Should half naked pictures of anime characters be marked NSFW on Lemmy?
I’m talking about this sort of thing. Like clearly I wouldn’t want someone to see that on my phone in the office or when I’m sat on a bus.
However there seems be a lot of these that aren’t filtered out by nsfw settings, when a similar picture of a woman would be, so it seems this is a deliberate feature I might not be understanding.
Discuss.
266
Comments272
As a huge Anime fan, with some catching up to do, I've blocked every anime adjacent community, because NSFW filtering isn't applied as strictly as I would prefer, on the Anime communities here.
I enjoy a good sexually charged image as much as the next person, perhaps more.
But I scroll Lemmy in front of my impressionable daughter sometimes.
I would like to catch up on Anime recommendations, here.
But, to me, it's just not worth the risk of suddenly needing to explain to my daughter why Faye Valentine's parents didn't love her enough to buy her full sets of clothing.
![email protected] mostly posts key visuals and posters, episodes discussions, and news. Stuff you'd see in public.
The actual fanart side of things tends to stick to ![email protected] and ![email protected]
That wouldn't be an issue if you'd fulfilled your duty as a parent and educated her on the classics.
You have a point, actually.
Op, if my HR dept saw me scroll by that pic... It would be an annoying conversation. Like while I'll agree, there's no nudity... I would get in trouble. I've left some chatroom due to this... People just don't understand that I don't care but the folks cutting my checks will make a thing of it
But when you suggest that it becomes a whole HR issue.
I prefer to frame it as an HR opportunity
I don't understand the issue. Wouldn't it be solved by the exact same solution?
As much as I like looking at pictures of anime girls I think they should be marked as NSFW if they are barely clothed.
I think if you wouldn't use it as your wallpaper at work because it is inappropriate for work, that's NSFW. So yeah at my job that would be NSFW.
I feel like the Internet needs more tags:
Something like that.
These aren't even enough.
The tag for this particular problem would be something like "mildly suggestive" because it's literally just skin that some people don't want to see.
Yeah, I agree. I do sort of understand op's consternation. I don't browse Lemmy on my work PC, but sometimes on lunch or in public I pull it up on my phone on All communities and I'm suddenly conscious that everyone beside me can see the "sfw" furry and anime art that I scroll past.
However, that's kinda my fault. I don't want to ban those communities because I like that stuff. It's just a little odd that we call it sfw when, to be honest, I have a hard time picturing most work places where I live happy to see that on my desktop.
Yeah, that would be great. Many instance admins already use CSAM classifier models on all incoming images. It'd be great if they could add additional models that could put meta tags on images automatically like "suggestive" and "gore" with the option for the poster to modify the tags just in case it was a false negative or positive. Like a lasagna getting gore, for example.
I wonder if Lemmy could easily do content warnings like on Mastodon. I don’t know if it’s part of the ActivityPub spec but it’s definitely a thing that’s been implemented elsewhere.
The answer to "is it part of the activityPub spec?" is more often than not a strong No.
I am of the opinion that there should be more granularity to NSFW than a simple binary.
I'm a fan of how e621 does things:
rating:s (safe)
rating:q (questionable)
rating:e (explicit,)
But I would add another:
rating:t (traumatic, known elsewhere as Not Safe For Life)
Call it "purity" and allow users to filter posts to allow or block any arbitrary combination of purity levels (wallhalla, formerly wallbase, does this if you want to see how it could work).
It would be great if everything could be classified in this way, but is it practically possible to apply a more complex system like this across instances, given that we struggle with the simpler NSFW tag?
The reason why people are struggling with one tag may also be exactly because it's only one tag.
It's difficult to categorize gray as black or white, after all.
Imo, the real issue is how not to go overboard, adding more and more tags, and keeping things easy to filter.
Perhaps. I'm not expert but I'm just not convinced you'd get good compliance across instances.
After all, even minimal non- compliance makes the whole thing pointless
Can't the same be said about what we have right now, though?
No system is flawless, but you'd be surprised the lengths people will go to uphold the ones that work.
Moreover I don't think these need to be on a single scale. Like, trauma isn't "more" than pornographic, it's just something completely different (ideally).
There can be a scale of safe to unsafe for a variety of reasons, and people might be able to filter what they see more proactively based on their own tolerances (and interests).
But then again complexity can be a deterrence. Tagging and cataloging can be a big content management problem and I think most want to do the simplest thing possible.
But maybe content advisory could be a crowd sourced effort, using a up/down ranking on explicit categories just like we can do on posts.
Makes sense to me.
There is https://github.com/LemmyNet/rfcs/pull/4 but lemmy devs aren't responding for months.
Of course it should. NSFW doesn’t mean too hot to handle. It means, I don’t want coworkers or customers seeing this on my screen, as a matter of professionalism.
I just want posts or communities to have category tags for me to block by tag. So I can block all anime and every non-English community.
I have nothing against them. They’re just not of interest to me and I don’t want them on my feed. Blocking a community is mostly useless because there are so many of them it’s like playing whack a mole.
I completely agree... Most of my block list are 'moe' communities, and it is only getting longer
There is a proposal to add Tags but devs aren’t really responding. https://github.com/LemmyNet/rfcs/pull/4
Look, this whole thing is absurd like a Monty Python sketch, but much less funny.
Is this picture not safe for work..?
How about this one..?
And what about this photograph of an actual naked beaver I posted the other day..?
For me, all three could get me in trouble at work (because they clearly have nothing to do with the work I should be doing), and none of them would get me in trouble at the bus (though there's plenty of other pictures in Lemmy I wouldn't want to be caught watching in the bus to avoid embarrassing myself or others), but that's me, and that's why I don't use lemmy at work and if I use it on the bus I use a different account and only on communities I'm subscribed to.
But deciding whether to watch these pictures or risk watching others like them at work or the bus is my responsibility, not lemmy's, or the community moderators', or their posters'.
If I'm worried about “not suitable for work” I should be old enough to work, which means I should have a minimum of self control and be responsible for my own actions.
If I'm caught at work or on the bus with an “unsuitable” image on my phone because I was browsing some site that might contain images of that kind I'm not going to blame that site, or whoever posted that image, and I'm not going to demand of them to adapt to my particular circumstances and mark, censor, or remove any content I might find unsuitable.
That's my job, not theirs. They're not my fucking nanny, and I shouldn't need one.
Attempting to shift the blame for my own actions to the people providing me with this content (and for free, no less!) would be childish, petty, and disingenuous, to say the least.
That's wonderful. But perception is everything. Could the HR lady walk past my desk, see me scrolling Lemmy and flipping through image after image of half nude cartoons? Is that still safe for work? I think you'll find they feel the same about works of art in enough businesses that none of these images are safe for work. In an art gallery? Sure. In a dental office? Probably not.
How can we be in the Fediverse and still have to fucking repeat this over and over.
Curate your feed
This isn't an algorithmic driven platform. If you want to see what you'll like, you gotta be proactive. Complaining about anime pictures from an anime community is just dumb.
I curate my feed. However because of the lack of an algorithm I don't get suggestions. This means that I (and likely others) scroll through the everything feed repeatedly.
