ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

What is appropriate content for DonationCoder?

<< < (8/43) > >>

Lashiec:
HAHAHAHA! That joke was great!

I'm all for the tag system. Some of the forums I usually visit are mostly used by teenagers and by twenty-something guys. Even those teenagers know when to mark a new topic as NSFW (prefixing a "+18" before the title of the post) when it can be clearly offending for someone. And I tell you, most of those guys are far meaner in language and pictures that the most explicit image or sentence posted here. If raving teenagers know when to draw the line, I feel the majority of the forum will know when to do such thing, after all most people around here is over 18 (it's not that being a 18-year old guy makes you a responsible person instantly, anyway).

Besides, I think that most adult threads here have a meaningful title, which explains by itself (case in point: the Pr0n Tube topic), and foul language often carries a spoiler tag or a "NSFW" mention somewhere. Of course, what it's foul language for me, could not be foul language for another person, like f0dder said.

jgpaiva:
I belive the tagging system would solve most of the problem.

Almost every "offensive" thread got a comment from a mod, IIRC (i was about to make one in that youporn thread, but then i saw it was ken who had posted it and everything ken posts is sacred ;) ). Thus, i think the mods are delicate enough to recognize questionable material, and even if they are not, members can "report to moderator" that thread, and it can be marked as NSFW.

I do recognize what veign mentioned about having too many threads marked as NSFW might be a "go away" sign for newcomers, but i think it'd be worse if they opened one of those threads and were surprised. At least, with the tag, they can be aware of what to expect.

As for considering the tagging system a means of censorship, i don't think it should be faced like that. It's a mean of preventing the "surprises", not a way of preventing the thread to be displayed for the general public. (because i support the idea that the default setting for the "show NSFW content" should be ON).


PS:
(BTW: +3 for jgpaiva's use of "anal")
-Ralf Maximus (January 03, 2008, 06:02 PM)
--- End quote ---
Oops, that was inadverted. Not being a native english speaker results in this kind of thing.. :)

Ralf Maximus:
Oops, that was inadverted. Not being a native english speaker results in this kind of thing..
-jgpaiva (January 03, 2008, 07:22 PM)
--- End quote ---

Your use of "anal" was appropriate, and a pefectly polite application of the word.  I was just being silly.  :-)

CWuestefeld:
Trying to walk delicately around the margins of politics...

The line
it is too narrow and robotic to make this a "Censorship -vs- Freedom of Speech" issue.  It isn't.  It is an issue of courtesy and consideration.
--- End quote ---
is the universal rationalization of all censors.

There is absolutely no one who believes that they are actually censoring. They're always doing it for the larger good. Consider that television and movies practice "self-regulation", the result of which is the absence of even artistic nudity yet a glut of violence.

That said, while it is a censorship question this is emphatically not a free speech issue (not that anyone has asserted so yet). The right to free speech is only a limitation on the government. The Founding Fathers believed in the ability of civil society to police itself, community members directly and immediately providing responses to proper and improper speech.

So this sort of discussion is exactly what James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and the others would have expected of us.

Ralf Maximus:
If we're considering implemention of a tagging system, then why is "censorship" relevant any more?

If we were talking about deleting posts, sure.  But nobody's suggested that.

FWIW, I am what many consider to be an extreme left-wing, progressive, libertarian, freedom of speech proponent.  I don't consider it my duty to protect the tender eyeballs and brains of anyone; if they've made the decision to venture out their front door they will See Things in the real world.  Expecting somebody else to protect them from unsavory images or ideas is infantile.

Having said that, I also respect the values of others who do not share my viewpoint.  I think a voluntary tagging system -- nothing like censorship -- is the way to go.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version