CW warning: I’m gonna mention a bunch of potentially extreme fetishes.
I like the theory of this idea, but it would require coming up with a very distinct list of what is considered ‘extreme’ content, and finding intuitive colors for them is hard. Is soft vore ‘violent’? what color is bestiality? Are medical scenes violent? What color is all-the-way-through (the non-violent, unrealistic sort)? You have to either lump these things into boxes they don’t fit in, or have an entire rainbow of options to opt out of. Which I’m not opposed to, but it’s a lot of work, for both the developers, and the user.
Good questions! You can privately discuss whatever you please that does not violate Realm rules or TOS! It is up to you to ensure that’s appropriate with the other person, however, and to keep it private! However, if you start pinging people who you don’t have sufficient rapport with about interests that are NOT in their tags (or worse, they have tags expressing their disinterest in) and hit them up to role play your favorite thing that they want nothing to do with… that’s no bueno! That can be avoided as simple as an OOC ask like, “hi, is it okay to ask about something not in your tags?” Granted, if someone’s spamming random people with that en masse, or pushing it after someone says no or ignores them, we may still need to have a chat with them…
Now, if they have tags that say they’re into something, but you’re both in an area that disallows it, you’re not allowed to engage the subject in that Area (I.E. publicly), but you could privately ask them about it via Whisper or Message. That’s fine. The “I like this” tag opens the door. Just remember, it’s not full-on consent, and there may be limits or boundaries that differ between players. We leave that to people to explore, feel out, intuit, discuss, or whatever works. We’re all adults here!
This rule is primarily targeting situations where people are explicitly ignoring tags and Area rules and propositioning people for specific subjects without any good expectation that it’s appropriate to do so.
Having read the main post, and the entire thread, I’d like to add my two cents.
It seems to me that these new rules, while they do make sense, make the most sense in the context of an attempt to cover up all the ageplay related content on the platform. At least at a first glance upon a users first visit to Wolfery.
It also seems to me, and correct me if I am wrong here, that the thing that is making Wolfery staff take action on this has its roots in how the many different governments around the world may perceive ageplay content. And how those perceptions could potentially negatively impact the platform as a whole. Not out of any desire to restrict anyone’s RP.
Now, I may be venturing outside the scope of this thread a bit here, but I have a hypothetical question. If, let’s say Lamplight was made into its own realm, is it reasonable to assume that some government would step in to shut it down? If the answer to that is yes, then I am sorry, but I think it would be wise to stop beating around the bush with half measures and simply ban the problematic content before it becomes a legal problem.
We’re all adults here, yes, and yes we all consent to RP on this website, and that’s exactly why I think that Wolfery staff have a duty to protect their users from the potential legal ramifications of using a website that has content on it that their individual governments can potentially perceive as child P**n.
In my view, if you’re going to allow ageplay on Wolfery, you may as well allow users under the age of 18 too because the potential legal ramifications are potentially just as severe. For both users, and the platform as whole.
That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying that a government could perceive ageplay RP on Wolfery as child p**n. And if that’s the case, it doesn’t matter what any of us think on the matter. Is it a hypothetical? Yes. Is it possible? Also yes.
We could do with less subtly implying ageplayers are all pedophiles, or saying allowing them around is morally equivalent to permitting child p**n, ok.
I think the point being made is “governments will treat it the same way because of fucking course they don’t care to learn the distinction, they see something that vaguely looks like it and go scorched earth”.
Again it sounds like everyone is saying, “Well, content warnings sound reasonable.”
But they literally aren’t.
They are an extra action being aimed at just one group of people.
And it’s a bunch of work to develop a feature, that literally already exists as a browser addon. Just come up with what words upset you and block elements with them in it.
Like, why should this involve any of us when the people being bothered have a solution they can implement in one minute already?
That fact alone shows this is just discrimination against ageplayers.
Those who don’t want to see the content, already have the tools available to completely cause them to never see it, and for some reason we are all here talking about how ageplayers should change what they are doing to appease… who exactly?
I’ve lost a good number of friends on this site - good damn roleplayers - because they saw the park filling up with sexualized child characters all the time. And yes, it does seem to be targeted at sexual ageplayers because it is a kink oftentimes baked into the character as a whole in a way that other extreme kinks rarely are (unless we have giant gore monsters running around - which, since one of the people who could turn into those is among those friends of mine who left, is much less likely now). Is just putting stuff in a drop-down and keeping the profile thumbnails SFW such a sacrifice for the sake of stopping the site from losing more users? You’re putting a single iota of your own comfort above the ability of other people to even bear to be present.
Ideally, the solution we end up with makes it impossible to run across that kind of content without seeking it out, which, let me stress, would benefit you. You would lose literally all the heat on you. Invisible to your detractors. Free. In your lane. Moisturized.
But I’m literally not.
I’m saying your friend could’ve easily just blocked seeing that content with a plugin and been happy.
Did he bother to spend a minute doing such?
No, he didn’t. I spend a minute to block fetishes I don’t want to see.
I am respectful to others by when I have an issue, I fix it myself.
If I can block the content so can you or he or anyone else?
Spider characters make me uncomfortable can we start a discussion about banning their images next?
Same with the impregnation tag. That’s offputting to me for some reason. Others should change for me!
Your logic here just doesn’t hold up. If one decides to be offended by a thing, they should be the one to censor their content.
This is literally what the tool called your browser does. Just use the tool you have in front of you.
I shouldn’t have to learn to code or trust someone else’s code to put directly into my browser extensions. Plus, this is a proactive solution rather than a reactive one everyone else has to individually take.
At this point, everyone else seems really on board with this, so I don’t have to convince you. It’s gonna go through.
You should absolutely know how to code to be online. You put yourself and those local to your network at risk for not doing such. That’s not an unreasonable expectation at all.
90% of English communication is done in JSON now. If you can’t read such you are technically illiterate as you can’t read the majority dialect of the language.
It’s the future. You need to learn how to read code, it’s the same as reading or basic chemistry. We all need to know it, because you can easily harm others by not understanding such.
Furthermore, you already have to trust Acci then as you didn’t read his (Very pretty) code. It’s a good read. And it should be read because this is a site that allows images and it’s actually rather important to individually verify a website is handling images properly.
So what’s the different between trusting these devs or some other one?
Content warnings are fine by me. As a person who experiences empathy, I like being able to write literally anything I want and know that people who will be harmed by it won’t see it. Plus, having a built-in system for applying content warnings makes it clear to me that my content IS allowed, and what content is best to put warnings on, and kinda helps me find an audience. Content warnings are an advertisement of another kind, if you’re into my sort of nonsense~
Reputation. Even if you can read code it doesn’t mean you’re going to understand all of it, there’s such a vast number of different languages that are in a constant flux of updates and improvements, and new languages come out daily.
No one’s going to have the same aptitude as you do when it comes to learning, site still has to be user friendly.
The ‘internet is a clique for coders’ thing tells me you watched the towers come down live on a CRT television at work. That’s a very, very dated attitude. Yes, you should be tech literate. No, you don’t need to know how to program, you just have to execute a bit of common sense on what sites you visit, what data you enter, and what you download. That will protect you from most threat actors unless they are either very motivated, or are state affiliated. The clearweb is not the wild west it used to be - that era has passed, and you apparently did not notice it whizzing by.
And yes, I know image handling has to be done carefully. I read about the 4chan sink threads. I hope they caught those guys.
But this is all besides the point. It’s happening, and the only question left is how you, personally, will deal with it.
Fox has already indicated that new UI work is planned to allow more content warning utility, and that they will include an amendment to the original proposal permitting the use of collapsible fields as a means of applying a CW on content that would otherwise be inappropriate.
@Raeth, since there are several announcements pointing to this thread, could we get the amended first clause edited in the OP so folks see that this popular request has been embraced by the moderation team?
@Kookierhondje, I mean this with all kindness; I think your arguments have fallen into the realm of the absurd. I really do appreciate the spirit of what you are saying — that a marginalized demographic should not have to lift a finger to accommodate the pearl-clutching of the unjust — but content warnings are already normative in the kink community, and as you have seen, most people are in support of it here. It helps everyone, as Draft has demonstrated with his own description, and costs very little.
As someone who absolutely has to deal with this kind of injustice first-hand all the time, I think it is worth considering whether there is anything to be gained from asking literally every writer on Wolfery to make a change that requires years of experience to complete when we can just apply a label to content that is not allowed in Sinder, which many of us are very much interested in doing.
