To me, the question regarding NSFW content (by which I assume you mean pornography - correct me if I'm wrong) on Tildes is not "Why not?" but "Why?" What's the point of adding pornography to a...
To me, the question regarding NSFW content (by which I assume you mean pornography - correct me if I'm wrong) on Tildes is not "Why not?" but "Why?" What's the point of adding pornography to a site where the philosophy is that "in-depth content (primarily text-based) is the most important"?
Different websites have different purposes. You won't be able to use Tildes for lots of things: for shopping, for banking, for watching movies/shows, for booking concert tickets, for job-searching, for looking up bus/train timetables, and so on. Why is porn the exception? Why do you need porn on a website for discussion? Why can't you go to XTube or the millions of porn sites out there?
Different websites specialise in different things, and that's perfectly all right. Not all sites need to be all things to all people.
Being a Reddit alternative is not the same as being a Reddit clone. If Tildes did everything exactly the same as Reddit, then there would be no point in having Tildes at all. If I'm looking for a...
Being a Reddit alternative is not the same as being a Reddit clone. If Tildes did everything exactly the same as Reddit, then there would be no point in having Tildes at all.
If I'm looking for a hamburger, I can go to McDonald's or I can go to an up-market burger shop. I might not be able to get everything that's available at McDonald's (like thickshakes or apple pies) at the other burger shop, but it's still an alternative to McDonald's.
A reddit alternative is fundamentally going to have the same problems as reddit itself. If we’re hoping to avoid those problems then @Demios has to make choices that are different than Reddit’s....
A reddit alternative is fundamentally going to have the same problems as reddit itself. If we’re hoping to avoid those problems then @Demios has to make choices that are different than Reddit’s. Not necessarily better, just with different goals in mind
There is a very serious problem with the knee-jerk attitude against NSFW content exhibited by some users here. I have to agree with those people that most NSFW (which they keep calling porn while...
There is a very serious problem with the knee-jerk attitude against NSFW content exhibited by some users here.
I have to agree with those people that most NSFW (which they keep calling porn while actually meaning nudity) content would not exactly match the goals of Tildes, just as memes would not either.
However, I deeply disagree with both the NSFW≡porn≡nudity PoV and with the outright prohibition of NSFW. IMNSHO, if a topic can produce meaningful discussion and is legal, then it should be allowed—provided that it is properly tagged.
In addition, if any “free talk” topics or even groups are ever allowed, then I believe no distinction should be made between NSFW and non-NSFW low-quality content.
The vagueness of the "not safe for work" label might be part of the problem. Usually it's taken to mean that if you're browsing reddit or another site on your work computer, anything that would...
The vagueness of the "not safe for work" label might be part of the problem. Usually it's taken to mean that if you're browsing reddit or another site on your work computer, anything that would embarrass you / get you in trouble if someone happened to glance over your shoulder. That narrow definition tends to limit it to images that are fairly obviously prurient or sexual in nature.
However, it could also be interpreted more broadly, to mean anything that might get blocked by filtering software, if your company IT department installed it.
Tildes focus is on high quality, text-based content, so the first type of NSFW content is likely to be excluded based on being low-effort / image-based anyway, regardless of whether it's of a sexual nature.
The broader definition of NSFW is where there's a grey area, I think. An article on the history of prostitution over time could certainly be on-topic for Tildes. If that article included paintings or photographs of 19th century prostitutes as a complement to the text, it might deserve a "be careful reading this at work" tag, despite not being pornographic.
You've misinterpreted my point there. I even said this: It's not that "NSFW = nudity = bad". It's that most content that would be posted under the "NSFW" banner is shallow. People just want to...
You've misinterpreted my point there. I even said this:
whenever people say "I want NSFW content!" they almost invariably mean they want to just post links to pictures of naked women (and, sometimes, maybe men) for prurient voyeurism.
It's not that "NSFW = nudity = bad". It's that most content that would be posted under the "NSFW" banner is shallow. People just want to post pictures of naked women (and men) to masturbate to. They don't want discussion, they want wank-bank material.
I have no problem with nudity, as such. I wrote this: "If someone wants to discuss the nude in art, I would expect a little more effort than a bare link to one of these works. Maybe a few paragraphs, with links to various images, to encourage a discussion." If someone has NSFW content that will prompt high-quality discussion, that's fine. But, I fail to see how an erotic picture of a naked woman/man posted just for men/women to ogle at will prompt that high-quality discussion.
https://tildes.net/~tildes/4cz/no_nsfw_group#comment-1aim While there is certain discussion about how much gatekeeping is needed on Tildes, I definitely agree that most NSFW content (nudity or...
Please provide an example of the NSFW content you so desperately want to see here that will meet Tildes' goal…
If it's not meeting those goals, it doesn't belong here.
While there is certain discussion about how much gatekeeping is needed on Tildes, I definitely agree that most NSFW content (nudity or not) fails to meet Tildes' quality standards. However, I firmly believe there should be no special rule singling out a type of NSFW content as the general quality requirements are more than sufficient.
P.S. There is a difference between "I want NSFW content!" and "I want no a priori NSFW ban."
You didn't provide an example of the NSFW content you want to see here. I want a link to one of these supposed "high-quality content" naked pictures. Show me some "high-quality content" tits or...
You didn't provide an example of the NSFW content you want to see here. I want a link to one of these supposed "high-quality content" naked pictures. Show me some "high-quality content" tits or dick (I promise - you won't shock me). Show me how you're going to contribute to Tildes' content standards with some porn.
You keep arguing that there should be no blanket ban on porn (which you incorrectly assume covers all nudity). Show us the exceptions that would justify not having such a ban. Put up or shut up.
Consider the following topic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pubic_Wars It was discussed in depth in a blogspot blog with plenty of both text and (obviously NSFW) pictures. Just the opposite: I...
It was discussed in depth in a blogspot blog with plenty of both text and (obviously NSFW) pictures.
porn (which you incorrectly assume covers all nudity)
Just the opposite: I distinguish non-erotic nudity, erotic art, artistic erotica, slight softcore, softcore, semi-midcore, midcore, and stuff beyond midcore I am not that interested in. However, I have no illusion that if there is a blanket ban on porn, then there will be gatekeeper prudes who will see porn in anything resembling nudity.
