NSFW vs Pornographic Content
NSFW vs Pornographic Content
Hey! I was about to make a feature request on github for this but I thought having a discussion first would be helpful.
I propose a system of filtration :
-
Porn - Obviously, sexual material of any kind, not including sensual photos without nudity but anything else with nudity which is supposed to be arousing.
-
NSFL - Not safe for life. Any kind of gore, content with blood or showcasing a fatal/non-fatal accident, murder etc. goes here.
-
NSFW - Any kind of post that doesn't fit either Porn or NSFL. For example, memes referencing sex, porn, fetishes etc. or use of words related to these activities.
Please give more suggestions. I would like this because I don't want to see porn but I am okay with posts that reference adult themes.
A better idea would be a generic content warning system replacing the existing NSFW toggle. This would not only improve compatibility with the rest of the fediverse (which does use support CWs) but also give you way more filtering options than just "safe, tits or gore".
CWs should be applicable to both communities and individual posts, and would "stack" on top of each other. (Each post would "inherit" the CWs of it's community.)
35Safe, Tits, or Gore:
Growing up in the 21st Century.That's a book people would read.
8Le tits now
7So content warnings that could be customized by different fediverse outlets like lemmy, mastodon etc.? But that would be something to talk about in the activitypub repo probably.
3CW's?
1Would it also make sense for users to be able to tag posts from other users or other instances with their instances CW?
Almost a voting system (this post has been tagged gore 12 times). Then the community can do the work for federated content.
1
You're barking up the wrong tree.
Activitypub only supports a single "sensitive" flag. While it isn't impossible for lemmy devs to find a workaround for lemmy, it likely wouldn't federate properly. I believe dessalines has explained the technical side of it before, and why they don't have this as a near future goal.
But, this has already been requested a shit ton, and i believe on github
15They could always set the sensitive flag if any of the tags applied for the purpose of cross-compatibility, and only expose the specific type of sensitive content to Lemmy clients
3
That sounds like a great plan. Unfortunately I think it's ill-conceived.
To demonstrate, I'd like you to take this survey: https://novehiclesinthepark.com/
Then read up on some of the discussions from the time https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36453856
Rules can be interpreted in many ways and your rules of porn/nsfl/nsfw might not conform to other peoples' rules of porn/nsfl/nsfw. It's not exactly an easy problem to solve.
12Permanently Deleted
1
"Spoiler" would be a nice addition.
Maybe "Porn", "Nudity", "Gore" and "Spoiler" would be better because more explicit?
9i think nsfw as content warning is ok. after that, we need tags.
with tags you have, then the ability to filter them.
since tags are not standard, you can have as many as you want.
4In Mastodon they have "Conten Warning" as general I think
1
Hmmm... so the discussion goes up to tag which I think are already requested?
2I think it would be good to go even a bit further with eh granularly of classifications. For example, shocking NSFW versus gore, versus people dying. Maybe I am ok with seeing something unexpected but I just don't want to see some one die.
Filtering would also make sense. Maybe I only want to not see porn, but I'm okay with nudity in a non porn sense.
2What I don't want thought too fine control, like - porn with tits, no tits, black jewish lesbian porn etc.
3Hmm. Tough to think this through. Maybe some one or some instances do want that granular of control?
Maybe it could be added as a kind of tag in a post. Instances can decide in advance the tag type and users or even viewers of content could tag it whatever. some instances might have few categories, some man Edit: but they should be nested, as in, NSFW, then NSFW > Porn, NSFW> Porn > and on and on..
2