But I'll do you one better. Lemmy doesn't prevent users under the age of 18 from joining so long as they are 13 or older (just like other platforms). There's a reason that most if not all websites curate for NSFW content, and it's to make what the public can view with or without an account safe for children who are likely visiting those sites. That's the reason Facebook won't let you post half nude photos publicly. It's the reason Reddit has NSFW tags. You're preaching to the choir as far as users curating their content. NSFW tagging is literally a tool to use to curate the content you see. If your argument is that posters have no responsibility for what content they post that's just logically wrong. No laws work that way. It's literally why platforms aren't being held liable for the misinformation spread by their users. I'm not complaining about random anime lewds. I'm pointing out that they are not safe for work. So they should be labeled as such since that is the status quo for not safe for work content. In the same way that a lot of content related to the war in Ukraine and the conflict in Palestine are labeled that way.
If you're gonna be stuck on what the user should be doing rather than treating all of these items the same as far as what they are then you're gonna have a bad time because I'm not entertaining that. I curate my feed and I don't scroll the Everything feed at work, but that doesn't mean I think other users shouldn't be able to.
Doesn't work though. I have blocked communities that produce a lot of nsfw material but they keep popping up It's wackamole
I don't think anyone in this thread is complaining about its existence on lemmy at all.
Some people are suggesting that it should be marked as NSFW. If you don't want to use NSFW tagging, that's great, you be you and turn it all off in your settings, but please don't shout at people who do want to use the NSFW tagging to help them curate their feed.
If you disagree that this kind of image should be classified as NSFW because you want to use lemmy at work to view this kind of image but blur things that feature more explicit images, that's fine. and you could express that calmly and positively, but shouting in the thread at people using a lemmy feature for its designed purpose seems like a really over the top reaction to me, particularly since the NSFW features are all completely optional for you.
Implicitly, there is only one solution of puritanical situations and that's to curate you feed.
Is a post about how you should unionize NSFW in this strange argument? Who knows. Do you live somewhere that showing ankles is only made as a prurient interest? Good luck friend!
If you scroll though the all feed enough, you're going to find plenty of things that aren't socially acceptable in your own mind.
But I'd like the Not Suitable For Work feature to filter posts that are not suitable for work. It's curation, just a different way to your preferred way. If you don't want to use the NSFW features, just turn them off. No need to be cross about it. It's in settings.
(Your point about ankles is badly made, in my view. I think you were arguing the point that because there's no objective speed that separates slow from fast, there's no difference between slow and fast, but that doesn't make sense in the real world. It might be hard to judge sometimes, but that doesn't mean I should be shouted at for advocating an opinion on voluntary speed limits!)
That's entirely my whole point!
Lemmy has no way of knowing that. Moderators have no way of knowing that.
The only one capable of deciding what is suitable for your current specific environment is you!
It's impossible to define a one size fits all NSFW tag, and it shouldn't be up to the content provider to do so.
What to browse and when is and should be entirely the responsibility of the user accessing the content.
If you get caught browsing pictures that are unsuitable for whatever your current environment is, that's on you for browsing a site that might have those pictures, and on no one else.
Accept your responsibility and don't try to switch the blame.
Then nothing here on Lemmy should have an NSFW tag at all. But you know that doesn't work. Because you can have a feed that's completely fine and then scroll randomly and find a bunch of porn posts back to back. If you are posting content to a platform you are responsible for that content and what it shows. That's literally why we have any tags.
This is like arguing that because it's legal to show graphic content of war or similar on the news it should be allowed with no warning on any website. There's underaged people everywhere on the internet. Sites that have graphic content as the main content censor accordingly. Why is Lemmy any different?
Yes, exactly, now you're getting it!
Oh, no, you actually don't. You actually think you're making a point. 😞
Yeah, that's how lemmy works. And the internet as a whole, really, except for small pockets of it.
Which is why it's up to you to be aware of which sites are suitable for your current environment and which are not, and have the fucking self control and patience to wait until you're in a suitable environment to browse the ones that aren't.
Sure, but I can't be responsible for it being suitable or not in your current particular environment because there's no objective way for me to know what is and isn't suitable for you in your current specific circumstances.
“NSFW” is entirely subjective, it changes from person to person, from place to place, and from minute to minute depending on each user's current circumstances, and expecting the poster to predict all of these possibilities is absurd, profoundly stupid, and outright disingenuous.
The only person who knows what might be suitable in YOUR current particular environment is YOU. It's your fucking responsibility to know which sites might contain something that you'd consider unsuitable and avoid them until you're in and environment where they'll be suitable.
Don't try to shift the blame and responsibility for YOUR lack of self control onto the people who're giving you free content and who have no possible way of knowing that you might find it unsuitable at a certain specific point in space and time.
Yes. And it should be allowed, that's what legal fucking means! (And even if it isn't legal in your particular shithole there's probably some other where it is, so good luck trying to enforce that.)
If some sites decide to not allow it, that's perfectly fine (in lemmy's particular case it's up to the instances, I believe, and some might leave it to the communities), but it's up to YOU to keep up with which ones do allow content you might consider unsuitable and which ones don't.
Sure, some might give you warnings for specific kinds of content as a courtesy, but you really have no way of knowing if their particular definitions of “NSFW” match yours because it's an entirely subjective issue in which it's impossible to reach a consensus, so it's still up to you to check and make sure.
Well, that's up to their legal guardians. I'm certainly not their nanny, and neither are the lemmy admins, moderators, or posters. You really seem obsessed with shifting your responsibilities onto unrelated third parties, you should probably have that looked at.
No they don't. Have you ever visited a porn site..?
It's not, that's the point. Which is why you should treat it like any other site that might contain “NSFW” content AND NOT FUCKING USE IT AT WORK! Fuck. It's not fucking rocket surgery. 🤦♂️
I really want to know - what is this rocket surgery you keep referring to?
A play on words, a mixed metaphor combining "rocket science" and "brain surgery", both of which are colloquially used to refer to something very difficult. Therefore, saying that something “is not rocket surgery” is meant to imply that said thing is rather easy to do, and doesn't require any specialized learning or training.
In any case, it shouldn't be rocket surgery to understand the meaning here by the context alone even if you've never heard the phrases “it's not rocket science” or “it's not brain surgery”, but since we seem to be dealing with people, for lack of a better term, incapable of understanding the extremely simple concept of not browsing sites which might contain content unsuitable for work while at work, maybe it turns out that it is in fact as hard as rocket surgery for you lot, but in that case you should be asking your legal guardians, not random strangers on the internet.
Here's what you need to do: navigate to your settings. Tick "show NSFW content" untick "blur NSFW content" and stop getting cross with those of us that use that feature. Simple. You choose your view, we choose ours. Let those of use who want to use the feature use it in peace. It's YOUR responsibility to curate the feed you want, after all, as you keep angrily telling the rest of us.
If you're scrolling through multiple photos of half nude anime girls back to back, i think you scrolled to much and should probably take a few hours break from lemmy.
I either turn it off completely or I leave it censored. I'm not saying there aren't options. I'm saying a work environment would not consider it to be safe for work so yes it should be censored with a NSFW tag. The everything tab sometimes is perfectly fine and other times has back to back posts like that. I have no control over that. Neither does anyone else.
YES YOU FUCKING DO! 🤦♂️
Is someone forcing you to browse the everything tab at gunpoint, or blackmailing you into browsing it‽
Because if not, you should have the self control to NOT FUCKING CLICK ON THE DAMN THING!