There is no such ban. There is an informal-yet ban on porn, and now most seem to agree that this stands for NSFW for the sake of NSFW as opposed to NSFW content prompting high-quality discussion....
There is no such ban. There is an informal-yet ban on porn, and now most seem to agree that this stands for NSFW for the sake of NSFW as opposed to NSFW content prompting high-quality discussion. For this reason, I consider such an extra ban redundant.
I have met several people who could spend several hours per week watching gore (at that time it was especially rotten.com) but inferno forbid if they see a glimpse of an image whence one could...
NSFW content (by which I assume you mean pornography - correct me if I'm wrong)
I have met several people who could spend several hours per week watching gore (at that time it was especially rotten.com) but inferno forbid if they see a glimpse of an image whence one could infer that human females have nipples.
It is clear that the primary purpose of Tildes is high-quality content, and most NSFW content would not qualify.
However, I cannot understand why “porn” (be honest—you mean nudity) is to be constantly singled out. If a proposed NSFW topic does not meanmeet the quality standards, then it does not belong here, and I myself am willing to report such a topic or, if I happen to have mod powers in the group, to delete it—even if I would enjoy that content somewhere outside Tildes. But I would treat a non-NSFW LQ topic in exactly the same way.
Also, if there should be any place for “free talk” content (I have no particular opinion whether this should be allowed), then I definitely think no distinction besides proper tagging should be made between SFW and NSFW.
Because it doesn't meet the quality standards, by definition. And, no I don't mean nudity. You're misinterpreting my point. You can post nudity - whether art or porn - as long as it's high-quality...
However, I cannot understand why “porn” (be honest—you mean nudity) is to be constantly singled out.
Because it doesn't meet the quality standards, by definition.
And, no I don't mean nudity. You're misinterpreting my point. You can post nudity - whether art or porn - as long as it's high-quality content that will prompt high-quality discussion. FYI: "Check out those tits!" does not count as high-quality discussion.
(i.e., all porn doesn't meet the quality standards) (i.e., some porn can meet the quality standards) Out of these two contradictory statements of yours, I definitely support the second. FYI, while...
Because it doesn't meet the quality standards, by definition.
(i.e., all porn doesn't meet the quality standards)
You can post nudity - whether art or porn - as long as it's high-quality content that will prompt high-quality discussion.
(i.e., some porn can meet the quality standards)
Out of these two contradictory statements of yours, I definitely support the second. FYI, while I might be not as strict as you in what is high-quality and what is not, I am not that loose. I described what I would do if I saw "Check out those tits!" on Tildes in the message above.
I find it quite amusing that I essentially agree with most of your meta opinions (to the point that I simply vote on them as “I agree” replies are meaningless) with NSFW being the only exception.
Okay. I haven't been as precise with my language as I should have been. I'm pretty sure that when the OP and others like them complain about a lack of NSFW content here, they're not bemoaning the...
Out of these two contradictory statements of yours,
Okay. I haven't been as precise with my language as I should have been.
I'm pretty sure that when the OP and others like them complain about a lack of NSFW content here, they're not bemoaning the fact that they won't see Da Vinci's 'Vitruvian Man' or Botticelli's 'The Birth of Venus' here. They want to see porn. For clarity's sake, I am defining porn as nude imagery (still or moving) posted for the primary purpose of sexual enjoyment. These people want wank-bank material, not high-quality discussion about the use of the nude in art. That's the basis on which I (and, I assume, most people in these threads) am approaching this discussion.
Then you come in assuming that we are equate "NSFW" with "all nudity", while we're actually discussing porn. It makes for a messy discussion.
I am willing to concede that there may be instances of pornography which might count as high-quality content or prompt high-quality discussion (I'm waiting for you to provide an example of this). However, when someone asks "No NSFW group?", I'm willing to give a blanket "no" because I assume they want simple wank-bank material, not a discussion about sexism and exploitation in the porn industry, or the impact of certain porn movies on the development of porn as a genre - like in the 'Inside Deep Throat' documentary.
And here is the problem. There are people who consider anything resembling nudity as serving this purpose, and this is why I oppose an outright ban. The fact that there is no wank-bank group on...
for the primary purpose of sexual enjoyment
And here is the problem. There are people who consider anything resembling nudity as serving this purpose, and this is why I oppose an outright ban. The fact that there is no wank-bank group on Tildes is perfectly covered by the site's quality standards.
BTW, I recalled another example of nudity-containing content that would meet Tildes' standards but could be opposed by Prudistanis: see Medicine in
P.S. There is discussion on whether Tildes can have “free talk” content
(mentioned by Deimos in this thread, so I am not the only one). At this point I am willing to accept any outcome, but if anything like that is allowed, then I must state that the artistic value of many softcore sets exceeds that of an average pet picture (though, in general, boobs and gallowboobs are more or less at the same level).
This is ridiculous. You're arguing against a strawman. No one in this thread is arguing for an outright ban of all NSFW content. Yes, those prudish opinions exist in the world. They're not...
There are people who consider anything resembling nudity as serving this purpose, and this is why I oppose an outright ban.
This is ridiculous. You're arguing against a strawman. No one in this thread is arguing for an outright ban of all NSFW content. Yes, those prudish opinions exist in the world. They're not currently being advocated for here.
The original question of this thread was asking why there's no top-level ~nsfw group. That's been answered pretty thoroughly. You're now debating a side issue that as far as I can tell isn't an actual problem Tildes currently has - that of high-quality content that otherwise fits on Tildes, and someone wanting it removed because it also contains some sexually suggestive content.
People reading this thread might also be interested in this previous discussion: "What is tildes' take on NSFW content?" Also, discussions like this about Tildes are best suited to ~tildes: "Meta...
Also, discussions like this about Tildes are best suited to ~tildes: "Meta discussion about Tildes itself, including questions, suggestions, and bug reports".
There are plenty of sites on the web without porn. Hardly any need to become one of them. Really, the incessant repetition of this fallacy is getting ridiculous.
