We have over a period of time gotten repeated reports of unmarked NSFW posts in certain communities. All of these communities share the same singular mod, who have shown indifference when content has been reported. As leaving NSFW posts unmarked is against our instance rules, we have moved to set the rule-breaking communities to hidden.

Those of you who subscribe to hidden communities will continue to see them as normal, for everyone else these communities will look empty and hidden from c/all.

The newly hidden communities are:

We would also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that programming.dev’s policy is to by default hide political communities, pornographic communities and communities hosting bot spam. Users seeking such content can subscribe to hidden communities so see them as normal.

Just recently we also went ahead and hid communities from lemmygrad due to the politics clause.

As always we encourage our local users to report content that break our instance rules. All content you report are seen by the admin team and helps inform the team of what’s going on across the fediverse.

    • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
      1·
      2 months ago

      Hidden communities are a good feature.

      It is unfortunate that it reduces discovery, but as marking posts NSFW when I think they aren’t also suppresses discovery, I don’t consider this a loss in the slightest.

      The opposite. Hidden, but available, is a very good place to be for a lot of the content I post.

      Instances can and should run their operations the way they see fit, hence creating a diverse range of options for users on what kind of “front page” they’d like to see.

      Hence my affinity for sopuli, which straight up defederates instances that host mostly pornography, as that is a genre of content I have no interest in consuming or sharing.

      I do take some issue with presenting my threshold for what constitutes NSFW to be “indifference”, but that’s a diplomatic issue. I am not indefferent in moderating my communities, and I’m a little insulted anyone would come to that interpretation given they actually looked into my actions.

      People have different sensibilities, and while I have used reports and comments to gauge where that line is for others, I don’t see the utility in erring on the side of caution beyond a certain point.

      • davidagain@lemmy.world
        0·
        2 months ago

        No, it’s completely indifference to other people’s desire to use NSFW to mean Not Suitable For Work.

        I certainly don’t work in an environment where having cartoons of scantily clad girls in suggestive poses on my phone screen in my lunch hour is in any way acceptable, and I don’t think I’m unusual in that.

        You don’t care about that, you’ve made that very clear in the past, you just care about how many views you can get for your adolescent-look content which is “mildly arousing” - your words, not mine.

        I don’t know why you think “mildly arousing” is somehow safe content to browse at work.

        So yeah, you’ve expressed absolute indifference to other people’s need for a clean feed by refusing to tag your content appropriately. You harm the fediverse by trying to impose your will,