• 3 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle



  • There have been meta discussions on this topic and there really isn’t a clear answer. It quickly devolves into “how do you define NSFW”. And there are good arguments for a broad variety of answers there.

    Looking at OP’s particular kink as an example, one argument is that, even though you’re showing completely clothed people, you probably shouldn’t be showing pictures of sexy girls wearing watches on your work computer. It isn’t porn, but I think your coworkers would quickly see that you are getting a sexual kick out of it regardless. on the other hand, most people consider this a porn instance. There are a lot of things that aren’t safe for work that really don’t fit with what most people consider the purpose of this instance (porn).

    As I recall, the instance doesn’t prohibit SFW content. It’s just that people here aren’t looking for SFW content and a lot of them are going to downvote SFW content because they don’t want to see it. The instance could try to tell people not to downvote these posts, but that’s not going to do much to change behavior. While some people do follow such guidelines, most aren’t going to follow upvote/downvote guidelines and are going to vote as they wish.






  • Op, you should add “uniquely” to the post title. That word in the title on the infographic is important. This is not showing the most popular Halloween candy, it’s showing candy that is much more popular there than the national average.

    As an example, let’s say tootsie rolls are the 30th most popular candy in the us. But in the state of Stateland, it’s the 10th most popular, which makes it Stateland’s biggest deviation from the national popularity. This makes it Stateland’s most uniquely popular candy because it is much more popular there relative to the overall us. Snickers is actually the most popular in Stateland, but tootsie rolls show up on the chart as the state’s most uniquely popular Halloween candy.




  • This is nothing new fighting pedophilia and human trafficking are the smokescreen used to enact most laws controlling the internet.

    Edit to fill in what I’m implying: these laws (eg FOSTA-SESTA) are either ineffective or counterproductive in their stated goal, while simultaneously having broad add-on effects, generally harming free speech.

    FOSTA-SESTA makes sex work less safe for those who are not trafficked. Meanwhile it pushes actual traffickers “underground” and off the internet, making it much harder for law enforcement to find and successfully prosecute them. Bonus: the law has been used to push sex education and general discussion of sex and sexuality off of major websites.