There are plenty of sites on the web without porn. Hardly any need to become one of them.
Really, the incessant repetition of this fallacy is getting ridiculous.
The default content-and-comment website is full of memes and fluff, why deviate from the default? A/the declared purpose of Tildes is high-quality content and discussion. As I have stated many...
why deviate from the default?
The default content-and-comment website is full of memes and fluff, why deviate from the default?
A/the declared purpose of Tildes is high-quality content and discussion. As I have stated many times, I agree that most NSFW content is low-quality, but I see no reason to single out circlejerk, gore, memes, nudity, porn (not the same as nudity), trolling, or any other low-quality content.
However, if a topic is presented in a way implying high-quality discussion, then it should be allowed. The “plenty of other sites for…” approach would result in packs of petulant gatekeepers invading any such topic (not unlike what happened to the topic discussing all episodes of some show a month of so ago).
I would say what is need is an NSFW tag rather than a separate group. As noted by others, NSFW is heterogeneous with the only common thing being that it is, well, not suitable for viewing at work....
I would say what is need is an NSFW tag rather than a separate group. As noted by others, NSFW is heterogeneous with the only common thing being that it is, well, not suitable for viewing at work.
I still can imagine a future subgroup which would be NSFW-only: ~art.erotica or ~creative.art.erotica, where it would be possible to discuss e.g. trends in erotic art and artistic erotica (as opposed to merely posting links to new sets). Another example I can imagine is a subgroup dedicated to nudism where relevant places and events would be discussed (as opposed to posting mere photos).
As for non–nudity related NSFW, I cannot quickly come up with high-quality subgroup ideas, but maybe there are other Tildes users who can think of a subgroup around videos with excessive foul language or even around gore (I have no expertise—thank you for understanding).
Fortunately, we can already do this -- if there's a piece of content that is worth discussing that happens to be NSFW, it can be posted to the appropriate group with a NSFW tag. The thing that...
I would say what is need is an NSFW tag rather than a separate group.
Fortunately, we can already do this -- if there's a piece of content that is worth discussing that happens to be NSFW, it can be posted to the appropriate group with a NSFW tag. The thing that many folks here have an objection to is content that is inherently NSFW - i.e., gore or porn. Many of these inherently NSFW topics invite low effort discussion, and I think it would be foolish to include such content at such an early stage of the site when we don't have any moderation controls beyond what people post and what Deimos decides to remove. We can easily revisit the inclusion of NSFW content at a later date once things like the trust / reputation system and comprehensive subgroups are fully implemented.
Some mixture of it complicating the kinds of grants and such that Deimos would want to apply for, the extra effort that it would require to moderate, and it just not being within the goals of the...
Some mixture of it complicating the kinds of grants and such that Deimos would want to apply for, the extra effort that it would require to moderate, and it just not being within the goals of the site.
I believe it's been said that nsfw topics may be opened up for productive discussions (like sexual health or something), but something like outright porn won't happen. Personally, I think this place has the potential to be great for healthy and higher-effort pornographic content / discussion, but it won't happen.
@Deimos and others, one of the main reasons why I decided to disinvest myself from Reddit (in addition to the well-known commercialisation) is the lack of honesty and sincerity in the way Reddit's...
the kinds of grants and such that Deimos would want to apply for
one of the main reasons why I decided to disinvest myself from Reddit (in addition to the well-known commercialisation) is the lack of honesty and sincerity in the way Reddit's current leadership justifies the changes they make on Reddit. A very good example is the purge of several alcohol- and guns-related subs several months ago, which was explained by Reddit “not being a marketplace” even though it was almost immediately noted in the discussion that the most probable reason was FOSTA/SESTA.
If the real reason is that someone I would call the government of Prudistan is willing to finance Tildes in exchange for any content not satisfying the 19th century standards being outright prohibited, why don't you state it explicitly in a place easily found by anyone (such as the blog or the introductory message)? In this case, I would like to express hope that such contingent funding will be avoided, if not completely then from some point in the future.
I imagine because most users won't be coming with the expectation that it would be there in the first place, honestly. As much as I would like to carve out a space for higher-effort pornographic...
I imagine because most users won't be coming with the expectation that it would be there in the first place, honestly. As much as I would like to carve out a space for higher-effort pornographic content and discussion (because I actually have a huge problem with it being treated as disposable because it's for sexual gratification instead of some other feeling), there's nothing about ~ that made me think porn would be on here.
It's not that nudity in general is disallowed, so I don't really see much of a problem. Anyway, with the constant debate about high quality content on this site, introducing something like ~porn would be a giant pain in the ass for little gain. Simplicity of acquiring grants and maintaining nonprofit status may be factors, but that's not all there is to it.
I'm not exactly mad at Deimos for not sending out a notification to all users telling us "oh btw there's no porn because I'm going for a grant and also even if that falls through there still won't be porn," I don't see the point. It seems to me like Deimos is being pretty open about this, there's not porn because it's not a porn site. That isn't something every user needs to be spoonfed, it's pretty self-explanatory if you know what the site is about.
I do not understand why I am in the minority with my opinion that a porn (or erotic in general) site is a site whose primary purpose is porn/erotic content, and NOT a site which does not outright...
there's not porn because it's not a porn site
I do not understand why I am in the minority with my opinion that a porn (or erotic in general) site is a site whose primary purpose is porn/erotic content, and NOT a site which does not outright prohibit that kind of content anywhere.
To make my point clearer, I would start with slightly changing the citation above:
There's not low-quality content because it's not a low-quality content site.
I am not for a group for any type of low-quality content (there is a discussion whether anything like “free talk” will be allowed, but I do not have any particular opinion and will accept any outcome).
I am against singling out any type of low-quality content. Either a topic meets the quality standards of the group it is submitted to or not.
However, if anything legal is outright prohibited, then expect a giant pain in the ass due to prude hordes petulantly attacking any topics they would judge as wrong. For example, someone posts an hour-long video of a theater performance which includes 15 seconds of nudity, and the discussion will be overtaken by gatekeepers whining that the whole thing is filthy porn.
I'm going to leave this at "I disagree," as I imagine this immediately turns into an argument about the political beliefs you've mentioned and my own opinion on how Reddit has trained people to...