If you know it might contain anything unsuitable for your current environment, just fucking WAIT to browse it until you're in an environment where it will be suitable!
It's not fucking rocket surgery, for fuck's sake, just have some fucking self control!
When I say I don't have control over that, you know I mean that I am not in control of the feed or what is in it. Jesus. Can we not pretend that I am in control of what is posted to social media? Because you know this isn't necessarily about self control. If it were news sites and broadcasters wouldn't get in trouble for what they show.
Again: No one is forcing you to use the damn site at work. You know the site might have content unsuitable for your work, therefore you should know you shouldn't be browsing it at work. You can wait and do something else. Anything else. That's all the control you need.
And if you are unable to have this minimum amount of self control, then any consequences you suffer are entirely your fault and no one else's. Don't try to blame other people for your shortcomings.
What in fuck's name are you talking about? Other than probably you for being unable to stop browsing unsuitable content at work, who the fuck is getting in trouble?
Sounds like you want the NSFW tag removed altogether. I find it useful. You don't. Change your settings to not blur NSFW posts and stop getting mad at people who use it.
You seem to be really cross about people wanting to use the completely optional Not Suitable For Work filtering and/or blurring features to help them curate their feed to make it Suitable For Work.
I think you need to realise that not everyone on the internet has the same priorities as you, and if you want to only browse lemmy away from work and you want to see things folks consider NSFW then that's great - go ahead. Absolutely fine. Just tick the boxes on your settings and then it literally doesn't affect you at all. You can hand-curate your feed to your heart's content.
But please let those of us who want to use the optional NSFW feature use it in peace and please stop shouting at people who disagree with you.
We're on a thread about whether certain pictures should be marked “NSFW” or not.
A subject on which, as is both obvious to anyone who doesn't have their head up their own arse and evidenced by this very same thread, no agreement is possible. An objective demonstration of why this tagging nonsense not only doesn't work, but can't possibly ever work.
You might as well be discussing about whether it's better to use the western horoscope or the Chinese one to decide which threads are “suitable for work”.
And I'm sorry, but this kind of wilful stupidly just fucking irks me to no end.
I don't get your problem. You like to filter by community or whatever, and I like to use the NSFW filtering. We're different. Why get cross about it?
Nice beaver!
I wouldn't have guessed a beaver would sit on his tail like that. Like how did he move to get it under himself like that?
Maybe the miscommunication in this whole concept is the word "work". What about at a restaurant or near family?
I think the "work" bit is a verbal crutch, what people want is a way to better scope their experience to content more appropriate for their current situation whatever it may be.
Sure, but that's the user's responsibility, not the content providers'.
It's extremely simple: could this site contain something that would be unsuitable for your current environment..?
— Definitely not. — Great, browse away (as long as doing so isn't unsuitable for some other reason, e.g. working, paying attention to your family, driving the car).
— Possibly, maybe, I don't know. — Ok, now, pay attention, here's the trick: DON'T FUCKING BROWSE IT. Wait until you're in an environment where you're sure it'll be suitable. Browse something else. Have some fucking self control, for fuck's sake.
You are the only one who can tell what is suitable for your current circumstances and what is not. Lemmy has no way of knowing that, the moderators have no way of knowing that, the posters have no way of knowing that.
It's your responsibility, not ours.
NSFW tags would only make sense if they were set by the user, and then they'd be useless because they could only work once the user (and their company's firewall) has already seen the content they didn't want to see. By definition, they can't work, unless everything is tagged.
You know what does work, though? Not browsing shit in circumstances where it might contain potentially unsuitable content. So do that, and let the admins, moderators, and posters be.
What you're saying is that you don't want to give users tools to curate their feeds, and your answer to them wanting those tools is for them not to view those feeds at all if they feel the content is unsafe. An interesting take. Where on the internet does that work?
Dude clearly doesn't know he can tick "Show NSFW content" and untick "Blur NSFW content" and suddenly he has exactly the website he's asking for. Very cross over other people's use of the site for no reason.
I've had those disabled since the minute I got on lemmy, I just can't abide censorship or, more importantly, wilful stupidly.
Censorship is where the government bans books and libraries etc because they disagree with the ideas in them. There's real censorship going on in the USA just now. This isn't censorship, it's feed curation - just some folks wanting to not have scantily clad figures show up on their phone in their lunch break.
It's not wilful stupidity, it's wanting some good old random entertainment on a break at work without some colleague harassing you for an inappropriate image which you could have had filtered out if people who didn't use the feature at all didn't spend so much time arguing that the inappropriate image should be viewed by those who do.
Calm down a bit and let other people use lemmy how they like. It's a free country. (apart from all the real life censorship, of course, and the lack of bodily autonomy women have in the USA), all that kind of stuff.
Summary: other people are different to you and live in a different context. Try not to be cross about this.
NSFW tags aren't a way to curate one's feed, they're a waste of time.
What you consider suitable will vary depending on where you are and what time it is, and might be completely different than what other users consider suitable.
You want to curate your feeds?
You can have multiple accounts, in multiple instances.
You can subscribe to suitable communities and only browse ones you're subscribed to.
You can block users, communities, and instances.
Most importantly, you can decide what to browse and when, and wait to browse feeds which might contain something unsuitable for your current circumstances until those circumstances have changed.
Can these tools be improved..? Sure!
Give me a way to choose between different sets of subscribed and I won't need to have multiple accounts, for instance.
Hell, this might be one of the few situations in which current “AI” models could actually be useful... just have one trained on what you don't want to see at specific times and places and use it as a browser extension to prevent you from seeing that content.
But tags aren't going to help with that, because they're entirely subjective, and only you know what you want tagged or not, and if you have to tag it yourself it's already too late, you've already seen it (and so has your company's firewall).
You're a waste of time. Good day sir, ma'am, or theydy.
That beaver is fully clothed though. A naked mull rat would be another matter.
The heck is a mull rat??
You don't know them? They are internet-famous.
Read up on them. Weird little fuckers.
Edit: oh damn! Guess that image is NSFW
Are they really mull rats or mole rats? Now, I'm questioning myself..
Haha, no, you're absolutely right. I'm sorry, in German they are called Nacktmull.
When's the last time you shaved your beaver? Ew.
Hey, that's a perfectly fine beaver, I'll have you know. Don't you go besmirching it!
I would go to war for you, Sir.
That's literally exactly what you're doing here.
It's not censorship, it's just tagging
It's a fucking waste of everyone's time, is what it is.
The definition of “safe for work” is entirely subjective and will vary from one user, place, and time to another.
The only ones with the information to decide whether to tag something as suitable or not are the users, and even our own opinion on what is and isn't suitable will depend on where we are and what time it is.
There is no possible objective consensus on what to tag or not, and there can't be, so tagging will never work for the vast majority of users.
Do you know what does work, though, with 0% chance of failure..?
If you aren't 100% sure that a site won't contain anything unsuitable for your current environment... DON'T FUCKING BROWSE IT!
It's that easy! No tagging needed, no censorship, no nothing. No need to bother anyone else or demand of them to do the impossible and predict what you will consider suitable or not at a certain point in space and time.
Just have some patience, exercise some fucking self control and personal responsibility, and wait until you're in a suitable place and time to browse the fucking site!
