The future of NSFW

Posted in

#101 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-23 at 13:54
< report >Ok we are just discussing guys of course every one is trying to let the others come to their side. But some users here have their particular way of thinking they are sitting on a pile of gold.

there is no need to go out of your way for snowflakes who only want their way.
First the "way" has not yet decided...so tell people they want their own way while implicitly imposing your own way seems kind hypocritical, but nothing new from your side.

Yorhel's the one to take the wheel.
Someone instead keep reassuring yorhel that he got the hands on the wheel and the decision it's only his decision to make....like there is any real need to tell him that (implicit wannabe manipulator??).

And why no flags for slice-of-life, shopping, eating, drinking, dancing and other such perverted activities I'm sure many people have no desire to see?
And why beliar should you redicule a user from express a simple opinion? Bestiality and scat are under "Darker sexual content" as trait rightnow, maybe is something we don't need but I don't find his suggestion something to laugh about.Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 13:59
#102 by beliar
2020-02-23 at 14:41
< report >
but I don't find his suggestion something to laugh about

Actually, it's a horrible suggestion, because it has a potential to spiral completely out of control. If we continue splitting hairs we won't make any progress forward at all.

I'm pretty sure most of the public places will frown on Vanilla explicit content as much as on the Darker sexual content. And in regards to the Darker sexual content, you simply cannot please everyone, or in this case, every principality with its own laws. Even such seemingly similar countries like the USA and UK have wildly different interpretations of what is legal regarding sexual content.

With UK outright banning fictional lolis and continuously trying to ban BDSM, where do we stop making flags?

It's nice for someone to say bestiality and scat is illegal, so let's get flags for that. So, maybe we also need flags for spanking and female ejaculation, because the acts were illegal in UK for some time. And even if the ban was overturned just recently, they might try to do it again. While we are at it, we also need flags for kissing, because I'm sure it's illegal to do somewhere if you are not married...

Oh, and many "darker" sexual content activities, like scat are perfectly fine in most European countries, South America and Japan. So, calling it illegal is a severe exaggeration.Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 14:43
#103 by warfoki
2020-02-23 at 14:48
< report >Beliar has a point though: if we keep adding flags for all the stuff, we'll never get anywhere. Having two 3-tier flags for violence and sexual content makes sense to me, as "not safe" images are pretty much always not safe for one of these two as reasons. And separating them worth the effort, since one can be more safe than the other, depending on where you are.

As I see it the point of this system isn't to unblock VNDB where it was blacklisted. I still maintain my stance on that the only way to really keep the proxy site off of blacklists is going draconian and purging it from images altogether, along with most if not all sexual tags and traits while leaving the original site at peace.

However, even if we rely on the new flag system for making the proxy site "safe" (which we shouldn't be doing) a separate, tiered violence and sexual content flag system will already filter out lolicon, bestiality and the like, so the "safe" site shouldn't be affected and if you want to filter out that type of content on the main site, that's what the tag and trait system is for.Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 14:55
#104 by naiohoras
2020-02-23 at 14:53
< report >
implicit wannabe manipulator??
yes.

I think it's only logical to add a flag for a hardcore content that's forbidden in most countries.
adding another flag? No. however, we can discuss it when creating the new guidelines imo. since isn't that what this thread is about? deciding which one's safe and which one's not.Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 14:56
#105 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-23 at 15:19
< report >@warfoki: I never said we "have to" add any other flags. I just don't like the way this thread discussion is carried on. At least now I can read some reasons in beliar second post.
I bet we are always fighting during discussions....
And I backed up both naiohoras and rampaa idea of having two 3-tier flags for violence and sexual content, even if I was really courious to see yorhel voting system.
That said my main concern was not on this thread topic (which interest me only a little) but on people.
#106 by ginseigou
2020-02-23 at 15:22
< report >
if you want to filter out that type of content on the main site, that's what the tag and trait system is for.
@103 By this logic, there's no reason in adding flags for violence and there's no point in making any additional flags at all. People can filter out anything.
@102 I was suggesting to add only one flag for all extreme pornography.Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 17:14
#107 by warfoki
2020-02-23 at 15:55
< report >@105: Ehh, I'd consider the discussion here very much polite and productive. A bit of sarcasm and bite in posts are perfectly fine, as long as we still have a productive discussion. At least imo. Then again, maybe I just have a higher tolerance for that sort of stuff. Engaging in political discussion in YouTube comment sections kinda makes you grow a thicker skin after a while.Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 15:56
#108 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-23 at 17:21
< report >
maybe I just have a higher tolerance for that sort of stuff. Engaging in political discussion in YouTube comment sections kinda makes you grow a thicker skin after a while.
Are you the same warfoki I use to know? Sometime I almost feel like I grasped your nature. But obviously I did not.

