@toplesstopics Hi, there is an initiative for a new server list underway and i see an issue with a proposed rule. The thing is that nudity and pornography are proposed to be treated the same, and that feels wrong.
I thought before i say something, you might be a lot more qualified to propose a better solution. I hope this is a reasonable request, if so please share your thoughts on this.
Easy to read pdf:
https://jeffreyfreeman.me/files/united_federation_of_instances_proposal.pdf
Please see chapter 3, rule 6 for what i mean.
Github repo:
https://gitlab.com/ufoi/constitution/-/blob/master/proposal.tex
(line 173 is what i mean, currently:
\item Nudity and pornography must be posted either unlisted, with a content warning, or both.)
@admitsWrongIfProven
🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 And you know they include "female looking nipples" as nudity but not "male looking nipples," like everywhere else that caters to the puritanical misogyny and transphobia of the US 🙃
@freemo
🇳🇱
We say nothing about nipples or even what constitutues nudity. This is intended to be open to discussion. If you feel the current wording is wrong just suggest your edits, we will discuss and hopefully incorperate them, thats why this is open to all.
I offered my perspective there, but its just an opinion. I want to see how the conversation progresses before I solidify my view either way. I think it was a great contribution.
I also am looking forward to hear @toplesstopics 's take on it before deviding what opinion to support.
Thanks for the wonderful ideas.
@jonathonbarton @freemo @toplesstopics @admitsWrongIfProven Are you proposing all images go behind a CW? That would be a flat no from me, I’d be out, as images are my primary use-case for social media. I might be misunderstanding though.
I do understand that this is a difficult sort of problem, and I don’t actually have a proposed solution. Except maybe to say that global commercial social networks have struck a balance, and maybe that should be the starting point?
I agree with you, for me enforcing all CW all the time is too overreaching.
You should mention your objection here so it gets noted:
@freemo Urg, GitLab has blocked my account (it’s years old and I have not ever really used it) and I can’t get in. Might need some sorting with GitLab support.
@john @freemo @toplesstopics @admitsWrongIfProven Not just images, *all* multimedia.
The more I think about this, the more I realize the implicit bias in *not* socializing using "CW" as a 'headline' and putting media behind it.
ie. "You WILL see my images if you have the audacity to visit your Federated feed at any time, because my implicit bias is that everyone is affluent with a high speed, unlimited data network that costs nothing."
@john @freemo @toplesstopics @admitsWrongIfProven
Given: people pay for data (I do, $10/GB when I'm not at home on wifi)
If you *don't* habitually click ONE STINKIN' BUTTON to require users to *proactively* choose to view your content, you're spending the money in other people's pockets.
That's even before considering the content.
Could be pictures of kittens. Doesn't matter.
It's biased strongly toward assuming connections are free & nobody has objections or triggers or even preferences.
@john @freemo @toplesstopics @admitsWrongIfProven
Hell, I'd strongly get behind a campaign to rename "Content Warning" to simply "Headline" to remove the implicit stigma of using it.
@jonathonbarton @john @freemo @admitsWrongIfProven
I like "post summary," personally.
@admitsWrongIfProven @freemo @toplesstopics @jonathonbarton I get your argument, but as I say, I’m out if this get adopted. I’d prefer this was implemented at the application level, so people can choose of their clients load media by default.
Hiding images, content warnings, rule discussion
@john @freemo @toplesstopics @jonathonbarton
I completely agree that the automated image hiding only makes sense at application level, as an optional feature for everyone.
For the "CW / Title even if contents is not problematic" issue, it seems a bit too broad to be part of the base rules? After all, we are looking for a minimum standard that many communities, casual and serious, can agree on.
As an example, i tried to make a title here in the CW field. I spent quite a moment to think what to write, and still it feels like it is not entirely descriptive - i think it would be impractical to mandate because it would be a too large burden for casual tooting. It might be ok for invested scientific postings, but not for everything.
@jonathonbarton @john @freemo @toplesstopics @admitsWrongIfProven Most people don't click buttons, and each post in a timeline has a fraction of a second to gain a user's attention. This would kill engagement for artists.
Please everyone, add these opinions to the gitlab.. remember only votes on the gitlab will be counted so the only way to actually get heard is to voice your concerns there.
@freemo
I like discussing it here before I commit it officially to github, though.
@werner58 @jonathonbarton @john @admitsWrongIfProven
@toplesstopics @freemo i like that style too, since github would exclude those who don't want to make an account. Get some input from everyone, post a more refined version to github for a discussion.
Is it posted here yet? I'm stoked to see!
@admitsWrongIfProven @toplesstopics
For some different ways to discuss with the larger group see this post I made:
@freemo @toplesstopics @admitsWrongIfProven
I took a swing at it -
Partly b/c it seemed like it would create a minimum of two 'verses, one 'SFW', one 'NSFW'.
Partly b/c I thought of a gazillion other topics that ought be behind a CW.
Partly because I work with a global team and am really aware of my 'network privilege'.
Proposed 'TL;DR'
Boobs, Bombs, or Beans - __All__ multimedia goes behind a CW, and every user actively and affirmatively chooses to view it.