I am against singling out any type of low-quality content. Either a topic meets the quality standards of the group it is submitted to or not.
I'm going to leave this at "I disagree," as I imagine this immediately turns into an argument about the political beliefs you've mentioned and my own opinion on how Reddit has trained people to think about their posts, and I'm not interested in following this as far down the line as it would require.
However, if anything legal is outright prohibited, then expect a giant pain in the ass due to prude hordes petulantly attacking any topics they would judge as wrong.
It seems that the line has been drawn at pornography. Both a documentary that contains sexual content and an album with a nude drawing on the cover have been posted and did fine. This is the way things work on most of the internet that adults inhabit, and I'd say a cover like that is in the same realm as a play with a bit of nudity in it. As long as they're tagged, things go smoothly and someone causing a scene about it is quite rare. I assure you, things will be fine and coming up with a horror story of how it could train the users of the site to rally against all things nude is a bit silly.
I can only hope that you are right but, unfortunately, there have already been cases of excessive gatekeeping on Tildes (example). Scenes were caused. For this reason I think there is no need for...
I can only hope that you are right but, unfortunately, there have already been cases of excessive gatekeeping on Tildes (example). Scenes were caused. For this reason I think there is no need for a special “no porn” rule as it is well covered by the general “no low quality” one.
We definitely have a gatekeeping problem, but isn't this the reverse? There the problem stems from there not being strict rules, so users take it upon themselves to discuss if something is high...
We definitely have a gatekeeping problem, but isn't this the reverse? There the problem stems from there not being strict rules, so users take it upon themselves to discuss if something is high quality enough. Isn't that exactly what's introduced by not disallowing NSFW content and deciding post-by-post if it's low quality?
I don't think either of those things should be outright banned, but not outright banning them makes the whole gatekeeping thing worse. Your argument here seems at odds with itself. Like, you're saying the "no low quality" rule is enough while posting an example of gatekeeping directly caused by that rule being the only thing in mind.
It is just the other way round. The current problem with the “no low quality” rule is that different users have different ideas about what is and what is not low quality (and there are no...
It is just the other way round. The current problem with the “no low quality” rule is that different users have different ideas about what is and what is not low quality (and there are no established moderation mechanisms as was and is discussed elsewhere), so there are inevitably boundary cases. In other words, the rule is fuzzy.
If the “no porn” rule is added, then there will be two fuzzy rules, and some high-quality content containing nudity will be attacked by zealots as porn.
A non-fuzzy rule like “no NSFW” would indeed mitigate the gatekeeping problem, but the price would be too high.
Why haven't most other sites that have rules like this fallen apart? What is unique about ~ that would cause a huge problem that doesn't hurt...anywhere else? There are definitely border cases of...
Why haven't most other sites that have rules like this fallen apart? What is unique about ~ that would cause a huge problem that doesn't hurt...anywhere else? There are definitely border cases of things where it's difficult to say if something's porn or not...but those generally won't comply with the quality rule. I have a hard time seeing it happening often, and it hasn't shown to spill over into anything else.
Tildes wants to mainly cultivate high quality discussion and NSFW content is typically lacking in high level discussion. Although the main reason there's not a NSFW group is just that there hasn't...
Tildes wants to mainly cultivate high quality discussion and NSFW content is typically lacking in high level discussion. Although the main reason there's not a NSFW group is just that there hasn't been a need for it. Groups are created based the frequency of posts that could be grouped together under a particular umbrella. So if we had more posts focused around high-quality discussions that were NSFW in nature there might be a NSFW group created.
Firstly legal reasons, the cost & liability related to user-submitted porn is rather immense, and Canada (where the site is hosted) has additional laws that cover some things that the US doesn't...
Firstly legal reasons, the cost & liability related to user-submitted porn is rather immense, and Canada (where the site is hosted) has additional laws that cover some things that the US doesn't meaning that a reasonably well-meaning US poster could post stuff that's illegal in Canada. I'm not sure Deimos wants to sift through porn all day looking for stuff that needs to be reported to the police and scrubbed from the site.
Additionally, PORN like others have said is mostly low effort content (link aggregation mostly), I think there's probably value & discussion to be had in NSFW Topics akin to what /r/sex offers (discussion of NSFW topics, and only links for reference) though.
It attracts a certain kind of people who only post "ermahgerd nice a$$, can I cum on ur titties" type of content. It would also bring no value to Tildes, since the number of porn sites is...
It attracts a certain kind of people who only post "ermahgerd nice a$$, can I cum on ur titties" type of content. It would also bring no value to Tildes, since the number of porn sites is immeasurable at this point.
Why? Tildes fosters discussion in all sorts of ways, like choices about placing the reply box so you have to read through other responses first. Most NSFW content doesn't foster discussion. You...
Why?
Tildes fosters discussion in all sorts of ways, like choices about placing the reply box so you have to read through other responses first.
Most NSFW content doesn't foster discussion. You enjoy the content, or not, and then vote up or down. There aren't a whole lot of in-depth discussions about it.
However, as you can find on other threads like this one, discussing whether or not NSFW things are appropriate, Tildes has no problem with discussing hard topics, like cultures of abuse and how to help, or things along the lines of public concerns.
Shock-value violent images, (Look! I broke my foot and the bone is showing!), or sexually alluring images, (Check out this sexy thing!), don't foster that kind of culture where we're willing to talk things through. So it doesn't belong.
And that's before we talk about the laws, and the grants that fund the site, and all sorts of other difficult steps that would be required to be taken.
?????? Can you provide any numbers? I am a libertarian type, and I never use a priori filtering, so none of my Reddit accounts has the NSFW filter on for content display or for searching. However,...
Reddit is majority porn.
??????
Can you provide any numbers?
I am a libertarian type, and I never use a priori filtering, so none of my Reddit accounts has the NSFW filter on for content display or for searching. However, when I search for an SFW keyword, I cannot remember a single case when an NSFW result was on the first page.
This is the list of the biggest subreddits: http://redditmetrics.com/top/
the highest porn sub is gonewild at the 62nd (sixty-second) place.