Oh, and many "darker" sexual content activities, like scat are perfectly fine in most European countries, South America and Japan. So, calling it illegal is a severe exaggeration.
Beliar don't tell me that eating shit or fuck an eye socket can be compared (illegal or not) to sex in missionary position or a blowjob. That was the reason I liked the voting system, because those are subjective topics and so everyone could express his opinion on the picture, and thus maybe fucking a dead body could have an higher rating (and thus danger factor) than a boobjob.
Flags are fine but they are on or off.
Also to me "darker sexual contents" are not what's legal or not but are those pictures where my wife asks me to minimize the application.

About the violence/gore vs sex/panties flag I really don't grasp where does the difficulty lies after we decided some rules and we make them clear to everyone.Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 17:23
#109 by beliar
2020-02-23 at 17:34
< report >
and thus maybe fucking a dead body could have an higher rating (and thus danger factor) than a boobjob
I'm not sure I understand you. If Yorhel does implement voting, it will still be a three-prong one (safe/suggestive/unsafe). Both fucking a fanny and fucking an eyesocket would have the same rating of "unsafe". No one even was thinking about more ratings, before Ginseigou mentioned that. Where does the "higher rating" you mentioned come from?
Sure, if Yorhel does implement the "gore" flag, the "eyesocket bang" would get that one too, but that's it.

Also to me "darker sexual contents" are not what's legal or not but are those pictures where my wife asks me to minimize the application.
And I'm completely in agreement. It was Ginseigou who mentioned legality, and my post was supposed to refute his stance and show that it's not the legality that is the problem.
#110 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-23 at 17:45
< report >
I'm not sure I understand you
I'm not sure I understand myself either. Maybe I assumed wrong here. I thought that let say safe = 0 suggestive = 5 and unsafe = 10 points. It could be possible with the voting system (which enables n votes instead of a single one) to decide a median underground vote for a particular picture.
That's why I liked the darker sexual content flag, because that could lead to a more fine grain voting system with something like:
safe = 0, suggestive = 4, unsafe = 7 and dark content = 10

But maybe I'm daydreaming and yorhel doesn't want to achieve that and I completely misunderstood everything.

And I'm completely in agreement
NiceLast modified on 2020-02-23 at 17:48
#111 by beliar
2020-02-23 at 18:01
< report >Hmm... that's not how I understood Yorhel. I got that there would be three options: safe/suggestive/unsafe with checkboxes, similar to how we currently have no spoiler/minor spoiler/major spoiler checkboxes for tags.
Of course that still doesn't exclude the aforementioned four point system. After all, you can add as many checkboxes as you want, but that will eventually increase the chance of severe disagreements, rather than decreasing. After all, the simplest mechanisms are the least prone to breaking down.
#112 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-23 at 18:07
< report >
increase the chance of severe disagreements, rather than decreasing.
True, but it could happen in a 3 or even a 2 flag system.
Let say for example that upon a picture you say suggestive and I say unsafe. Now we must force our vision one onto the other. With voting system you say suggestive and I say unsafe and that's it.
With flag the picture is either (point wise) 5-suggestive or 10-unsafe, with voting system is 7.5 (suggestive-unsafe)

What I wanna say and come to a conclusion is that probably I would like more flags just in case of a voting system, otherwise keeping it simple is the best idea. Without a voting system the more choices the more fights. Instead with votes you don't have to change other users idea. You just express your opinion and let the median vote decide the final factor.
Now that I think of it its actually same problem of trait (single decision) vs tags (eveyone got to vote)...and not that tags always brings the best results in terms of reliability. I think I start to understand what could go wrong with voting system too.Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 18:37
#113 by sakurakoi
2020-02-23 at 19:26
< report >
First the "way" has not yet decided...so tell people they want their own way while implicitly imposing your own way seems kind hypocritical, but nothing new from your side.
I think you forgot the original goal if you are not moving the post that is. It's not about "what we don't want to see" but "what we don't want to show (to others)". The question remains to be asked whether a stranger from somewhere may find it safe, not safe or in between. This system is not for "I don't want to see X content but Y!".

The guidelines would then outline what others may find objectionable, they are basically for those who have lacking common sense, knowledge, empathy or a combination of all three.
#114 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-23 at 21:27
< report >
I think you forgot the original goal if you are not moving the post that is. It's not about "what we don't want to see" but "what we don't want to show (to others)"
Yes I did move the post, but only a little bit. And truly I don't see any harm on discussing a way to add a little feature (the gore/blood image exclusion) for ourself while keeping the original goal of choosing what to and what not to show to others.
I also liked ginseigou idea, maybe because I thought (horribly) that it could work.
But lets presume I did forget the original goal of the thread or let's presume I did say something stupid while talking about the original goal, I keep my idea that I didn't like the colorful expressions some people used, yours included, but you know snowflakes melt at the ego sun.