Everyone else manages this incredibly subjective confusing tag just fine . Weird
We're in a fucking thread discussing whether certain drawings should or should not be “NSFW” (an entirely subjective question on which, obviously, no consensus can possibly be reached).
Y'all ain't managing anything, fine or otherwise.
Which half?
NSFW is not safe for work, so if it wouldn't fly at work.... it should be marked.
what if someone works in a sex shop? (asking for a friend) /s
Sure, sex workers, morticians, first responders, doctors, AI Gore artists are all interesting corner cases
NSFW to mean implies the content that wont get anyone in trouble or fired.
lmao is that artifical intelligence gore or Al Gore the politician
I definitely had to reread that a couple times lol
He is my muse.
Still NSFW (in that case, not enough nudity)
Anime girls are the most oppressed demographic 😔
You know damn well how NSFW is applied on the internet.
Clearly we have a different understanding, how do you apply Not Safe For Work?
I've often seen NSFW used as basically just "contains nudity". You could have a woman in skimpy clothing shaking her everything in a manner clearly trying to evoke sexual thoughts, but because her nipples and genitalia are technically covered, it would get posted as "SFW".
Sure, so you want a nudity/sex tag instead of a NSFW tag.
NSFW would be a superset of nudity.
Just because some people don't know how to use NSFW doesn't mean it means something else than "Not suited for work". Anything that a colleague, boss etc could see that would result in awkwardness, "the talk", is NSFW. Same thing for gore.
Yes
I 100% would not want an image like that to pop up in front of a coworker. I'm on board with you, OP.
Yes.
The tag is Not Safe For Work. I'd say that if you were to look at this in most work places you'd probably be speaking to HR within the hour...
Yes. 100%
I wish there was strictly an amine tag so I could filter all that shit out like you can with nsfw. Blocked countless weirdass communities that randomly popup.
These are a few ways to get rid of them:
He's proud!
Legend.
There is a proposal to add Tags but devs aren't really moving it forward. https://github.com/LemmyNet/rfcs/pull/4
Where the NSFW line is drawn varies depending on the moderator and community. If there are communities that are either not moderated actively enough or draw that line too far to one side for your taste, then don't subscribe or block those communities. Those tools exist there for a reason.
I would not consider the post you have linked to as NSFW. I also think that the NSFW tag has evolved over time, so perhaps my definition of NSFW just doesn't line up with what today's standard should be. There are plenty of anime characters in very popular shows that have a character design similar to that. There are big billboards of them some places to promote the show. Just because it might be NSFW in your work environment/region, does not mean it is everywhere.
Yeah. It's not a question of right or wrong, it's a question of whether a moderator (or community) is willing to put into the extra effort to allow folks in sensitive reading environments (or sensitive readers, I suppose) to participate.
I am constantly, personally, under the impression that there are no Anime communities on Lemmy, even though I frequently read "new/all".
I genuinely think there aren't very many. That's true right? I haven't blocked like 700 of them already? I don't give much thought to blocking an unmoderated community, so it could be.
(Sarcasm) Which is tragic for those communities, because my Anime hot takes are on fleek.(/sarcasm)
I think anime has become one of the more active niche interest communities on lemmy. The most active general anime community is ![email protected] (shameless plug).
In general, myself and some of the other more active posters have been migrating and encouraging other related communities to be located on the ani.social instance. Part of the reason behind that is that it lets users that just really don't want to see any anime content (see this thread) simply block the instance and move on.
I know all about anime hot takes though. I have previously professed to hating Clannad so much I couldn't watch past the first couple of episodes.
Damn, that sure is a hot take
Depends
Clannad? Valid
After-Story?
That would be perfectly acceptable where I live and work. No nudity, no tits, no genitals, move along...
On the other hand, anime in general is relegated to teens more than not here, so any anime would raise eyebrows if seems browsing from my phone by others given I am definitely not a teen by large.
YMMV, but different cultures different sensibility.
Should Lemmy be a MCM or a MCD? I think this should be the question.
Does anyone else find this creepy?
You find it creepy that most consumers of anime are teens?
I don't get it?
I just block the people that post them, and the sub it's from. I almost never see that shit now.
I do the same but there so fucking many, it seems. Why are people so into the cartoon porn? It's fucking weird.
Yeah, there seems to be some disconnect with those people. I look at the people's history before blocking them, and the ones posting that content often have some mental health issues.
Probably resulting from an inability to find healthy love or the feeling of being loved, as most mental health issues seem to stem from.
Love is all we need, and when it's lacking, shit gets weird.
Yes, you could get in trouble at work for viewing it just like you said a picture of a real woman would be
NSFW has become code for porn, effectively. My friend and I use NSFO for 'not porn, maybe not even nudity, but not necessarily appropriate for the office'. Maybe that's what we need. A second filter.
I see plenty of memes labeled NSFW. I sometimes assume they're porn and keep scrolling. Sometimes I recognise the image even through the filter and I'll click on it. I find this very confusing. It's not a bad idea to have two different terms. But I feel that that might get lost in the sauce as the term has already gone critical mass. People will probably start to use them interchangeably.
Yes, they should be. For the same exact reason anything that is taboo but socially acceptable but definitely unprofessional should be. Real boobs, cartoon boobs, it doesn't bother me at all but it makes me very much less likely to browse lemmy in a public setting. Setting morals completely aside, if you want this platform to thrive, you'll have to be compassionate to the consumers of it, the user base. The community can definitely make this thing not usable if they want to. It's about being practical.
Why do these anime girls always look like they're in their teens? Extremely creepy.
Because the target audience is usually teens.
I recently discovered Korean manga.
A lot of comics and protagonists are college age or in their 20s, compared to Japan's 10 yo saving the world.
The most optimistic explanation I have been able to arrive at is that they are less intimidating for fragile male egos. However, I concur wholeheartedly: Extremely creepy.
Yes. Problem is that NSFW has lost its original meaning to a lot of people. NSFW was originally to hide things that might be controversial to be visible on your screen in a workplace, so it should be fairly conservative. Beachwear would 100% not be safe to look at in a work environment.
But now a lot of places are using it to determine what is safe to look at not in front of your boss, but in front of your kids or in public. That is a much different thing. NSFW flags should not be used to restrict kids from seeing it, just your boss. There needs to be a separate flag for hiding things from kids. And because social norms are different in different societies, there should be even more granularity in the flags. Nudity is just one thing that is NSFW.
NSFW should be reserved for blocking things that I don't want to suddenly appear on my screen when I'm browsing the Internet on my break at work when I'm allowed to browse the Internet, but it wouldn't be good for a naked picture to show up on my screen suddenly.
thissssss
This whole problem would be solved by adding more tags as per this proposal: https://github.com/LemmyNet/rfcs/pull/4 and enabling more filtering.
but @[email protected] and @[email protected] didn't look at it for months and I don't know what is their stance on it. The dev that wanted to implement it doesn't want to spend energy to push forward for a green light.
I have no idea why is this such a debate.
NSFW is such a loaded term.
There is no need for any "green light", if there was a problem with the rfc we would have said so from the beginning. From what I can tell the rfc is not completed yet, and when it's completed someone still needs to step up to implement it. Even my own rfc which was finished months ago is still not merged and not implemented.
What would need to be done to complete it?