Browse r/all top this hour any time of day Traffic stats would be more indicative than subscriber numbers for obvious reasons Reddit definitely alters their algorithms in attempts to hide the...
(I have 100 items on display, not the default 25; I exclusively use the standard Reddit, not the so-called Redesign) 7/100 to 12/100 NSFW items (0 or 1 in top 25); I tried...
(I have 100 items on display, not the default 25; I exclusively use the standard Reddit, not the so-called Redesign) 7/100 to 12/100 NSFW items (0 or 1 in top 25); I tried https://www.reddit.com/r/all/new/ instead, which is better as it changes completely every minute: 9/100 to 15/100. Certainly, I would need to repeat this e.g. every 10 minutes for at least full 24 hours, but I hardly believe that the typical average is above 50/100.
I would like to see numbers (unique visitors are more indicative than page views IMHO).
Or maybe a typical Redditor just prefers gallowboobs to boobs?
Amount of individual posts is irrelevant, so I urge you to acquire traffic stats screencaps for r/gonewild, r/nsfw, r/nsfw_gifs, etc. from their mods and report back. I can supply stats from...
Amount of individual posts is irrelevant, so I urge you to acquire traffic stats screencaps for r/gonewild, r/nsfw, r/nsfw_gifs, etc. from their mods and report back. I can supply stats from r/videos to compare. Several top nsfw subreddits will over take any regular default in numbers I’d bet.
I agree that the best metric is from traffic stats. I would even suggest acquiring NSFW vs non-NSFW stats from Reddit admins. However, it is you and not me who makes the argument that Reddit is...
I agree that the best metric is from traffic stats. I would even suggest acquiring NSFW vs non-NSFW stats from Reddit admins.
However, it is you and not me who makes the argument that Reddit is majority porn.
I'm pretty sure @deimos has mentioned porn being a huge portion of the traffic for reddit on a similar topic to this one from ages ago. Now, whether it outperforms the non-porn on the site, I have...
I'm pretty sure @deimos has mentioned porn being a huge portion of the traffic for reddit on a similar topic to this one from ages ago. Now, whether it outperforms the non-porn on the site, I have no idea for sure, but I doubt it.
This is veering off the topic of NSFW posts, but...please recognize you're in the minority on this, and don't try too hard to apply your political beliefs about government to the way a private...
I am a libertarian type
This is veering off the topic of NSFW posts, but...please recognize you're in the minority on this, and don't try too hard to apply your political beliefs about government to the way a private website like Tildes is run.
Part of what I'm trying to escape by coming here from reddit is libertarian moderators who seem to believe that banning trolls violates the Non-Aggression Principle, and that the 1st Amendment protects the right to shitpost.
Do not worry, I am a libertarian type, not a full libertarian (and not an American BTW). While on Tildes, I adhere to the basic principles of Tildes such as no low-quality or not being an asshole...
Do not worry, I am a libertarian type, not a full libertarian (and not an American BTW). While on Tildes, I adhere to the basic principles of Tildes such as no low-quality or not being an asshole (this is known as code switching).
I don't necessarily have an objection to NSFW content on Tildes in general. I do have an objection to NSFW content on Tildes right now — here's why: The goal of Tildes is to provide a system that...
I don't necessarily have an objection to NSFW content on Tildes in general. I do have an objection to NSFW content on Tildes right now — here's why:
The goal of Tildes is to provide a system that is robust enough to effectively self moderate towards high--quality content and discussion.
Most inherently NSFW topics, such as porn and gore, have a high bar to clear when it comes to spurring high-quality discussion, and as such require strict moderation to ensure quality.
We're still at a really early stage of the site and we have almost no actual moderation controls.
Therefore, we should not have inherently NSFW topics or groups on Tildes until we have better controls in place. I think we should continue the discussion over whether or not we should have NSFW groups at that time. My guess is we'll be able to find a solution.
To me, the question regarding NSFW content (by which I assume you mean pornography - correct me if I'm wrong) on Tildes is not "Why not?" but "Why?" What's the point of adding pornography to a site where the philosophy is that "in-depth content (primarily text-based) is the most important"?
Different websites have different purposes. You won't be able to use Tildes for lots of things: for shopping, for banking, for watching movies/shows, for booking concert tickets, for job-searching, for looking up bus/train timetables, and so on. Why is porn the exception? Why do you need porn on a website for discussion? Why can't you go to XTube or the millions of porn sites out there?
Different websites specialise in different things, and that's perfectly all right. Not all sites need to be all things to all people.
Oh, that's a shame. I thought tildes was a Reddit alternative.
Being a Reddit alternative is not the same as being a Reddit clone. If Tildes did everything exactly the same as Reddit, then there would be no point in having Tildes at all.
If I'm looking for a hamburger, I can go to McDonald's or I can go to an up-market burger shop. I might not be able to get everything that's available at McDonald's (like thickshakes or apple pies) at the other burger shop, but it's still an alternative to McDonald's.
A reddit alternative is fundamentally going to have the same problems as reddit itself. If we’re hoping to avoid those problems then @Demios has to make choices that are different than Reddit’s. Not necessarily better, just with different goals in mind
There is a very serious problem with the knee-jerk attitude against NSFW content exhibited by some users here.
I have to agree with those people that most NSFW (which they keep calling porn while actually meaning nudity) content would not exactly match the goals of Tildes, just as memes would not either.
However, I deeply disagree with both the NSFW≡porn≡nudity PoV and with the outright prohibition of NSFW. IMNSHO, if a topic can produce meaningful discussion and is legal, then it should be allowed—provided that it is properly tagged.
In addition, if any “free talk” topics or even groups are ever allowed, then I believe no distinction should be made between NSFW and non-NSFW low-quality content.
The vagueness of the "not safe for work" label might be part of the problem. Usually it's taken to mean that if you're browsing reddit or another site on your work computer, anything that would embarrass you / get you in trouble if someone happened to glance over your shoulder. That narrow definition tends to limit it to images that are fairly obviously prurient or sexual in nature.
However, it could also be interpreted more broadly, to mean anything that might get blocked by filtering software, if your company IT department installed it.
