This is not a topic for which whimsy is acceptable, and further commentary which is mocking, irreverent, and/or unhelpful will result in a suspension.
1 Like
And they make you look like you are not mature enough to participate in a website or discussion meant for 18+ aged individuals. These are the tactics of children, not an adult.
1 Like
If a user showed up saying that enough trans people are pedophiles to warrant the exclusion of trans folks from the platform, they would not be long for Wolfery.
If you want for this space to be tolerant, the people in it actually have to tolerate us. Calling us pedophiles is not tolerance.
1 Like
Idk what spaces you hand around, but literally all the internet spaces I hang 'round this is normal behavior.
If you aren’t staying on topic, please keep your comments to yourself.
1 Like
Chocobocobobocobo has been suspended for 24 hours. This conversation is serious, and people across the range of positions all stand to lose things they care deeply about. This is not a place and time to fuck around.
13 Likes
Seriously, how many times to I have to suggest that folks in favor of ageplay NOT be idiots and make a huge mess out of things? I don’t care how hurt you feel that folks don’t want you around. Yes, it sucks. But know what? You’re still around for the moment and the more of an effort you make trying to say it’s not fair, the more difficult you make it to try and keep the kink allowed at all. And again, I say this as someone who WANTS TO KEEP AGEPLAY in Wolfery.
Stop shooting yourselves in the foot by whining about how much it hurts to be put into the corner, because if the VAST MAJORITY OF SOCIETY had their way, that corner would be nuked out of existence. It’s getting to the point where the idiots are going to make the mods change their mind and just say ‘fine, you don’t want to be hurt, go somewhere else so you don’t feel hurt’.
If a user believed such, but did not act on it behaviorally, they would be allowed to remain.
If a user says that they believe that a behavior one engages in is indicative of, or equivalent to, another behavior, the question comes down to intent and context.
People stating their positions on moral equivalences in a conversation like this is acceptable. People broadcasting it out of this context is not, and we police that.
The purpose of this policy is, I reiterate, to create a separation in which people who feel morally compelled to say something do not have the prompting to speak, and the people who would be hurt by their statement do not hear them.
To summarize, calling you pedophiles as an ad hominem is unacceptable, saying that they believe in a connection between that identity and ageplay, in this context, is acceptable. Putting that kind of inflammatory rhetoric in a profile is not acceptable.
Tolerance is compatible with disapproval. It is made easier with social systems that reduce contact between mutually disapproving groups.
It is not ‘whining’ to expect that others joyfully engaging with storytelling in the same venue as us treat us with respect. You may bear all of the privilege in the world and so perhaps this is some nothingburger of a request to you, but I grew up gay in the nineties and trans in the aughts, and I have had enough of “just be quiet and let them shit on you”.
I do hear where Fox is coming from here, but I am no longer comfortable having this discussion. I leave it to you all to work something out that approximates justice. I know that is all there is, an approximation, but if I am not even welcome to advocate for my peers who are reading this anxiously and for myself, then I see no reason to continue.
I must see to my friends and family; this entire ordeal has been exhausting to endure for many of us.
1 Like
I fully support the idea behind Safe Sane and Consensual.
As long as someone’s actions aren’t hurting themselves or others,
And they aren’t somehow impaired to a point where they cannot reasonably give informed consent
And those involved all give informed consent…
Then I do not care what it is they are doing. Let them do it.
I also do not believe that text is causing harm, but if it is then this doesn’t apply strictly to ageplay anyway.
However, with that said, I think this topic has two ways to be looked at:
What is a reasonable approach to allow something to exist while also protecting those who do not want to see it? I think the suggestion of adding spoiler tags/warning is the simplest solution and I believe should resolve this.
The other side is any possible legal ramification of allowing it at all, and further possible ramifications of having had this conversation and still allowing it anyway. I would like to say that it is unreasonable for a site of this size and scope to be required to have a legal team to track and keep up to date with any possible laws that put their site in violation of all nations in the world is wholly unreasonable. But I do unfortunately think it is something to be considered. What do those ramifications look like. Is saying oops, sorry I’ll change policy if called out enough, or will this conversation be seen and the judges say, yeah, but you knew this would be an issue and allowed it anyway?