Well someone has to write the code.
I know someone that is willing to implement this feature, but they are waiting for merge of rfc to open a Pull Request with initial implementation.
As I understand the RFCs are for defining scope and design requirements for specific feature. And when the design is finalised RFC is merged. Then someone opens a PR to implement it.
If you were imagining some other process it would be beneficial to acknowledge change of development phase from designing to implementing.
P.S. The readme in the repo is supporting my view.
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. We are currently making some last improvements to the RFC, and it should get merged within the next days.
The RFC is merged now!
https://github.com/LemmyNet/rfcs/blob/main/0004-post-tags.md
block .ml, problem solved =D
No, that doesn't solve the problem. You have to have a merge accepted by the owners of the repo, unless someone wants to start a new fork and maintain that.
When browsing in All or similar, there's a non-zero chance of coming across things that can be offensive, explicit, or disgusting. You shouldn't encounter anything pornographic or where people die or get horribly injured, but that is my only expectation.
I browse in thumbnail view for that reason. It's enough to see if I want to see a full image, if it's not something I want to see, I didn't get hit full blast by it, and if it's something I don't want people around to see at that moment, it's much harder for them to see it and faster to scroll past.
When you select a sort that pulls from every community, it's you asking to see everything. Death, injury, and private parts are about the only things the bulk of society can agree are at least somewhat offensive, so those are the only things you should expect to see blocked by a NSFW filter. Lewd, gross, and offensive are still free to pass, for better or worse. That's the Internet culture has existed for most of its existence and feels pretty universal in my experience.
If the NSFW limit was put on "image of a woman wearing shorts and sports bra", would you run to shut down the break room TV when they showed such obscene NSFW things like the Olympic games with their skimpy track and field and beach volleyball outfits? All of those communities would obviously need to be marked NSFW on Lemmy too.
And while NSFW indeed does come from the words "Not safe for work", it isn't "blur everything that wouldn't be appropriate for my coworkers or boss to see me browse during work time".
Getting caught watching episodes of My Little Pony would be pretty inappropriate and embarrassing during working hours as well.
Why not????? That's surely exactly what NSFW should mean.
Your "there's no clear boundary between appropriate and inappropriate" is bogus. You could use the same argument to remove NSFW tagging altogether or allow CSM on the platform. It's not a useful or sensible contribution.
Nudity, gore, violence - explicit materials. Stuff you wouldn't be allowed to plaster on a giant billboards in the middle of the city or on the side of your office building or have run on daytime TV in the breakroom. If an image of a clothed female is NSFW then obviously a man wearing nothing but a towel in a shower is as well.
You start making a list of everything everyone takes offence into and finds inappropriate and you end up with a list with literally everything on it. Some people in this thread have used "If I couldn't use it as a wallpaper at work, it should be NSFW". Plenty of people would find this picture absolutely disgusting and inappropriate, so should it and everything like it be NSFW tagged as well?
That's the same argument again. It claims that something is sometimes hard to do therefore should never be done. It claims that some people might disagree therefore no decision can be made. It's fallacious.
Some people would get in trouble at work if they were caught browsing Lemmy. Period. Therefore every post, and the entire website, is NSFW.
You define it that broadly and it's meaningless.
There's a world of difference between "some people" and "most people" that you're ignoring. Obviously the NSFW tag is useless to people who aren't allowed on their phones in their break time, but that's absolutely no reason to exclude scantily clad people from the not suitable for work tag.
I'll go with, if you are browsing an Anime related channel, then that's not to be NSFW'd.
When x-Posting, it would be NSFW.
But I don't use Lemmy or social media at the workplace anyway, so what would I know
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
You seem to be unfamiliar with the concept of context
Did you look at the image?
She's not being sexual or suggestive.
Good luck explaining that to HR or trying to come up with a non-creepy reason for viewing that on your computer at work.
Solution: Don't look at Lemmy at work.
I don't look at Facebook, use Google for non-work needs, and I don't use social media.
I check my email but honestly I shouldn't even do that.
I work in IT. They can see everything you type, everything on your screen, and can silently record video and audio. It's not your computer, it's theirs, and they are completely within their rights under the law.
Are you serious? She's mostly naked. Look at the body language and facial expression.
And it's just the woman in a void, unlike the Olympics where they're people doing stuff.
If a smile and blushing is suggestive to you, I suggest that you never leave your house. Too many temptations out there my guy.
And if a bra and shorts qualifies as "mostly naked" then I suggest that you don't leave your house between the months of May and October.
I see your other reply below, so I don't know if this is before or after the other one (which is an honest take).
My guy. Do I have to explain to how "I was reading about the olympics" is a whole other category than "I was looking at anime girls"? Maybe it shouldn't be, but that's not the world we live in.
Where do you draw the line?
The platform has its own governance.
Personally, I feel like social media at work is inappropriate.
If you're watching the Summer Olympics, and only watch the events where they're scantily clad (and commonly underage), maybe not watch that at work either.
As far as the tag? If it's not showing nipples, isn't sexual in nature, or suggestive, I personally don't see why it should unless you go back and puritanically apply the tag anything anyone could be offended. And at that point - what do we have left?
Look, I can't control what people define as sexual. It is possible to block communities. Tailor it to fit your preferences. Heck why not make a second profile that is specific to when you're not at work? And one that blocks out all but the news and wholesome content for work?
I don't see why this should be a one-fits-all process. We're trying that out right now, with the supreme court. (Assuming that you live in the US)
Honestly I lost track of what the original context was (irony) and was just mad that people are like "no, no, half naked anime girls are totally on the same level as Olympic athletes"
It's up to the community what they want to mark as NSFW. I personally think stuff like the linked image are on the far side of NSFW.
Eh I will admit there are places where wearing a bra in public is odd and sexual there are also places like Florida where women were bras out in grocery stores
If you're browsing Lemmy, on your phone, in work then really you should be curating your feed a bit better.
Ding ding ding
No
Yes. All academic points aside, it's not socially-acceptable to view stuff like this in public.
I would have no problem if that popped up in my feed while I was in a public place.
That said, I don't think it would be safe for work, so the nsfw would apply. But I would not be browsing Lemmy at work either.
Having looked at your referenced image. No. She is appropriately clothed for summer.
In certain states in the US, a woman can choose to be topless anywhere a man can be. This woman is not topless.
Also maybe not visit Lemmy or any social media at work.
As far as on the bus? I guarantee that there's a woman on the bus in similar atire off it's summer.
Also, Americans are usually more prude, especially when it comes to the female body, than what is healthy (I understand that you would not want to make an attempt at social change starting in the workplace though).
I think they should only be half marked NSFW.
As maybe the main culprit behind such content, I can comment.
I'd love to err on the side of caution. Unfortunately that isn't how the NSFW toggle is used, and erring on the side of caution any more than necessary comes with drawbacks in terms of post visibility and community growth.
Posts like the one you linked perform orders of magnitude better when not marked NSFW, which means they reach more people who want to see them when un-tagged, than didn't want to see them.
And tagging them, in fact achieves the opposite.
This is because people scroll past content marked NSFW regardless of what it is. Because they can't see what it is. Except when they are looking for porn.