Tildes focus is on high quality, text-based content, so the first type of NSFW content is likely to be excluded based on being low-effort / image-based anyway, regardless of whether it's of a sexual nature.
The broader definition of NSFW is where there's a grey area, I think. An article on the history of prostitution over time could certainly be on-topic for Tildes. If that article included paintings or photographs of 19th century prostitutes as a complement to the text, it might deserve a "be careful reading this at work" tag, despite not being pornographic.
https://tildes.net/~tildes/35u/what_is_tildes_take_on_nsfw_content#comment-ysm
You've misinterpreted my point there. I even said this:
It's not that "NSFW = nudity = bad". It's that most content that would be posted under the "NSFW" banner is shallow. People just want to post pictures of naked women (and men) to masturbate to. They don't want discussion, they want wank-bank material.
I have no problem with nudity, as such. I wrote this: "If someone wants to discuss the nude in art, I would expect a little more effort than a bare link to one of these works. Maybe a few paragraphs, with links to various images, to encourage a discussion." If someone has NSFW content that will prompt high-quality discussion, that's fine. But, I fail to see how an erotic picture of a naked woman/man posted just for men/women to ogle at will prompt that high-quality discussion.
Please provide an example of the NSFW content you so desperately want to see here that will meet Tildes' goal of "high-quality content and discussions", where "in-depth content (primarily text-based) is the most important". If it's not meeting those goals, it doesn't belong here.
https://tildes.net/~tildes/4cz/no_nsfw_group#comment-1aim
While there is certain discussion about how much gatekeeping is needed on Tildes, I definitely agree that most NSFW content (nudity or not) fails to meet Tildes' quality standards. However, I firmly believe there should be no special rule singling out a type of NSFW content as the general quality requirements are more than sufficient.
P.S. There is a difference between "I want NSFW content!" and "I want no a priori NSFW ban."
You didn't provide an example of the NSFW content you want to see here. I want a link to one of these supposed "high-quality content" naked pictures. Show me some "high-quality content" tits or dick (I promise - you won't shock me). Show me how you're going to contribute to Tildes' content standards with some porn.
You keep arguing that there should be no blanket ban on porn (which you incorrectly assume covers all nudity). Show us the exceptions that would justify not having such a ban. Put up or shut up.
Consider the following topic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pubic_Wars
It was discussed in depth in a blogspot blog with plenty of both text and (obviously NSFW) pictures.
Just the opposite: I distinguish non-erotic nudity, erotic art, artistic erotica, slight softcore, softcore, semi-midcore, midcore, and stuff beyond midcore I am not that interested in. However, I have no illusion that if there is a blanket ban on porn, then there will be gatekeeper prudes who will see porn in anything resembling nudity.
@Deimos
Tagging doesn't work. If you want to report my comment to Deimos, you need to send him a message.
Is there, in fact, an a priori ban on NSFW content? If so, where is that specified?
There is no such ban. There is an informal-yet ban on porn, and now most seem to agree that this stands for NSFW for the sake of NSFW as opposed to NSFW content prompting high-quality discussion. For this reason, I consider such an extra ban redundant.
I have met several people who could spend several hours per week watching gore (at that time it was especially rotten.com) but inferno forbid if they see a glimpse of an image whence one could infer that human females have nipples.
It is clear that the primary purpose of Tildes is high-quality content, and most NSFW content would not qualify.
However, I cannot understand why “porn” (be honest—you mean nudity) is to be constantly singled out. If a proposed NSFW topic does not
meanmeet the quality standards, then it does not belong here, and I myself am willing to report such a topic or, if I happen to have mod powers in the group, to delete it—even if I would enjoy that content somewhere outside Tildes. But I would treat a non-NSFW LQ topic in exactly the same way.Also, if there should be any place for “free talk” content (I have no particular opinion whether this should be allowed), then I definitely think no distinction besides proper tagging should be made between SFW and NSFW.
Because it doesn't meet the quality standards, by definition.
And, no I don't mean nudity. You're misinterpreting my point. You can post nudity - whether art or porn - as long as it's high-quality content that will prompt high-quality discussion. FYI: "Check out those tits!" does not count as high-quality discussion.
(i.e., all porn doesn't meet the quality standards)
(i.e., some porn can meet the quality standards)
Out of these two contradictory statements of yours, I definitely support the second. FYI, while I might be not as strict as you in what is high-quality and what is not, I am not that loose. I described what I would do if I saw "Check out those tits!" on Tildes in the message above.
I find it quite amusing that I essentially agree with most of your meta opinions (to the point that I simply vote on them as “I agree” replies are meaningless) with NSFW being the only exception.
Okay. I haven't been as precise with my language as I should have been.
I'm pretty sure that when the OP and others like them complain about a lack of NSFW content here, they're not bemoaning the fact that they won't see Da Vinci's 'Vitruvian Man' or Botticelli's 'The Birth of Venus' here. They want to see porn. For clarity's sake, I am defining porn as nude imagery (still or moving) posted for the primary purpose of sexual enjoyment. These people want wank-bank material, not high-quality discussion about the use of the nude in art. That's the basis on which I (and, I assume, most people in these threads) am approaching this discussion.
Then you come in assuming that we are equate "NSFW" with "all nudity", while we're actually discussing porn. It makes for a messy discussion.
I am willing to concede that there may be instances of pornography which might count as high-quality content or prompt high-quality discussion (I'm waiting for you to provide an example of this). However, when someone asks "No NSFW group?", I'm willing to give a blanket "no" because I assume they want simple wank-bank material, not a discussion about sexism and exploitation in the porn industry, or the impact of certain porn movies on the development of porn as a genre - like in the 'Inside Deep Throat' documentary.
And here is the problem. There are people who consider anything resembling nudity as serving this purpose, and this is why I oppose an outright ban. The fact that there is no wank-bank group on Tildes is perfectly covered by the site's quality standards.
BTW, I recalled another example of nudity-containing content that would meet Tildes' standards but could be opposed by Prudistanis: see Medicine in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ig_Nobel_Prize_winners#2002
P.S. There is discussion on whether Tildes can have “free talk” content
(mentioned by Deimos in this thread, so I am not the only one). At this point I am willing to accept any outcome, but if anything like that is allowed, then I must state that the artistic value of many softcore sets exceeds that of an average pet picture (though, in general, boobs and gallowboobs are more or less at the same level).
