guidelines would get deleted and a warning to the user.

The problem here is the idea of "acceptable under rules". It seems pretty simple, certain things can be displayed with the rules as they are now. The truth is, however, that things are never as black and white as that. What some people would be okay with, others could find offensive. After all, each person is different and each person is disturbed by different things.

Honestly, I think we should work with the mods in this. It's really all we can do. I guess we can appeal a decision we feel is wrong. But we have to accept that these things will happen. Sometimes something you thought was acceptable offended someone and had to be taken down. Can we really blame people for being human?

I'd say we work together on these issues should they arise, rather than crying foul and raising hell over it.

But what is the point of having NSFW tags and buttons if nothing in the forums can actually be NSFW? if this is to be a so called PG forum anything and everything under NSFW should and will get deleted. It is retarded when other forums can use the NSFW buttons properly and we can't.
I have also seen sites that you cannot view NSFW unless signed in and still under NSFW buttons and it works. Yes they post nudes but no porn allowed and it works. That is how a NSFW tag should be not this bullshit of no (female) nipples and no genitals even if drawn.

What I'm saying is that you should send a PM to him and try talking about this. Try getting him to see things from your point of view. Maybe a middle ground can be reached.

I was in IRC with him "rules are rules" was said. Abra feels the same way about the NSFW tags and buttons but he has to follow the rules. It was he who told me to start this thread. To get us talking and hopefully get things straightened out with mods and users.

Ah, well alright then. Glad that was worked out. I guess we should discuss this issue here now.

I'm with Daniel on this. Putting a NSFW button is clearly indicating that whatever it is behind it is a mature subject. Choosing to click the button is your choice, you can't really blame anyone else when you've made the decision. It's the same idea as agreeing to the TOS. You've acknowledged that you understand what's behind it, you can't complain about it. I think we should allow whatever would go behind a NSFW button to stay. Otherwise, we completely destroy the point of having that button.

But, RM says that the mods know what can be allowed and what can't. Can we expect the same level of approval and disapproval from every mod? Just curious.

I'll tell you what all this talk of porn is doing to me:

So apparently the MODs and USERSs don't care, think I'm trolling, or don't bother with site related forums. I have the feeling that if this thread was started by say Chris, RandomMan, or one of the MODs there would more discussion and more people involved.

SO WTF KYM?

Then you have Fridge Logic's response…. dude this isn't about porn, it's about what is right. Rules that we the USERs can follow and all MODs can follow. I don' want to be told by one mod that a NSFW button is fine and have another tell me to delete it. Why is it that we have such a loose interpretation of the rules?
No gore? ok then how about these? Are these gore? Should these be deleted? Should they even be under a NSFW tag? Rules being rules I should be banned for gore right now.

Well, there's a distinct difference between NSFW content and porn. People just sometimes don't recognize it.

Indeed.

It goes both ways too people call things porn when it isn't. My interpretation of porn is insertion. A person naked (live or drawn) is not porn. yes it would fall into more adult or rated "R" and definitely would be NSFW. That is what NSFW buttons and tagged threads should be for, "R" rated material. If they say they want a "PG" forum then what is the point of NSFW buttons?

I apologize, Daniel. I have trouble reading your longer posts.

I'd like some in-depth rules. What specifically is allowed? What is porn? What instances can you post it? How is it treated by moderators? What can users expect to happen if they post it incorrectly? As it stands, there's no real consensus among the moderation, and I don't think that's fair to the users. It's more of a matter of "We'll know it when we see it." But it can vary by the mood of the moderator and from each moderator. It's less of a rule than it is a guideline, and it leaves users in the dark until they get a warning or something.

I think the current approach is just a way of avoiding the moderation's different opinions of pornography. We would have to have a long, drawn out conversation as to what should be censored and in what way, and I'm not sure if people want to have that conversation.
 
I think that's a little different from what you've been saying, but I think how users can post questionable content needs to be discussed more and posted where people can refer to it.
 
 
tl;dr: I prefer preemptive specificity over ad hoc discretion. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Verbose, as much as you'd love a series of site rules that contain so much detail you'll drown in it, it is simply not possible.

