›
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE

Simplifying the NSFW rule

glennmagusharveyglennmagusharvey
edited 2013-05-17 12:45:19 in IJBM meta
Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human

The recent NSFW thread has made me go back and examine the rules that we have on NSFW material.


I was thinking (along with Naas) about changing the current rule about NSFW stuff -- right now it says to mark the thread and the links inside -- to simply saying that NSFW links stay in NSFW-marked threads, and you don't have to mark the links themselves NSFW, because that would be redundant.  And simply bar NSFW links outside NSFW-marked threads.


So there's just one thing: marking threads NSFW.  NSFW threads are fair game for everything, threads not marked NSFW shall not have NSFW content.


What do y'all think of this simplification?


 


(Moved from IJBMer updates to separate thread.)


Comments

  • Naas_HumanNaas_Human
    edited 2013-05-17 12:50:36

    Alternatively, no need for NSFW warnings in the thread title so long as the posts themselves carry that warning. Which is sort of closer to what I was thinking, and probably helps in situations like @InsanityAddict described in updates (i.e. one NSFW link related to a mostly SFW topic)


    And in case anyone's wondering, I don't think being allowed to embed NSFW images in your posts is an option.

  • glennmagusharveyglennmagusharvey
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human

    A reply from @InsanityAddict before I moved to this thread:


    I'd say keep the old rules. Plenty of times something NSFW is relevant to what should otherwise be an SFW thread(be it a news site with icky ads, a post in Updates that doesn't warrant its own thread but still is NSFW, etc.).


    Actually, that's another idea.  Combining IA's and Naas's, we could keep NSFW content off the site but simply allow links to NSFW content.  We could further combine that with the old rules and say that NSFW threads don't need NSFW post warnings but outside, they do.

  • Naas_HumanNaas_Human
    edited 2013-05-21 11:38:08

    If we remove the need for redundant NSFW warning (as in, thread title and post) can/should some threads have their NSFW labels removed? I think with the image dump thread, all posts with nsfw links carry that warning anyway, and I don't think people expect links in that thread to be nsfw by default since it's a pretty general-purpose thing.

  • PonicalicaPonicalica
    (void)

    You could do what Heapers' Hangout does, and have an NSFW category, unavailable to unregistered users.

  • glennmagusharveyglennmagusharvey
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human

    I'd rather not do that because we have NSFW threads scattered throughout IJBM history and I don't feel like making our site appear kinda like there's any section that's guaranteed to be SFW and then run into problems when people assume it really is.

  • Central AvenueCentral Avenue

    Yeah, I think that only really worked for HH because we basically implemented it as soon as we got our own server--before that we were on a free Vanilla account and couldn't have any NSFW stuff anyway.

Sign In or Register to comment.