This is ridiculous. You're arguing against a strawman. No one in this thread is arguing for an outright ban of all NSFW content. Yes, those prudish opinions exist in the world. They're not currently being advocated for here.
The original question of this thread was asking why there's no top-level ~nsfw group. That's been answered pretty thoroughly. You're now debating a side issue that as far as I can tell isn't an actual problem Tildes currently has - that of high-quality content that otherwise fits on Tildes, and someone wanting it removed because it also contains some sexually suggestive content.
Just FYI: I'm not continuing this discussion.
People reading this thread might also be interested in this previous discussion: "What is tildes' take on NSFW content?"
Also, discussions like this about Tildes are best suited to ~tildes: "Meta discussion about Tildes itself, including questions, suggestions, and bug reports".
There are plenty of sites on the web for porn. Hardly any need to become one of them.
There are plenty of sites on the web without porn. Hardly any need to become one of them.
Really, the incessant repetition of this fallacy is getting ridiculous.
The default content-and-comment website is full of memes and fluff, why deviate from the default?
A/the declared purpose of Tildes is high-quality content and discussion. As I have stated many times, I agree that most NSFW content is low-quality, but I see no reason to single out circlejerk, gore, memes, nudity, porn (not the same as nudity), trolling, or any other low-quality content.
However, if a topic is presented in a way implying high-quality discussion, then it should be allowed. The “plenty of other sites for…” approach would result in packs of petulant gatekeepers invading any such topic (not unlike what happened to the topic discussing all episodes of some show a month of so ago).
I would say what is need is an NSFW tag rather than a separate group. As noted by others, NSFW is heterogeneous with the only common thing being that it is, well, not suitable for viewing at work.
I still can imagine a future subgroup which would be NSFW-only: ~art.erotica or ~creative.art.erotica, where it would be possible to discuss e.g. trends in erotic art and artistic erotica (as opposed to merely posting links to new sets). Another example I can imagine is a subgroup dedicated to nudism where relevant places and events would be discussed (as opposed to posting mere photos).
As for non–nudity related NSFW, I cannot quickly come up with high-quality subgroup ideas, but maybe there are other Tildes users who can think of a subgroup around videos with excessive foul language or even around gore (I have no expertise—thank you for understanding).
Fortunately, we can already do this -- if there's a piece of content that is worth discussing that happens to be NSFW, it can be posted to the appropriate group with a NSFW tag. The thing that many folks here have an objection to is content that is inherently NSFW - i.e., gore or porn. Many of these inherently NSFW topics invite low effort discussion, and I think it would be foolish to include such content at such an early stage of the site when we don't have any moderation controls beyond what people post and what Deimos decides to remove. We can easily revisit the inclusion of NSFW content at a later date once things like the trust / reputation system and comprehensive subgroups are fully implemented.
As I understand it, this possibility hasn't been ruled out.
https://tildes.net/~tildes/4cz/no_nsfw_group#comment-1aib
Some mixture of it complicating the kinds of grants and such that Deimos would want to apply for, the extra effort that it would require to moderate, and it just not being within the goals of the site.
I believe it's been said that nsfw topics may be opened up for productive discussions (like sexual health or something), but something like outright porn won't happen. Personally, I think this place has the potential to be great for healthy and higher-effort pornographic content / discussion, but it won't happen.
@Deimos and others,
one of the main reasons why I decided to disinvest myself from Reddit (in addition to the well-known commercialisation) is the lack of honesty and sincerity in the way Reddit's current leadership justifies the changes they make on Reddit. A very good example is the purge of several alcohol- and guns-related subs several months ago, which was explained by Reddit “not being a marketplace” even though it was almost immediately noted in the discussion that the most probable reason was FOSTA/SESTA.
If the real reason is that someone I would call the government of Prudistan is willing to finance Tildes in exchange for any content not satisfying the 19th century standards being outright prohibited, why don't you state it explicitly in a place easily found by anyone (such as the blog or the introductory message)? In this case, I would like to express hope that such contingent funding will be avoided, if not completely then from some point in the future.
I imagine because most users won't be coming with the expectation that it would be there in the first place, honestly. As much as I would like to carve out a space for higher-effort pornographic content and discussion (because I actually have a huge problem with it being treated as disposable because it's for sexual gratification instead of some other feeling), there's nothing about ~ that made me think porn would be on here.
It's not that nudity in general is disallowed, so I don't really see much of a problem. Anyway, with the constant debate about high quality content on this site, introducing something like ~porn would be a giant pain in the ass for little gain. Simplicity of acquiring grants and maintaining nonprofit status may be factors, but that's not all there is to it.
I'm not exactly mad at Deimos for not sending out a notification to all users telling us "oh btw there's no porn because I'm going for a grant and also even if that falls through there still won't be porn," I don't see the point. It seems to me like Deimos is being pretty open about this, there's not porn because it's not a porn site. That isn't something every user needs to be spoonfed, it's pretty self-explanatory if you know what the site is about.
I do not understand why I am in the minority with my opinion that a porn (or erotic in general) site is a site whose primary purpose is porn/erotic content, and NOT a site which does not outright prohibit that kind of content anywhere.
To make my point clearer, I would start with slightly changing the citation above:
There's not low-quality content because it's not a low-quality content site.
I am not for a group for any type of low-quality content (there is a discussion whether anything like “free talk” will be allowed, but I do not have any particular opinion and will accept any outcome).
I am against singling out any type of low-quality content. Either a topic meets the quality standards of the group it is submitted to or not.
However, if anything legal is outright prohibited, then expect a giant pain in the ass due to prude hordes petulantly attacking any topics they would judge as wrong. For example, someone posts an hour-long video of a theater performance which includes 15 seconds of nudity, and the discussion will be overtaken by gatekeepers whining that the whole thing is filthy porn.
I'm going to leave this at "I disagree," as I imagine this immediately turns into an argument about the political beliefs you've mentioned and my own opinion on how Reddit has trained people to think about their posts, and I'm not interested in following this as far down the line as it would require.