Sadly while some guidelines are easy to write, it will be impossible to write guidelines about common sense, knowledge and empathy because I will gladly like those to be defined too.
#115 by naiohoras
2020-02-23 at 23:37
< report >I don't know if I missed something obvious here, but isn't voting system will be something like...these?:

> Image A is a borderline between safe and suggestive. the initial uploader rated it as suggestive.
> a user disagree and vote it as safe. now the votes are even.
> scenario A: more users, let's say 2, voted the image as suggestive with the total of 3 votes, now the image is flagged as suggestive.
> scenario B: more users voted on safe and now the points are 4 safe 3 suggestive, now the image is flagged as safe.
> scenario C: when the number of votes keep being even, the image will be flagged as the initial flag, which is suggestive here.
> scenario D: somehow, some people voted it as NSFW (I don't know, trolls?), now the image is flagged as NSFW. this is where the mods and trusted flaggers come.
> mod/trusted flagger will get more points when voting, let's say mods are 3 and trusted flaggers are 2. so they can "manipulate" (in a good way) the votes easily.

that's why I see no downside in Yorhel's idea. pretty solid imo.Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 23:53
#116 by yorhel
2020-02-24 at 08:47
< report >
safe = 0, suggestive = 4, unsafe = 7 and dark content = 10
Hmmmm. This mixes two different concepts (sexual content and gore/dark stuff) on a single linear slider, which means we'd have to somehow value whether non-sexual torture is safer than friendly hardcore porn. That's going to differ a lot per person.

While a 10-point system can work in combination with voting, I'm not sold on the idea. Figuring out how I'd rate each image with so many options would slow me down quite a lot. Three options seems like enough to me - it's more clearly defined and easier to flag.

Regardless of whether we go with voting or making this part of the edit history (I'm still in favor of voting, but I'm working on a few other things at the moment so I still have time before committing to a choice :P), we have to decide on the available options and their definitions. I like the three-point systems, so that leaves us with basically two options:

Two three-value fields to separate the sexual parts from the violence, which comes down to a total of 2*3=6 options:
> Sexually explicit + Serious gore = Guro
> Sexually explicit + Minor violence/blood = Defloration scene with blood?
> Sexually explicit + Safe = Regular ero scene
> Sexually suggestive + Serious gore = Cut off limbs and cleavage
> Sexually suggestive + Minor violence/blood
> Sexually suggestive + Safe
> Sexually safe + Serious gore = Cut off limbs in a non-sexual way
> Sexually safe + Minor violence/blood = Typical anime action scene or something
> Sexually safe + Safe = Totally perfectly safe image

Or a single three-value field to cover everything, expressed in the above options:
> Explicit = Sexually explicit OR Serious gore
> Suggestive = Sexually suggestive OR Minor violence/blood
> Safe = Sexually safe AND safe
(That OR is a logical boolean "or", not an "exclusive or" :)

Actual definitions are of course TBD.

Engaging in political discussion in YouTube comment sections kinda makes you grow a thicker skin after a while.
You must me a true masochist. I mean, the VNDB community is certainly not the friendliest place on earth (unfortunately), but that's on a completely different level. :/
#117 by warfoki
2020-02-24 at 11:17
< report >
Two three-value fields to separate the sexual parts from the violence, which comes down to a total of 2*3=6 options:

Okay, that looks like 9 options to me. Also, just to be clear, I think it should be two separate flags when voting, not one combined flag with 9 options. Basically like this:

Sexual content flag

[_] Safe.
[_] Suggestive.
[_] Explicit.

Violence content flag

[_] Safe.
[_] Minor violence.
[_] Gore.

Rating would be only saved and considered valid once the rater picked an option for both. Also, there should be no default value, to avoid people just clicking continue and saving wrong values that way.

If you want me to, I could take a shot at coming up with definitions and guidelines for this system.Last modified on 2020-02-24 at 11:18
#118 by ginseigou
2020-02-24 at 12:50
< report >Like it was mentioned before, it makes no sense that vanilla sex is in the same category as guro, bestiality, lolicon, shotacon and etc. I think the 4th flag for sexual content is needed. My suggestion is this:

Sexual content flag
[_] Safe.
[_] Suggestive.
[_] Vanilla sex\Nude (adult) body.
[_] Extreme porn.Last modified on 2020-02-24 at 13:08
#119 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-24 at 13:26
< report >
Hmmmm. This mixes two different concepts (sexual content and gore/dark stuff) on a single linear slider
Nope since I'm on the same line with the idea of warfoki with two separate flags, with the possible addition of a 4th "Dark Sexual Content" option like ginseigou is asking.

Sexual content flag

[_] Safe.
[_] Suggestive.
[_] Explicit.
[_] Extreme/Dark.

But again that 4th flag would be useful only for ourself and a possible future feature in user's profile page. If we only need to hide content from 3rd party (the others!) than is useless since no one cares about the distinction between the two. For "them" (the others) every kind of sexual content is just sexual content.

While a 10-point system can work in combination with voting, I'm not sold on the idea. Figuring out how I'd rate each image with so many options would slow me down quite a lot. Three options seems like enough to me - it's more clearly defined and easier to flag.
Yorhel, every picture would have 2 separate and not mixed underground factors: one for violence and one for sexual content. Mixing the two concepts it does not make sense, bacause you can achieve the same thing with less complexity with separate flags.
Anyway both routes (9-option single flag or 3-option double flags) enable the possibility from a user perspective to: "Hide all sexual content" while showing "Gore violence" which is impossibile with a single 3-option flag.Last modified on 2020-02-24 at 13:32
#120 by yorhel
2020-02-24 at 13:40
< report >
Okay, that looks like 9 options to me.
Yeah, well, who needs math anyway.

[_] Extreme/Dark.
Ah, okay, I'm slowly starting to see what you're getting at, but I'm still puzzled by this one. What does Extreme/Dark sexual content cover that isn't covered with the combination of the violence flag?

If you want me to, I could take a shot at coming up with definitions and guidelines for this system.
That would be very helpful, looks like we've reached a near-concensus on the available options now at least.
#121 by warfoki
2020-02-24 at 14:04
< report >I'm guessing Extreme content would be anything that's very often deemed illegal to show or, is, well, extreme. Things like:

- Lolicon / shotacon
- Guro
- Bestiality

The problem with this one is that this is a rabbithole to go down into. Like, do we tag it extreme, even if it is not explicit (eg. protagonist french kissing a loli who is in her underwear)? What is extreme anyway? Incest is illegal pretty much everywhere, patreon also banned incest, so should we make incest extreme too? Or just blood related one? How does that even come through on the image alone? What about hardcore sexual slavery? That's a pretty deal more extreme than a nude couple doing it in missionary. And rape? Tentacle hentai is technically considered to be bestiality by some countries / sites, so do we filter that too? Like, you know where do we draw the line there? The safe / suggestive / explicit is much easier to define because it is not concerned with the type of sex the characters are having, just how much is directly shown.

As such, I don't think this is necessary. Just use the tag / trait system for this site while the mirror site will be void of any and all sexual images anyway, so it doesn't matter there.
#122 by alto
2020-02-24 at 15:18
< report >Can't agree with breaking down explicit even further, warfoki summed it up well.

For gore, I can understand wanting "hardcore" stuff such as realistic corpses, lost limbs/beheadings being flagged - some people may not want to ever see that. On the flip side.. if you opt to view something explicit, I don't have much sympathy when you get explicit stuff even if it's the "wrong" explicit.

Rating every image twice along sexual/violence scales appears of dubious benefit to me. I mean, do we have more than a handful of images on the site that would actually qualify as gore? Do people actually care about not seeing any blood or someone getting punched? Does this solve a problem we have? Is "let users better control the content they want to see" now an additional goal?

IMO safe/questionable/explicit is simple, can cover 99.9% of cases and does a better job than the existing system.
#123 by ginseigou
2020-02-24 at 15:46
< report >@122 I agree, if your reasoning for not adding a new flag for Extreme porn is that people can filter it out, then there's no reason for new violence flags because people can filter out violence too. Most people easily tolerate violence rather than certain genres of porn.Last modified on 2020-02-24 at 15:49
#124 by warfoki
2020-02-24 at 16:11
< report >The reason I don't want extreme content flags is because either the violence or the sexual filter are going to filter those out anyway. So why bother?

Violence and sexual content are worth filtering, because there's a different level of tolerance for them and simply calling an image unsafe doesn't help there. An image is pretty much always unsafe because one of these two reasons, so makes sense to separate them. They are also fairly easy to separate, "extreme" content isn't.Last modified on 2020-02-24 at 16:14
#125 by beliar
2020-02-24 at 16:52
< report >
it makes no sense that vanilla sex is in the same category as guro, bestiality, lolicon, shotacon and etc.
Actually, it makes perfect sense.
I am extremely against separating the extreme content. I have warmed to the two scales for explicitness and violence, but extending the explicitness scale to include the so called extreme content is just bollocks.
Warfoki has already explained in his previous post how subjective the idea of "extreme" is. And as I have mentioned, frenching your unmarried partner would be extreme in some countries. You cannot account for every taste and trying to is just insanity.
You think there are many edit wars regarding safe/unsafe content. Just add the "extreme" button and get popcorn, because the edit ward will go through the roof.