I think I have actually hidden all of those already since idk who moe is I didn't care. π Who is moe?
Programming.dev Meta
Welcome to the Programming.Dev meta community!
This is a community for discussing things about programming.dev itself. Things like announcements, site help posts, site questions, etc. are all welcome here.
Links
Credits
I've tried to hide all the moes but it feels sisyphean. I hide cyber moe, military moe, office moe... but the next day someone is going to start taco moe and I will see a half naked girl with cheese hair and a lettuce bra. There is no escape.
I understand and approve of the decision.
But please don't perpetuate the idea that I don't take moderation seriusly.
A difference in sensibility between me and someone else, is not indifference on my part.
I can only report on what I've been told by those who have directly dealt with the reports, my apologies if parts of the phrasing are inaccurate/poorly made. I'll make a note that we should probably reach out to relevant moderators beforehand next time we make similar actions.
As for differing sensibilities, I'm not sure most people would classify this kind of content as safe to browse at work/in public.
Regardless, we are not here to make demands or argue on how other instances moderate their own content. This post is made mainly to keep our actions transparent to our local users.
Thank you for hiding that, I was sick of it.
I don't believe it's hidden for you, as the OP is from a different instance.
So Iβm confused by the whole community hiding thing. Since Iβm local to programming.dev, the owner of programming.dev can hide communities from other instances for me? I get that these communities arenβt moderated well, but it seems like the instance owner that those communities are in should be the one on top of that or risk defederation. I donβt really love that my local instance can just hide things from other instances.
Hiding communities outside our predefined rules (politics, porn and bot spam) isn't something we take lightly, and we are only hiding them now after several months of reoccurring reports that break our instance rules (3.4).
We will do our best to be transparent about when and why we hide a new communities, and be aware that subscribing to a hidden community will unhide it for your feed.
If you do have concerns and suggestions on how to alleviate those, please know that we are happy receive feedback.
Neat thing is, you can just join another instance, or even setup your own. Instance admins can and already do defederate entirely from other instances, you won't ever be able to see that content without leaving the site. Hiding on the other hand means you can still see it if you subscribe to it, they just aren't having it show up on the default feed. This should result in less severe action, like defederation, it's a great improvement. Downside exists, but it comes with more upside. Join an instance that appears to align with your ideals and you will get the benefit of a feed that allows for content discovery. NSFW content discovery is probably better done on an NSFW centric instance anyway.
If you are trying to compare this system to something like Reddit, lamenting the added effort of picking an instance and needing to move around sometimes, this is just one of those things people need to accept and start pushing for changes that make the process easier. The alternative is going back to big tech and eating whatever shit they decide to serve.
That's great. Thanks.
I was getting tired of ~~bop-a-mole~~ bop-a-moe blocking these.
I like a NSFW picture just fine, sometimes, but the NSFW toggle doesn't work for communities that don't even attempt to tag their content.
Missed opportunity for "bop-a-moe"
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 donβt 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.
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.
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. [email protected] 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 Iβm 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.
And you took exception to me saying you were indifferent?!
I am anything but indifferent when it comes to how to operate my corner of the fediverse.
But when the problem isn't mine to solve, yes? Would you expect me to be vegetarian just in case the person next to me in a restaurant doesn't want to see anyone eating meat?
We wouldn't be arguing if you agreed to tag it.
So start reporting. I have and will consider every report I get. I use both votes and reports to gauge where the line is so as to offend as few as possible. When I do get reports I flip the tag or remove a post until it is tagged, more often than not. And as I keep telling you, I DO TAG THINGS FROM THE START.
Provided the report is even close to reasonable. Some people seem to think every anime woman is underage or deliberately intended to appear as such, and that all depictions of them are solely for imagining immoral acts.
Stuff like "shitton of pedo-adjacent crap" and "scantily clad busty teen-style cartoons" makes me pretty sure you are one such person.
Would you expect me to be vegetarian just in case the person next to me in a restaurant doesnβt want to see anyone eating meat?
I would expect you to put the word "chicken" on your chicken nuggets, and not argue that they had tofu in them or that they belonged in the vegan isle at the supermarket.
No.
You're asking me to label all the drinks as hard liquir, no matter what the actual alcohol content is.
And I'm telling you some of the stuff doesn't even contain any, and the stuff that does, has a wide range of percentages.
Yes, I'm asking you to label all the drinks that contain alcohol with the word alcohol. Just that.
Everything that's Not Suitable For Work as NSFW. Simple.
scantily clad busty teen-style cartoons ... solely for ...
"mildly arousing"
This you?
You're pulling those two words from the second rule in some of my communities.
No nudity or especially lewd content, keep things merely mildy arousing.
Which forbids everything more than mildly arousing, and invites literally everything less than that.
What?
Can't help wondering what you're deleting here.