I think I have actually hidden all of those already since idk who moe is I didn't care. π Who is moe?
this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
68 points (97.2% liked)
Programming.dev Meta
2465 readers
24 users here now
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
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.
Well I wouldn't have if you didn't give me the idea. It's taco time.
I think he's that Simpsons barkeep
(real answer, it means cute, more or less, in Japanese. pronounced "Mo-eh")
That's great. Thanks.
I was getting tired of bop-a-mole 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"
Thank you for hiding that, I was sick of it.
Your feed will not be affected, as this is a decision affecting programming.dev.
Your account is on sh.itjust.works.
If you'd like to remove my communities from your feed, I list them all in the sidebars on each of them, so you could block them from there.
And I do not currently have plans to set up any more.
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.
hidden just means it won't show up in the All feed, but you can still subscribe to see all the posts from them
so this is much softer than defederation, and it's per community instead of an entire instance
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.
Yeah that is neat and a huge improvement over having Reddit as a dictator over content. At the moment, I think itβs a barrier of entry though. Maybe thatβs a good thing too. I actually like Lemmy more because my feed is slower due to having less people posting on the communities I follow than the subreddits I follow.
They can't. They can only hide things for their users, not other instances.
The local home admin of a community could entirely remove it, but they cannot hide it for other instances.
For off-instance communities, an admin can either hide them (visible to local subscribers) or block that one community (visible to no-one on the instance). But this again only affects the one instance, and has to be done by each instance that wants that community to be hidden or blocked.
Even if a community is hidden on its home instance, it would only become hidden on that one instance.
Yeah, this is what I meant. I think itβs kind of odd for an instance to be moderating other instances for its users, if that makes it clearer.
I don't think so at all.
I am on sopuli.xyz mostly because it's run by finns, but also because they defederate and block pornographic instances and communities, which I do not want to see.
Given that there is transparency, then, this type of instance-level curation, means each user can choose on what instance they would like to create an account, and get a starting-point for the kind of content they would like to curate.
This decision makes programming.dev a perfect home for users that were going to block these communities anyway.
Yeah, you can just block everything you don't like, but if theres an instance with a policy that aligns with what you want, you can cut down on that work a lot by just setting up your user there.
Thanks for the explanation, I think Iβm understanding better now. Part of my confusion is just me still not fully understanding the structure of these federating platforms. It makes a lot more sense now.
Me when this post has led me to find cute anime girl communities lol. I respect the decision to do it...but I'll be subscribing to some of these
Oh, I didn't even know they had any unmarked NSFW pictures on the moe channels, they all looked completely safe to me.
In my opinion, we don't. But what is "too sexy" varies by a lot.
It's impossible to please everyone, so I just do my best to toe a line I think is reasonable.
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 the aknowledgement.
When it comes to that second post, had I gotten a report on it, I would probably have flipped my decision not to mark it NSFW, as I have done on some posts in the past.
But I didnt get a report. Edit: though I went ahead and changed it now.
The others I could hang up as posters at work just fine.
On the subject of sensibilities differing
I have images like that one, and "worse" in my wallpaper rotation both on my phone and PC. I even have some pieces depicting actual nudity in an artistic setting.
My city has public statues and art installations that do that. In fact kind of a lot of places do. Way too much of the world suffers what I consider weird hangups on this subject.
I get separating pornography from public display, but this isn't that.
While I respect people not wanting to see certain content (and their right to block it), I don't see what's so offensive about the human body, or the aesthetic appreciation for it that some us feel, to the point that even non-nudity that displays the wrong shapes has to be censored lest someone somewhwere take offence to the point of it causing genuine averse consequences.
Even then, lemmy doesn't have the kind of complex tagging system that would allow people to define what they don't want to see before they see it. I expressed in this thread that I don't want porn in my feed, but if I were to disable NSFW content on my profile, a lot of not-porn I do want to see would go with it.
How many people would miss my post if I err on the side of caution too much?
Would I flag it as "midly provocative" if that was an option to allow those who want to to filter it out? Sure. But we don't have proper tagging on lemmy. Not yet. And NSFW is synonymous with pornography for A LOT of people, which again, this isnt.
Hence why sopulis policies on blocking porn fit me so well. And why programming.dev should absolutely do the equivalent for whatever types of content you want enable your users to see.
I realise I'm at an extreme end of the matter, which is why I DO flag some things as NSFW even when I don't personally bat an eye.
But I also can't just flag everything, or mark the entire communties NSFW, because that IS used for porn, and will be what users expect and post if I did.
So I do my best to offend fewer people, but at the same time the content I want to share is often in a place where people simply don't agree on what it is and how to categorize it.
And while posting with an abundance of caution would be nice, it means suppressing discovery on all instances, instead of just some, and mostly being found by users browsing for something to masturbate to.
Discussions are getting off-topic and this is an announcement post, not a discussion post, so I'm locking the post.
If local users want to have an in-depth discussion regarding admin moderation of programming.dev, you're encouraged to make a discussion thread in !meta@programming.dev.
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.
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 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.
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.