It seems that the line has been drawn at pornography. Both a documentary that contains sexual content and an album with a nude drawing on the cover have been posted and did fine. This is the way things work on most of the internet that adults inhabit, and I'd say a cover like that is in the same realm as a play with a bit of nudity in it. As long as they're tagged, things go smoothly and someone causing a scene about it is quite rare. I assure you, things will be fine and coming up with a horror story of how it could train the users of the site to rally against all things nude is a bit silly.
I can only hope that you are right but, unfortunately, there have already been cases of excessive gatekeeping on Tildes (example). Scenes were caused. For this reason I think there is no need for a special “no porn” rule as it is well covered by the general “no low quality” one.
We definitely have a gatekeeping problem, but isn't this the reverse? There the problem stems from there not being strict rules, so users take it upon themselves to discuss if something is high quality enough. Isn't that exactly what's introduced by not disallowing NSFW content and deciding post-by-post if it's low quality?
I don't think either of those things should be outright banned, but not outright banning them makes the whole gatekeeping thing worse. Your argument here seems at odds with itself. Like, you're saying the "no low quality" rule is enough while posting an example of gatekeeping directly caused by that rule being the only thing in mind.
It is just the other way round. The current problem with the “no low quality” rule is that different users have different ideas about what is and what is not low quality (and there are no established moderation mechanisms as was and is discussed elsewhere), so there are inevitably boundary cases. In other words, the rule is fuzzy.
If the “no porn” rule is added, then there will be two fuzzy rules, and some high-quality content containing nudity will be attacked by zealots as porn.
A non-fuzzy rule like “no NSFW” would indeed mitigate the gatekeeping problem, but the price would be too high.
Why haven't most other sites that have rules like this fallen apart? What is unique about ~ that would cause a huge problem that doesn't hurt...anywhere else? There are definitely border cases of things where it's difficult to say if something's porn or not...but those generally won't comply with the quality rule. I have a hard time seeing it happening often, and it hasn't shown to spill over into anything else.
Tildes wants to mainly cultivate high quality discussion and NSFW content is typically lacking in high level discussion. Although the main reason there's not a NSFW group is just that there hasn't been a need for it. Groups are created based the frequency of posts that could be grouped together under a particular umbrella. So if we had more posts focused around high-quality discussions that were NSFW in nature there might be a NSFW group created.
Firstly legal reasons, the cost & liability related to user-submitted porn is rather immense, and Canada (where the site is hosted) has additional laws that cover some things that the US doesn't meaning that a reasonably well-meaning US poster could post stuff that's illegal in Canada. I'm not sure Deimos wants to sift through porn all day looking for stuff that needs to be reported to the police and scrubbed from the site.
Additionally, PORN like others have said is mostly low effort content (link aggregation mostly), I think there's probably value & discussion to be had in NSFW Topics akin to what /r/sex offers (discussion of NSFW topics, and only links for reference) though.
It attracts a certain kind of people who only post "ermahgerd nice a$$, can I cum on ur titties" type of content. It would also bring no value to Tildes, since the number of porn sites is immeasurable at this point.
NSFW content doesn't necessarily foster productive conversations, but I can see how it might attract certain users to the site in the future
Why?
Tildes fosters discussion in all sorts of ways, like choices about placing the reply box so you have to read through other responses first.
Most NSFW content doesn't foster discussion. You enjoy the content, or not, and then vote up or down. There aren't a whole lot of in-depth discussions about it.
However, as you can find on other threads like this one, discussing whether or not NSFW things are appropriate, Tildes has no problem with discussing hard topics, like cultures of abuse and how to help, or things along the lines of public concerns.
Shock-value violent images, (Look! I broke my foot and the bone is showing!), or sexually alluring images, (Check out this sexy thing!), don't foster that kind of culture where we're willing to talk things through. So it doesn't belong.
And that's before we talk about the laws, and the grants that fund the site, and all sorts of other difficult steps that would be required to be taken.
Reddit is majority porn. Can't open that can of worms.
??????
Can you provide any numbers?
I am a libertarian type, and I never use a priori filtering, so none of my Reddit accounts has the NSFW filter on for content display or for searching. However, when I search for an SFW keyword, I cannot remember a single case when an NSFW result was on the first page.
This is the list of the biggest subreddits:
http://redditmetrics.com/top/
the highest porn sub is
gonewildat the 62nd (sixty-second) place.How does this make Reddit “majority porn”?
??????
Browse r/all top this hour any time of day
Traffic stats would be more indicative than subscriber numbers for obvious reasons
Reddit definitely alters their algorithms in attempts to hide the copious amounts of porn subreddits
Amount of individual posts is irrelevant, so I urge you to acquire traffic stats screencaps for r/gonewild, r/nsfw, r/nsfw_gifs, etc. from their mods and report back. I can supply stats from r/videos to compare. Several top nsfw subreddits will over take any regular default in numbers I’d bet.
I agree that the best metric is from traffic stats. I would even suggest acquiring NSFW vs non-NSFW stats from Reddit admins.
However, it is you and not me who makes the argument that Reddit is majority porn.
I'm pretty sure @deimos has mentioned porn being a huge portion of the traffic for reddit on a similar topic to this one from ages ago. Now, whether it outperforms the non-porn on the site, I have no idea for sure, but I doubt it.
This is veering off the topic of NSFW posts, but...please recognize you're in the minority on this, and don't try too hard to apply your political beliefs about government to the way a private website like Tildes is run.
Part of what I'm trying to escape by coming here from reddit is libertarian moderators who seem to believe that banning trolls violates the Non-Aggression Principle, and that the 1st Amendment protects the right to shitpost.
Do not worry, I am a libertarian type, not a full libertarian (and not an American BTW). While on Tildes, I adhere to the basic principles of Tildes such as no low-quality or not being an asshole (this is known as code switching).
Why?
Because it's not necessary here, especially in the early stages of the site's growth,.
I don't necessarily have an objection to NSFW content on Tildes in general. I do have an objection to NSFW content on Tildes right now — here's why: