3mo ago

[Announcement] New set of communities made hidden

We have over a period of time gotten repeated reports of unmarked NSFW posts in certain communities. All of these communities share the same singular mod, who have shown indifference when content has been reported. As leaving NSFW posts unmarked is against our instance rules, we have moved to set the rule-breaking communities to hidden.

Those of you who subscribe to hidden communities will continue to see them as normal, for everyone else these communities will look empty and hidden from c/all.

The newly hidden communities are:

We would also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that programming.dev's policy is to by default hide political communities, pornographic communities and communities hosting bot spam. Users seeking such content can subscribe to hidden communities so see them as normal.

Just recently we also went ahead and hid communities from lemmygrad due to the politics clause.

As always we encourage our local users to report content that break our instance rules. All content you report are seen by the admin team and helps inform the team of what's going on across the fediverse.

You're viewing a single thread.

45 comments

@MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz FYI
- Hidden communities are a good feature.
  It is unfortunate that it reduces discovery, but as marking posts NSFW when I think they aren't also suppresses discovery, I don't consider this a loss in the slightest.
  The opposite. Hidden, but available, is a very good place to be for a lot of the content I post.
  Instances can and should run their operations the way they see fit, hence creating a diverse range of options for users on what kind of "front page" they'd like to see.
  Hence my affinity for sopuli, which straight up defederates instances that host mostly pornography, as that is a genre of content I have no interest in consuming or sharing.
  I do take some issue with presenting my threshold for what constitutes NSFW to be "indifference", but that's a diplomatic issue. I am not indefferent in moderating my communities, and I'm a little insulted anyone would come to that interpretation given they actually looked into my actions.
  People have different sensibilities, and while I have used reports and comments to gauge where that line is for others, I don't see the utility in erring on the side of caution beyond a certain point.
  
  No, it's completely indifference to other people's desire to use NSFW to mean Not Suitable For Work.
  I certainly don't work in an environment where having cartoons of scantily clad girls in suggestive poses on my phone screen in my lunch hour is in any way acceptable, and I don't think I'm unusual in that.
  You don't care about that, you've made that very clear in the past, you just care about how many views you can get for your adolescent-look content which is "mildly arousing" - your words, not mine.
  I don't know why you think "mildly arousing" is somehow safe content to browse at work.
  So yeah, you've expressed absolute indifference to other people's need for a clean feed by refusing to tag your content appropriately. You harm the fediverse by trying to impose your will,
  
  So set up an account on programming.dev.
  I'm not going to retort any of the rest. I've made my point before and in this thread. You've clearly decided it's unreasonable, and gone ahead with interpreting it as negatively as possible.
  For anyone else reading, yes, I have and would describe some content I post as "mildly arousing" but a lot of that would fall under the stuff I DO mark NSFW.
  This person is acting as if I never mark anything NSFW and don't care who it affects. This is incorrect.
  
  This person is acting as if I never mark anything NSFW and don’t care who it affects.
  That's a straw man. What I claim is that whenever people ask that your NSFW "mildy arousing" pictures of girls are tagged appropriately as NSFW you refuse, that you have a really high bar for what counts as NSFW, that that bar is far higher than most workplaces, and that you simply don't care and refuse to tag.
  And yes, you are completely indifferent to the effect of your actions on others. Whack-a-mole is the right description of how we have to respond.
  You literally ask for "mildly arousing" content in the sidebar on the link I clicked from elsewhere in this thread, so please don't make out that that's a small minority of what you make and promote.
  You don't address the points about NSFW meaning not suitable for work because you don't care and you don't have good points to make about it.
  All this, by your own admission, is because when you tag stuff as NSFW it gets fewer views, as if the internet owes you its eyes. You're like those irritating ads about meeting attractive women in your area. You don't care whether it's appropriate when I'm browsing SFW content, you just want the views.
  
  I take it you're referring to rule two in some of my communities. The one that forbids posting content that is more than "mildly arousing". That is hardly me explicitly asking for content that only falls into that range.
  You act as if upvotes are given involuntarily. As if people upvote things just because it is there.
  Communities grow, content is posted, and upvoted to become more visible, because there are people who want to see and share it.
  This isn't an advertising platform, or some algo-driven hellscape where pleasing some piece of code somewhere is more important than posting things users actually like. I'm not paying to get more upvotes, I'm literally doing whatever people approve of the most. Deliberately.
  There is absolutely nothing wrong with trying to reach as many people who WANT to see what I'm posting, and nothing you can say about what you think my reasons are can change my mind. I know what my reasons are, and you are simply refusing to believe me.
  
  You are simply refusing to tag content which is Not Suitable For Work as NSFW, polluting other people's streams with your "mildy arousing" pictures of young girls.
  And yes, you are completely indifferent to the effect on the wider fediverse of thousands of users because you're working so tirelessly to meet the untagged fetish of your (checks numbers) 36 upvoters on the post linked above.
  It's REALLY selfish of you.
  
  If you're referring to the comment by the admin, they actually linked three posts.
  Their votecounts are 132, 89, and 36. (One of which I flipped to NSFW due to it being pointed out)
  I wouldn't care if I all I got was one upvote aside from my own. !vtubervids@ani.social is proof of that.
  You might have a point if I were drowning in downvotes and reports. But I'm not.
  But if I were, I absolutely would change how I do things.
  
  You're not getting downvoted and reported, you're getting your communities blocked, as per advice I think you handed out yourself in the "IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM, IT'S YOUR PROBLEM. CURATE YOUR OWN FEED" phase which is why I have to be signed in on lemmy at work, which I'd rather not.
  You might have a point if I were drowning in downvotes and reports. But I’m not. But if I were, I absolutely would change how I do things.
  Whole instances hiding your content because of persistent complaints and you pretend there's no issue.
  You'll respond with all kinds of evasions but you won't accept that you're polluting the fediverse with your untagged NSFW "mildly arousing" busty teen-style girl cartoons.
  NSFW means Not Suitable For Work. Please use it. Please.
  But no, you are utterly selfish and won't listen.
  One person upvoting your content justifies everything to you.
  Selfish.
  
  Please use it. Please.
  Are you missing the part where I literally do?
  Whole instances hiding your content because of persistent complaints
  I've gotten reports from exactly one user on programming.dev. I barely get reports in general. Despite consistent daily posting for over a year.
  IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM, IT'S YOUR PROBLEM. CURATE YOUR OWN FEED
  Exactly. My content isn't offensive, and anything clearly more risque I DO TAG. So if the content isn't for you, you should block it the same way I block music communities, because I'm not interested.
  
  "IT'S YOUR PROBLEM"
  Exactly
  And you took exception to me saying you were indifferent?!
  NSFW means Not Suitable For Work. Please use it. Please.
  Are you missing the part where I literally do?
  Yup. There's a shitton of pedo-adjacent crap you posted without a NSFW tag. The scantily clad busty teen-style cartoons. You're right here arguing against tagging it. Yeah, I'm missing you tagging it. We wouldn't be arguing if you agreed to tag it. WTF?
  Your remark about music communities is so off the point, because, and here's the thing: it's fine for work.
  
  How many more times can you beat this horse? It's thoroughly dead. Whinging about it as much and as repetitively as you have chosen to makes you seem less "concerned citizen" and more "entitled snot."
  Finish clutching your pearls, then curate your own feed. And stop expecting everyone else to do it for you. Your sensibilities won't always line up directly with the world around you, but repeatedly haranguing someone else about it won't solve matters for anyone.

45 comments