@admin @staff skill issue, pornography isn't inherently dangerous to minors (i'm a prime example of that, as a now adult), and you shouldn't expect to be able to tell people on ANOTHER FUCKING INSTANCE that they can't post porn AT ALL. sure, you can tell them to cw it, but like, you haven't made that argument at all???? lmao

@bachimusprime @staff If mastodon.social was "just another instance", I'd just block it, say 'I don't wanna see it' and move on.

But mastodon.social is actually one of the highly-promoted instances closely associated with the Mastodon project.

So, no, it's not "just another server".

@admin @staff i'm saying that you shouldn't be blocking instances based on some stupid sex negative puritanical bullshit. block an instance for being full of fascists, not for users posting porn lmao

@bachimusprime @staff If we don't sandbox pornography, why should we not allow gore and other content that YOU would probably find offensive?

No, I definitely stand by what I'm saying.

@admin@burnout.cafe @bachimusprime@estradiol.city @staff@mastodon.social there is this thing called a content warning. as a self proclaimed content Meta moderator you should be well versed in how graphic content like gore and execution videos is vastly different from gay porn. you know what though? I allow that sort of content with content warnings. People post injuries and shit, sometimes asking for help. We can talk about mastodon.social being a melting pot and an administrative burden to filter but gay porn is seriously the last of your worries. How about the fact it's open reg and quite commonly you'll see people create burner accounts to harass others? It doesn't matter if mastodon.social moderation eventually takes down the content, it is still disturbing to be stalked and harassed by nameless accounts.

this conversation is deeply unserious because banning gay porn isn't going to stop people from uploading csam. go to literally any mainstream social media platform. hell? i am pretty sure most instances I see csam coming from explicitly forbids it in the rules. Either outright or "This instance is under jurisdiction of $COUNTRY". Gentrifying this ecosystem to capture investors is literally antithetical to what this network supposedly stands for. banning gay porn is not going to make this platform safe overnight and any mainstream platform claiming to be safe for children is lying. Look at Roblox, look at snapchat, discord, kik, literally dozens to hundreds of examples.

You know what does work to keep children safe? Giving them the ability to come forward to you. Being active in their online life (there is an extent to this, swing too far and you guarantee your kid gets hurt). Actually fucking moderating your platform instead of asking others to. If mastodon.social hosting gay porn is of such a threat, defederate them. Done. No more problems.

@puppygirlhornypost2 @staff @bachimusprime

Why are gore and execution videos any less acceptable than gay or other pornography?

And if you allow gay or whatever other kind of pornography, then why not allow a lot of other things?

It's a debatable point as to whether pornography is harmful and unhealthy.

But it's uncensored presence is certainly one of the reasons why networks like Mastodon are not going to become "mainstream" anytime soon.

Mastodon is not considered a "safe" environment for many people.

@admin @staff > Don't we want to cultivate a more "family-friendly" environment that will attract a bigger public?

No.

@admin For the Mastodon team, giving people powerful tools to control what they see and how they’re seen is a big part of our software design ethos. That being said, we will NEVER moderate based on someone’s sexual orientation.

@staff mastodon.social is easily perceived by many newcomers as a central, general-purpose entry point into Mastodon and the wider Fediverse.

That gives it a particular responsibility.

A general-purpose public instance that carries the Mastodon brand up front in its domain name should not normalize exposure to pornography, regardless of orientation.

My opinion is that content warnings, sensitive-media blurring, and hashtags are not sufficient containment for pornography on "flagship" instances like mastodon.social, mastodon.world, et cetera.

Some content belongs behind warnings. Some belongs on specialist instances. Some should not be hosted at all.

In the case of mastodon.social and other flagship instances, it shouldn't be hosted at all.

I think that's a defensible viewpoint.

If other people are considered to have the right to publish pornography, which they do continually, I have the right to publish my reservations and opinions about it.

Or is "free speech" just for some people?

#mastodon #fediverse #pornography #moderation

@admin @staff "Gay pride is not about publishing gay pornography."

You have no fucking right to tell others what pride means to them. The fucking nerve for you to even think that it is OK.

"Don't we want to cultivate a more "family-friendly" environment that will attract a bigger public?"

Who ever said that was mastodon.social's goal? Why would you assume it is?

"If we don't sandbox pornography, when why don't we allow gore and other offensive content?

No one gets to blanket allow or deny anything on the Fediverse. Its peer to peer and open source. Admins get control over their instance and that is the extent of their authority. Stop trying to exert your authority over other instances.

"I actually did a some six weeks of training as a moderator for Meta, so I do have some personal knowledge of the range of content you could be exposed to if nobody moderates anything."

I assure you that nobody on the Fedi cares one rat's ass how Meta does anything. Fuck Meta. Fuck X, and fuck those that want to turn the Fedi into another sanitized, sex hating wasteland.

@staff@mastodon.social hello . i am a supporter of free expression, which is precisely why i really wish you would encourage more people to post homosexual pornography.

i'm the admin of gaysex.cloud, where our official stance is that we actually think gay sex and gay porn is kinda neat and that both are necessary for a healthy gay pride gay rights society.

i really do not want to block your whole instance. But it's a real nuisance seeing all those cishet people not posting gay sex videos (under a content warning, of course)

don't you want to cultivate a "queer-friendly environment" that will attract a bigger audience of sex workers?

uncensored pornography on Free Open Source Software networks is precisely what makes us different from "Big Tech". if We didn't Allow Female Representing Nipples, we'd be just like Tumblr.

if we sandbox pornography, then we might also see less gore and other "offensive" art that people have poured their souls into creating, when those people have no outlet to share the things they made.