So while I didn't stop using the NSFW tag, I pushed the needle a bit and stopped marking everything even slightly revealing as NSFW "just in case" because it was literally hiding it from the people who wanted to see it, and leaving just the porn enthusiasts to check the actual images, who'd then down-vote it because it wasn't actually porn.
I am myself completely uninterested in actual pornographic content on Lemmy, yet as someone who doesn't mind it, I actually do not hide NSFW content, and even disable blurring it by default.
Because the binary tagging of NSFW is utterly useless as a tool for curating away content I do not want to see, as a SHIT-TON of content I DO want to see would go with it.
Instead I use the list view in Thunder with its small thumbnails, making the occasional porn very difficult to spot over my shoulder, but allowing me to much more properly vet what posts I open and view in full size.
I am fairly certain that a lot of the people who engage with my many "moe" communities, are, like me, quite uninterested in actual explicit content. As such they do not engage with posts marked NSFW, or perhaps even disable it entirely on their accounts.
The NSFW toggle isn't enough, and its purpose and exact threshold varies wildly depending on your sensibilities.
This content isn't porn, yet if I run my communities as if it is, they don't get traction.
If I run my communities like they're for porn, they'll mostly be frequented by people who post and look for exactly that. But they won't fit in because I don't allow nudity, and the stuff I do allow isn't the kind anyone settles down to actually get off to, despite some of it being arousing. So, my communities don't belong on that side of the fediverse, but at the same time they don't entirely belong on the SFW side of a lot of people's feeds either.
Yet, to reach the people like myself, but who unlike me don't make the insane effort of checking every NSFW post to see if it's not porn, that's where they have to exist.
I'll reluctantly back you up since I feel like you're right, and while I also have eyes over my back at times, I don't mind those in-between images because yes, I'm not going to click the NSFW ones in front of my family but I can easily shrug a half naked anime girl or something because it's the Internet and that exists. And besides, I can appreciate a well drawn image, lewd or otherwise.
Plus, while I've got a young daughter, but if any one actually goes outside, you're going to see worse just on a billboard somewhere. Or if you're terminally online, you'll also see it in ads. As far as I'm concerned it's about as hard to avoid as someone saying fuck. I'll just have that conversation when I get there.
Sorry those who have stuck up jobs, though. The ones most likely to punish you because of an image are the ones you should most slack off during! Fuck those people, I hope we can move on to a tiered censorship system so everyone can just be happy and not fired over bullshit.
hey, just wanted to ask, how on earth do you maintain your rate of posting??
I threw together a helper tool using python. Whenever possible, it automates all the various steps of creating posts, such as crediting the artist, including links to their socials, shrinking large image files, uploading the image to a host...
It also doesn't actually post at the same rate that I find things to post. I was having to stop myself or I would go on spammy posting sprees when doing it manually, because I usually find hundreds of pieces worth sharing at a time. The tool lets me queue up all those posts with very little of the tedium of copy pasting links and artist names, and instead of me making a hundred posts all at once, it spreads them out over time.
I think this is a good conversion to have. I enjoy images of women, but everyone doesn't. I also don't feel it's fair to compare these images to porn and play morality police.
It makes sense to break NSFW into a handful of tags and allow more granular control. The problem historically was that the number of tags kept growing and became hard to classify.
The number of tags wouldn't be much of an issue, but then it comes down to the OP to tag appropriately. Even with generic NSFW filter turned on, I still occasionally see genitals in my feed.
We could allow users to tag, but I see brigading and other abuses possible here. Appointing power users also might work, but that has its own list of issues. That also would mean that all this information would need to synch with the post.
I vote for "NEP" to be the tag in between SFW and NSFW. It stands for "Not Exactly Porn"
It's for things you could still get off to and would likely get you in trouble at work, but hopefully wouldn't get you fired
I feel like, if done right, we could have a system of tags we could assign a comfort level. One could select the tags that they don't want to see, and possibly set their preferences to see what they want. Maybe a slider from absolutely not to always ok, and then move things as they see fit.
Done right, a person can control the content as they prefer.
Implemented poorly, and we have 4chan at the reigns of the MPAA.
I like the idea, but getting everyone to add the tags would be a nightmare unless the culture majorly shifts in favor of adding them
I think some communities might suggest tags, but you wouldn't be able to catch still of them. We don't have the resources for object recognition, but that is all I can think of for a fourth option.
Maybe a forced pop-up whenever you submit content. I know people are gonna hate it, but putting the option right in front of their face makes them far more aware of it.
If you wanted to make it optional, you could allow users to filter untagged posts. I think that with a combo of the popup could work to make it a thing people actually used.
Basically what were discussing is a less crap version of reddit tags, hashtags, forum tags, etc. The big problem with those, especially on reddit, is getting people to use them and use them properly. Every sub handled them differently (hell, on the 2 subs I modded, both used them differently and I ran both of them). Some subs let users apply, some were mods only, some were bots, etc. The other problem is getting people to use them properly. Hashtags aren't a bad system, but easily abused (look at Tumblr tags. They're essentially useless half the time).
Maybe community assigned tags could work. Have the poster tag from the start, then allow users to report if it should have a different level. It seems like a good idea, but I'd want to have something like a trust score behind it to filter errant reports and trolls, which I don't think is currently something lemmy supports, but idk.
Anyways, just throwing out ideas
Not bad ideas, but the forced pop-up asserts that there must be something sensitive about a user's post. I think maybe providing a few categories of sensitivity with their own drop-down boxes to select from.
These are terrible options, but for sexual they could be: Suggestive - from making sexual motions or comments to our model above Nudity - non-pornographic, but nipples or genitals are seen Porn
Violence seems to be a major category. Now sure about how to break it down
Gore Minor Injury Medical procedure Violent - these are bad options, I said
Politics is something people complain about, but I don't know if that should be considered sensitivity or if we should attempt to break it down.
Abuse This one is hard because by only selecting over category you rule others out. Is my abuse less than yours?
While I don't really see that specific image as nsfw, you can point that out to the posters to mark it as such; or you can block communities or posters that you don't think adhere to it consistently.
Edit: Neptunia series do have their fair share of fanservice as in their original artwork, so you could feel free to block that community
No
As a side note, if there can be a sort of tag that denotes things like half naked anime characters, I would be the first one to permanently filter them out of my feed because they contribute absolute zero value to my experience here. Not trying to be a downer but it's just not for me. I'm glad there are people who enjoy that and can have that.
There is a proposal to add Tags but devs aren’t really responding. https://github.com/LemmyNet/rfcs/pull/4
Yes
Probably yes. As long as it's something that would reasonably not be ok to watch in public/family/work environment, it's always better to be on the cautious side.
There's a setting to just not blur NSFW tagged content, for people that are not concerned.
No. Worrying about this is like making dogs and cats wear pants.
But in a bad way?
No. That's just a fully clothed character. Any workplace where that would be considered "NSFW" is the kind of place where getting caught browsing Lemmy at all is NSFW.
Counterpoint I have a workplace where browsing Lemmy would not be NSFW but I don't want to deal with someone being judgemental if they happen to look over my shoulder.
That's a you problem, not a content problem, though.
Are we obligated to mark SpongeBob SquarePants as NSFW because you're worried co-workers are going to be judgemental if they caught you watching it at work?
Getting cross with people who want to use the NSFW tag is making a you problem into an other people problem. If you don't want anything blurred, change your settings and stop belittling people's perspectives who want to use the feature.