I also have to agree with Makyo as someone who is also queer and trans. Being told to suck it up and shut up isn’t a great feeling.
I understand that you’re advocating for your interests in a way that you feel is practical, or maybe necessary. But people who are doing no harm should never have to accept inequity to settle for limited tolerance over none. I can see the logic behind your approach, and I appreciate what you’re getting at. But I cannot morally agree with it. Everyone here should be respected and treated well. None of the kinks we’re practically and legally able to support should be handled unfairly.
4 Likes
No one is being told to suck up and shut up. Except for the person I suspended.
What is being demanded is mutual tolerance. Ageplayers are being asked to tolerate the existence of people who believe they are engaging in immoral acts. Anti-ageplayers are being asked to tolerate the people engaging in acts they see as immoral.
Both sides want moderation to make a firm statement asserting that their perspective is correct. We won’t. We don’t even agree on it.
I have tried to emphasize many times that the moralizing arguments are not material. We are trying to create a frame work in which no one has to shut up and accept abuse, because you do not see each other.
The first and key step is, for everyone involved, to be willing to acknowledge that both sides have legitimate and valid reasons for their outlook and perspective. Even if you believe that their outlook is inherently wrong, consider that they believe it, they believe it strongly, and that deserves credence.
2 Likes
I am, to be clear responding to Vernon, who has specifically asked us to grin and bear it. I do understand where you are coming from.
1 Like
The usual approach is that if a court identifies content it must be taken down, and with that in mind the platform is not liable except to the extent it directed it to exist. For example, the “exceptions” listed here are common to EU/UK countries as they were part of an EU-wide directive. Wolfery meets all three to some aspect - it is a communications network, a cache for such communications, and an image host - it has policy addressing the hosted images.
The UK Online Safety/Harms act mentioned earlier does increase regulation but also excludes text as being considered pornographic. It requires sites to identify risks to children and of illegal conduct - like offering knives for sale, spreading terrorism or promoting RL suicide - and document them internally, and in some cases to implement age-verification (but again, text is not an issue they wish to address) - I think the prior policy change addresses this.
The biggest risk to a site outside UK jurisdiction is being blocked and having UK-based/operated funding withdrawn. I don’t believe they have the power to compel an external site to divulge information about moderators who may be in the UK etc. And Wolfery would be far, far down any priority list - their focus is sites offering RL video porn trivially accessibile to children or pro-suicide/body-harm forums, not furry roleplayers.
1 Like
Some of the language going around has rather heavily hinted otherwise.
That would be my thought as well, Wolfery is frankly too small to go after. But it might not hurt to be sure. I did a quick google search and the google AI said othweise. That said, I didn’t really research it either. And AI is known to hallucinate.
1 Like
It is in the interests of some to make such hints, where it advances their position. 
Having run IB for a decade, the only country we ever got a legal takedown notice from (via a cache host, who agreed to ignore it after we explained the context) was Russia. Which would have blocked us anyway just for the gay stuff.
Most countries spend more time and effort promoting their regulations than enforcing them because even going after clear violators is more than enough to deal with, let alone anything close to a borderline. Unfortunately that often leaves a grey area where it is not clear how things actually apply (which is why I asked about some specific examples) and it is easy for the regulated subjects to overcorrect in avoidance of risk.
Having said all that, I’m not a lawyer, there’s lots out there so it’s best to ask one if concerned - but they will probably have trouble giving a straight answer if the jurisdiction is ‘worldwide’.
“Roskomnadzor is informing”
1 Like
You are welcome to advocate. I feel you have done an admirable job on the whole. Some of your posts have prevented the need for some of mine, including providing corrections that text-based role play between consenting adults is categorically NOT pedophilia, at the least from a legal perspective. It is not only unhelpful to correlate the two, but it makes it more difficult to discuss the whole topic.
It’s a precarious line to walk, trying to mediate and contribute to these discussions, while being cautious that as a moderator, my voice carries more weight than some. I do my best, and I try to cultivate skills to aid in that, but I am still just another person.
1 Like