• X and Y both aren't allowed.
• Y is however allowed when hidden below a nsfw tag.
• X is only allowed when it features a specific type of content.
• That of course means that X has to stay relevant to the topic.
• Y is also only allowed between the 25th of January and the 3rd of June.
• That of course means as well that the black bar on X should be at least 2 cm wide.
• Unless you add Z to the mix, then the nsfw tag on Y isn't needed.
• But not in combination with Q, that's overboard.
• And then I'm not even mentioning T, oh dear lord.

See how confusion something like that quickly gets?

I'll stick with the discretion of moderator rule. By times, we have put up various notes and warning around the forum telling people that what they've been posting now is going overboard. Besides, it's not like we're banning on sight. We often send people warnings that something is going overboard. If they disagree with us removing it, they can always tell us their reasons and we'll try to explain it. If he can tell we were acting incorrectly, we can take that in mind next time. Mods aren't perfect, they're still human. We make mistakes as well, remember that. So don't blame us for being sucky mods when it goes wrong one time.

Just remember to stick to the topic and add a warning note when in doubt. No really, nsfw tags make a huge difference with questionable content. Especially if the topic itself contains a "NSFW" tag. Because when it's tagged NSFW, you offer people the option to not look at it. If they then still decide to look at it, that's their fault and they are to blame if they get scarred. If you're really unsure, you can always jump in the IRC and ask for opinions there before posting it. We allow pretty much everything in the IRC, so we can give you a heads up if it's save to post. When something is so hardcore that even a "NSFW" tag won't do anymore, you should be able to tell so yourself as well.

But let's continue there, how about the discretion of users. Because currently it only seems that moderators are to blame. That seems like a pretty lame excuse to me if an user breaks the rules, just blame the mod that jumped in and did his job. The moderators might jump in when the content has been posted, but it was the choice of that specific user to post it. When he posted it, he knew exactly what he was going to post. We can take for granted he read the topic of the thread, whether that topic contained a warning, whether his post is relevant to the topic, and whether or not his own post contains a warning. If he didn't, that's his fault and only that user should be to blame. By that, all consequenses coming with that post are also his. If he can't read the site rules and doesn't have a decent brain in following them or put his own opinion on his post, that's his fault and so are the consequenses.

@RandomMan
No it is simple I will show you.
(only a simple example)

This is completely safe
fully clothed "G Rated"

This is safe to post without NSFW button
nothing is showing no genitals no nipples "PG Rated"

This needs a NSFW button
breast and nipples showing but not porn "R Rated"

This is porn
this without the censored bar would not be allowed "X Rated"
With the censor bar makes it NSFW "R Rated"

Simple isn't it?

I, personally, would agree with the classifications Daniel has put forward as well as how to handle each of them.

It's clear, easy to understand, and it removes a lot of the uncertainty with posts.

We must have some way to make NSFW tags easy to post or easy to use, perhaps a button for making the said code.

As for gore, I believe it should remain under a NSFW tag as well. Perhaps differentiation between NSFW-Nudity/NSFW-Sex and NSFW-Gore on the tags.

Me personally, I don't like the word gore as related to pics of movie blood or drawn pics with blood. Horror or even violent content is more fitting. Real gore is like pics of real executions and death. It's the difference between "Faces of Death" and "Friday the 13th". And I do agree that even horror is an "R rating" and should be under a NSFW tag.

Congrats, Daniel. You've proven that if you bitch and moan enough about not being able to spam porn all over this site, the powers that be will eventually capitulate.

You should get a medal or something.

Just because this is an idea that's being suggested doesn't mean this is what's going to happen or that it is official, Fridge.

If you have a problem with what he is suggesting, please articulate your argument against it.

Thank you. Thank you.
First I would like to dedicate this to all of you that believed in me and supported me. I would like to thank all of the ponyfags, weaboos, furries, shippers and most importantly Thanks to rule 34.
Thank you

Because the mods and some users still don't know what real porn is. Mods are still deleting what ever they feel is wrong so rules still depend on mods taste. Users are calling girls in bikinis porn but they only say that because it's furry art, the dumb fucks. Let's continue this conversation and get more people involved her.

Can you link (and tag as NSFW until we're on the same page) to what was deleted? Or an example of it?

If I hear you right, then anthro art was deleted, but there was no genitalia or nothing else overtly obscene. And if the art was of a human, then you think it would have been OK. Is that right?

no I didn't post it someone else did but this is part of what I'm talking about. Read comment he thinks it's porn. Oclaf is posting on my wall to slow down the "suggestive" pics and a pic was deleted by Abra in furry thread and for good reason.
I want more discussion on this though.