It's not belittling anyone. It's about having an actual line and not making NSFW into a meaningless term.
Seriously, if you define "NSFW" as anything ANYONE won't want to be caught doing at work, all of Lemmy is NSFW. Your personal definition of "I might get embarrassed by it" is equally meaningless and, again, would result in the entire website simply labeling everything NSFW.
Oh, what if I work in a conservative workplace and don't want to get caught browsing a liberal sub? Guess everything liberal or left leaning is NSFW!
Oh wait, I'd be embarrassed by people knowing I have relationship problems, so any relationship advice is now NSFW.
I don't want my co-workers to think I'm a dumbass, so anything like NoStupidQuestions or ELI5 is also inherently NSFW.
You want to broaden the NSFW term to the point of being meaningless, and have everyone else moderate their posts to your ill-defined benefit. It's so meaningless that the tag may as well not exist at that point.
No, you're the one making it meaningless. If something's not suitable for work, tag it NSFW. Scantily clad people are clearly not suitable for work. Simple.
Yeah this guy is making the most ridiculous slippery slope argument here. What context is there for you to be viewing a half-naked anime girl at work? It just makes you look like a creep. Viewing political posts is hardly comparable.
femboy hooters allows it
If you want to start your path down the reddit rabbit hole, yeah. Else, no
I would personally adhere to US Beachwear rules unless mods specify otherwise.
No nipples, exceptions being for explicitly male, of photographs of cultures that generally do not cover breasts, or certain artistic or medical references.
No pubic region that reveals any genitalia or anus.
There is no third rule, literally anything goes, including the image you were wondering about.
So while some people might object to a lot of the content we see, I don't personally think it is problematic. Especially when your instance has images collapsed by default, except for thumbnails.
Those don't require an NSFW tag because they're actually strictly illegal throughout most of the world. You should report those regardless of if it's got the correct tags, if not to the moderators then to the authorities.
Bilateral half naked or radial half naked
where surface area > 49.999...%
49.999... is 50
yes. I accounted for xeno's paradoxical thong.
This is a weird thread... Lots of people really give a shit about what others think about the content they consume. There's also a lot of strange presumptions about people who watch anime and how it's creepy when adults watch it. If you were just described above, maybe you should reevaluate some things.
If you would get in trouble for this image on your phone at work, then you really should not be on Lemmy at work. I'm sure there are perfectly acceptable threads for your workspace on Lemmy, but then again, people used to read the articles in playboy magazine. Also, the example image is only sexual if you sexualize it, which you are doing by saying it should be marked nsfw. If the local news stations are comfortable showing gymnasts and swimmers and volleyball players in their respective uniforms, then why should this be any different? Lastly, if that drawing is making you uncomfortable, I don't know how to help you because this is so so so incredibly far from the worst content you can find on this site. Maybe you shouldn't be on here at all if that's the case.
It's only weird if you make it weird and this whole thread is making it weird.
Error: Infinite Loop
The difference between this and swimming attire is context. Seeing a swimming competition on the communal TV at work doesn't make you look like a creep but checking out drawings of a half-naked anime girl on your personal device does.
People who want to watch NSFW links can click the links
People who want NSFW stuff in their feed can tick "Show NSFW content" and untick "Blur NSFW content". There's no reason to argue with other people for wanting to use the NSFW tag for exactly what it was designed and named for.
Yes, there is.
Should XY be tagged as NSFW is not asking about if the tag should exist on certain topics (that's indeed something you can ignore with your own settings) but about if people should be forced to flag stuff as NSFW. And I refuse to tag stuff as NSFW just because I can imagine someone, somehow, in some rare context wanting that tag. Because by then it lost all meaning and we should do an "Yes this is safe for 4 years olds"-tag instead.
I claim that it's quite clear that this is not suitable for work. HR are not going to get cross with me for browsing memes in my lunch break on my phone, but if this comes up, it's clearly not OK, and I don't think I'm at all unusual in having a work environment like that.
I'm just asking that we try to use Not Suitable For Work to mean not suitable for work. You might feel that my workplace is weird, but that's not what you're arguing, so I think you're kind of missing the point of the tag. Yay internet freedom and all that, but tagging something that's very likely to get someone in trouble at work as NSFW is just being a considerate person. That's all. People are still free to see it, but it gives them the freedom to choose to filter it out and use their phone when they're on a break at work.
Again, I think you're on the wrong site at work then. Lemmy is not suitable for your workplace and you're asking us to make it suitable for your workplace.
You can say I shouldn't be on social media at work as much as you like, but until you're writing my pay cheques, it doesn't mean anything. We lead different lives, you and I. I'm sorry that your work doesn't allow you down time at lunch, but try not to hate on me for working at a place that does.
All I'm asking is that folks use the Not Suitable For Work tag on things that are not suitable for work. I just don't see that as a particularly big or bad thing to ask.
What makes you so keen to see this stuff at work anyway?
I didn't say that. And I am completely allowed on social media at work. But that image wouldn't get me any heat for being on my phone. You are not the authority on what is and is not suitable for all work places and I'm glad that's the case because your aim is to create a more censored internet. Just because you are sexualizing that anime woman, does not mean we all need to.
Sure? I'm not arguing against that?
Sorry, I could have been clearer that I was agreeing with you!
Oh, lol. Well that goes both ways : I misunderstand posts fairly often =) Sorry!
There is no social media that would consider summer clothes NSFW, you are taking it too seriously, it just means "not porn".
So like, pokemon would be NSFW?
Half naked? Shes literally wearing a top and bottoms. Yall need to relax
Still clearly not safe for work.
Doesn't really seem like it. It's a belly button. It's not even a provocative or suggestive pose.
Try showing it off at work. Set it as the wallpaper on your work computer and see how "safe for work" it is then.
This would hardly raise an eyebrow. Again, it's a belly button.
The point is that if you are seeking consensus on this around the most conservative interpretation of the concept, you will likely not find it. You are responsible for curating your own internet experience.
Work culture, especially in the US, is very conservative. The fact that you don't understand that it's better to be more conservative here regardless of consensus is astounding. Understand that the NSFW flag is a curation tool. You seem to think it's a form of censorship. It's purpose is to deal with the ten per cent on the far end of the spectrum who would take offence. And if your retort is that the majority shouldn't have to accommodate the minority, that's just a terminally online opinion that fails to recognise the fragility of real human interaction. It's analogous to saying that bridge engineers shouldn't have to accommodate the heaviest ten per cent of vehicles when figuring out what its maximum load should be when accomodating "most" vehicles is enough and that those vehicles should either lighten their load or find an alternate route.
I'm not going to argue with you over this because I don't believe you have the foundational understanding of why things are what they are.
I work in the US. This is a belly button. Yes I am quite skeptical that a picture of an anime character would course any fuss just about anywhere.
You also don't have to show your phone to your coworkers. What's astounding is that you apparently cannot conduct yourself in public.
None of Lemmy is safe for work.
When you're at work you should be working, not wasting time doomscrolling.
Either mark every single post as NSFW, or none of them, same difference.
easier with the bootlicking champ. why would you say this to anyone?
Hey, if you don't want to work, don't, but don't blame lemmy when you do something not allowed by whatever contract you signed.
The concept of "not suitable for work" is absurd by definition; if you signed a contract that will get you penalised if you browse a certain type of content, just don't browse sites which might contain that type of content while you work, it's not rocket science, just basic self control.
Lemmy and the internet ain't your nanny, if you're working you're hopefully an adult, so be responsible for your own actions and don't try to switch the blame onto unrelated third parties.
This is a facetious argument and you know it.
No, I've genuinely never seen the point of NSFW tags.
If you're worried about NSFW tags you shouldn't be using the resource that might have them under whatever circumstances are making you worry about NSFW tags.
Have some self control, the internet ain't your nanny, take responsibility for what resources you use and when, don't try to shift the blame onto the people providing you with said resources (and for free, no less!).
You've basically just excluded ninety per cent of the Internet from being used. And it's not surprising that this is coming from someone with an account on the lemmynsfw instance.
If everyone followed your logic, you wouldn't even be posting this because your instance would have been defederated a long time ago to not lose users.
I'm excluding 99% of the internet from being used in specific circumstances, sure. Or rather pointing out that it's the users' responsibility to do so, since no one else can know what is suitable or not in their current specific circumstances.
If you can't wait to browse something that might contain something unsuitable for your current circumstances until you find yourself in circumstances where it's suitable that's on you, not on whoever is producing or serving said content.
Yeah I am shocked at how puritan this thread feels.
My solution is to have multiple profiles. Block that stuff on your SFW profile and not on your NSFW profile.
I just came in my snuggie, thanks a lot
No 100%
There is no NSFW about that picture IMO
I can't see why any reasonable workplace wouldn't even allow one to have a poster like that hanging there
If someone hung a poster like that at the office I would question their social understanding.
Why?
I dont care if someone hangs a poster of their dog, their child, their partner or ozzy osbourne, unless the workspace is exposed to customers. Then i expect that there must be guidelines. I dont see how anime figures could offend anyone and i dont see how OP calls them half naked when they are fully clothed.
All I’m saying is that a person hanging a picture of an anime chick in their cubicle is far enough outside the norm of office behavior that said person probably doesn’t have a good sense of social cues. There’s absolutely a difference between pictures of your family and pictures of your cartoon waifu.
Maybe companies limit their options by establishing and maintaining a norm of office behaviour. Maybe letting people be people as long as they contribute with what they can and what they are good at, is enough to demand of your employees
Maybe. I don’t think those norms are enforced from above or anything. It’s one of those “read the room” type things. And that’s all I’m saying. Someone who would have a scantily clad anime poster in their cubicle at the engineering company I work at has failed to read the room. And thus I question their social understanding.
I also feel like it’s the sort of thing that makes a workplace less comfortable for some people. Like, I can imagine a woman working in the very male-heavy software and engineering departments who could find such posters off-putting. Just like it would be tacky to put up posters of a supermodel in a bikini on a muscle car.
Let’s maybe just not objectify people at work, you know?
Gives me the ick, like some guy with a pornstar poster. If you can't even go to work without having a sexualised image constantly in your eye line, you need to work on your priorities.
But isn't that their problem? Why bother what their personal priorities are?
Because they're working with other people?
So you have a problem with a persons priorities, based on their preferences when it comes to office decorations, because they are "working with people"?
As long as those preferences and priorities do not interfere with this persons performance at work, I don't see why you or anybody should have a say on this really.
Simply put, it's sleezy. I wouldn't want to hang around someone like that. Titillating anime pictures are on the spectrum of a mechanic's skimpy calendar. They've prioritised sexual gratification over social decorum, which the choice in of itself, I feel would make women uncomfortable. What kind of guy does that?
There's clearly a limit here, I'm sure you'd agree, perhaps your line is simply further back. Hardcore pornography is probably out, no? A fleshlight? A poster celebrating 9/11? Any number of these things wouldn't interfere with my ability to work, but I certainly wouldn't want to go near that person. You come to work to work, not to get a horn on.
Maybe expecting a community about women with huge tits and jiggle physics to not be a little risqué is the problem.
I browse by active and get this in my feed without having interest in it, so it's not just people specifically visiting certain communities.
Subscribed exists for a reason.
I don't want to live in a bubble for one but, more importantly, a new user will not have subscriptions.
Then that's the risk you take browsing unfiltered content. Especially on Lemmy, you are never going to get this consensus on how to tage content. So if you are in a place where you can't see sensitive content, then stick to more filtered content. This is like day 1 internet stuff.
Again, this fails to cover both the cases of someone who is checking out mbin/lemmy for the first time as well as someone who does decide it's maybe more than a sketchy site and doesn't have subscriptions yet.
Yes, and it also fails to realise that you can turn off NSFW filtering if you want in settings. Settings exist for a reason. If you want to view lemmy just in your subscribed communities that's fine. If you want to turn off NSFW filtering, that's fine. If you want to blur it all, that's fine. You do you. Fix the settings how you like, but there's no need for folks to hate on us for wanting to use the Not Safe For Work filter as it's designed.
The OP is literally about the images not being flagged as NSFW.
So block that community and you wont see posts from it.
I mean it should be fairly obvious, but sometimes a person is at home while browsing, and might like to see these. Other times they are at work while browsing and could actually get into trouble for viewing them
This is about the "not safe for work" tag, isn't it?
If you wanna browse at work, use a different account then? As others said, 'NSFW' is applied differently by different people (I don't think the example provided is NSFW, it's skimpy, but not lewd), at some point you have to have some self responsibility.
and sometimes you have to accept that other people want to use the Not Suitable For Work filter as designed. If you don't like it, you can turn it off in settings.
Well, there's your problem. What in fuck's name are you doing wasting time on lemmy when you should be working..?
And, if for some unconscionable reason you need lemmy for work and your IT aren't competent enough to have blocked it in the company firewall, just make yourself a work-specific user and browse by subscribed (though if you really needed it for work you'd almost certainly be going to specific communities anyway, not to the aggregated views...
Why get cross with people who want to use the Not Suitable For Work filtering at work? If you don't like it, turn it off. It's in settings. No one's forcing you to use lemmy the same way other users do.
I mean, I do for a lot of porn and some other communities (I'm not personally into anime at all, so those are usually among them). There are still two issues remaining:
I mean, congrats on finding content outside your bubble then. If you don't like it, use the tools available to you.
Like the Not Suitable For Work filter, you mean?
Who the fuck is using Lemmy at work..?
Lots of us have breaks & lunch, or just slow/down time.
A live feed of people at the beach would also be not safe for work. I’m certainly not offended by it, but it’s inappropriate for the work environment
TIL there are no jobs at the beach.
Edge cases you think are clever to point out are not the majority of job environments.
This entire thread is the epitome of "internet: serious business"
Well yeah. When you're in the real world, with real people, at real places of employment, it kinda matters.
Don't have stupid shit visable on your phone at work. It's a simple thing to do. If you can't grasp that concept then that's a you problem.
It's common sense.
That's exactly what I'm saying though. Don't show your phone to your coworkers if you don't want them to see it.
No. Don't have it visible. Phone's are not magic devices that only you can see.
Other people can see what's on your phone when you're using it. It doesn't have a magical screen only you can see.
People are not horses, they don't wear blinders.
Anime girls aren't real. You won't be seeing them at the beach.