2y ago

There should be a porn tag separate from the nsfw tag

There is a big difference between mild NSFW and full on porno. Suppose there is a News story with photo/video but it's a little bit graphic or violent. Nobody is jacking off to that. Maybe shouldn't view it at work, but in the library is fine.

Maybe it's a funny meme pic but there's a nip slip situation going on. No biggy; it should probably be tagged NSFW. Probably don't want it showing up at actual work. But I want to enable this kind of content away from work without a bunch of actual porn showing up in my feed.

There should be a porn tag. It's not the same as NSFW.

EDIT: The two main devs have done some amazing work here, but as I understand it they are totally booked for the foreseeable future. My rust chops aren't quite up to snuff (yet) and my frontend chops are non-existent, so it might be a quite while before I'm up to speed enough to make a meaningful contribution. In the meantime just thought I'd point out the issue.

11 comments

Nobody is jacking off to that. Never subestimes nobody.
- Challenge accepte... Wait what?
- As they say, there is a fetish for everything.

I'm trying to create a healthy porn community on lemmy. And the hostility of lemmy towards it is worrisome in my opinion. People are calling for de-federating lemmynsfw, people file false reports on my NSFW-only communities, the majority of instances ban porn,…
IMHO, there should be only two tags "NSFW", "NSFL". (= Not Safe For Life, meaning gore) There was this running-joke on reddit last year "when I was younger 'NSFW' on /r/all meant boobs, now it's most likely a video of a bomb being dropped from a drone blowing up russian soldiers."
I don't think we should rate the degree of NSFW or NSFL. Where is the line? I assume a topless lady is NSFW, not porn. But is a fully nude woman or man NSFW, or porn? If it's still "just" NSFW, what about two fully naked men holding each other penises? Or a woman on her knees looking at a penis without touching it, with her mouse open? This is a very fine line.
I'm in favour of most european broadcasting laws: visible nipples are fine as long as they're not sexuality, but "16" or "18" rating is recommended. Visible anus, vulva or penis makes "18/Unrated" mandatory, whether there is intercourse or not.
I would translate this to lemmy to "anything with nipples, anus, vulva or penis visible is NSFW, regardless of intercourse" No grading of "NSFW" or "porn."
- I agree that the de-federation and attitude is worrysome, but I disagree on your stance towards more tags. Servers that disallow NSFW now, might choose to allow NSFW but not porn. Servers that allow NSFW now, are likely to keep allowing both. Servers just don't want to deal with liability and weird protocol quirks showing people stuff they don't want, so they'll ban any category that's likely to include stuff they don't want. More fine-grained tagging means they can ban a smaller selection of things.
  I'm all for various kinds of tags to indicate why someone might not want to view certain content.
- Don't get me wrong, I think there should be porn on lemmy. It's great. I just don't want to get kicked out of the library. Or have a situation where I'm on the train/bus and some toddler is in the seat behind me looking over my shoulder. Edit: yeah probably should block any nsfw in the latter scenario

Simple, [Content Warning Tag]-(User Description Of Content Warning)

I'm thinking that having a generic "NSFW" flag and then a bunch of different tags you could use as modifiers would be better. "NSFW" would trigger the "blur/hide/whatever this" code, and you could filter based on #porn, #gore, #semprini, whatever, for the specific kind of stuff you're interested in/not interested in.
- I'm very defensive when it comes to NSFW. But I think "NSFW flag with mandatory reason from a drop down" (e.g. nudity, sex, violence, gore, explicit-language) is the best solution which satisfy both. That is actually a great idea.
  
  Just a UX nitpick: a drop down is usally for a single choice question but this should be multiple choice to avoid unintentional mislabeling.

11 comments