I believe that if it is pornographic nudity, IE, sexual nudity, it isn't allowed.

Same with genitalia.

Daniel is just being overly reactionary,

The images were of furry breast inflation with very prominent genitalia in an obviously sexual image.

Still don't see enough discussion on topic.
Only see three mods actually discussing anything here and so far there have been 2 users discussing it but I have seen plenty of people telling me what they think about what I post in IRC, in my other threads and on my wall.

Discuss:
As of 2010, the MPAA has added a descriptor of "male nudity" to movies featuring said content. A brief nudity require a PG rating. More than a brief nudity will require a PG-13 rating, but never be sexually oriented. A sexually oriented nudity will require a R rating.

so under MPAA guidelines genitals are PG
I still think it should be under NSFW button though.

I think you're forgetting a few factors of nudity here.

The ass is a widely accepted form of nudity, even in cartoons for younger viewers. I have seen plenty of shows, movies and cartoons that contain at least one scene where a person is naked for a while. They always make sure the female breasts, vagina and penis are covered, whether this is by camera angle or by the person himself, through hands or objects, or by the usage of a censor. With the ass they don't really bother as long as you can't spot an anus.

So you might want to check that again. Genitalia might get a PG rating according to that. But I'd like to see that again if they show a bare naked dick. I don't think that will go unnoticed and will be accepted with just a PG rating.

This is also the guideline I commonly follow on the forum and image galleries. I don't really care about asses or suggestive clothing. But I do bother when they show dicks, female nipples, vaginas or an anus, regardless of a NSFW tag.

According to Wikipedia, porn is the act of sexual intercourse. Nudity obviously doesn't fall within these factors. But we can assume that most people put certain factors of nudity within the area of pornographic content. This is also what I follow with what I accept in what should be allowed. So in that way, the porn rule has to be updated that it also covers certain factors of nudity. Not to forget KYM is still a SFW website. We don't want to be blocked from the Google search results because we show too much pornographic content.

@Daniel

Please remember that the only users that will benefit from us allowing more pornographic content are you and a very small group of other users. Most of the users are decent enough to know what to post and what to avoid. It may not always be covered in the rules, but the etiquette of posting is also still here.

I've said it before and will say it again. You are complaining about the discretion of moderators, but don't forget there's also the discretion of users when they make a post.

These are movie ratings and only concerning male genitals. TV ratings are different as are video game ratings. My point is naked doesn't mean X rated i.e. porn.
And why is it only female nipples are not allowed? Are female nipples somehow more X rated?
here is TV rating system:
The guidelines are as follows. Often sub-guidelines will be used to specify the type of content in the program.
TV-Y: Suitable for all children (particularly those of preschool or kindergarten age, as this rating is commonly seen in early childhood shows)
TV-Y7: Suitable for children over seven years old. May contain cartoonish slapstick violence, mild innuendo, and/or themes considered too controversial or incomprehensible for children under seven.
TV-G: Suitable for all audiences; contains little to no adult themes, sexual innuendo, violence, or crude language. Also used for shows with inoffensive content (such as cooking shows, religious programming, and reruns of classic game shows)
TV-PG: Parental guidance suggested; may contain mild to moderate crude language, sexual references, violence, and/or suggestive themes and dialogue
TV-14: Parents strongly cautioned; may be inappropriate for children younger than 14 years of age. Contains moderate to strong violence (including some blood-letting), moderate sexual references (including censored nudity and heavily implied scenes of sexual intercourse), moderate to strong offensive language (including bleeped-out obscenities), and moderate sexual innuendo.
TV-MA: Mature audiences; inappropriate for people under 17 years of age. Contains explicit language (which may or may not be censored for advertising reasons), explicit (though, in some cases, not pornographic) sexual content, and extreme violence.

So as you can see most rating systems go by age and also you can see the difference between TV-14 and TV-MA. TV-14 allows censored nudity. That's 14 years old man. A 14 year old can watch censored nudity. WTF do I need to read that again? Then it goes to TV-MA and anyone with cable channels like HBO knows what they show under TV-MA. They actually show fucking but can't show penetration.