General Discussions > General Discussion
Changes to Explicit: Vote now!
Beleth:
There's a time and a place for everything.
The statement has been put forth that the SGU Forums is not the place for sexual content*.
However, some of the most visited threads ever are the ones of naked people in Explicit.
Obviously, some people like it here, and some don't.
In the interest of keeping sexual context appropriate, I want to change how we treat such content today.
Currently, sexual content is not allowed anywhere but the Explicit section, but there's no NSFW (Not Safe For Work) tag on it, so it's easy for a new member to stumble upon an inappropriate image.
I want to change that.
There are three main options I see:
1) Just not allow sexual content any more at all.
- Rename Explicit Classic "Explicit Archive (NSFW)".
- Move the current sexually explicit threads to Explicit Archive.
- Start giving sanctions to people who post sexual content in Explicit as well as outside Explicit.
2) Create a child board specifically for sexual content.
- Create a board under Explicit called "Sexually Explicit (NSFW)".
- Describe Sexually Explicit as having a sexual context.
- Move the current sexual content in Explicit to Sexually Explicit.
- Start giving sanctions to people who post sexual content in Explicit.
3) Same as 2, but opt-in.
What "opt-in" means is that the board will be invisible to everyone except for people who request to see it. There will probably be an announcement in Explicit itself on how to opt in. (That's a detail that can be worked out later.)
4) Mark all of Explicit NSFW.
- Rename Explicit "Explicit (NSFW)".
- Change the description to define Explicit to have a sexual context.
- Leave everything else the same.
5) Same as 4, but opt-in.
See 3 above to find out what opt-in means.
What do you think?
[*] Sexual content includes both pictures of naked people and written erotica. I'm not going to argue the finer points of this.
EhJayArr:
The SGU forums is not the place for naughty language, and I can use the exact same arguments as the anti-porn folks to support that:
Naughty language is off-putting to some users.
Naughty language is not necessary for the forums.
If we ban naughty language, we'll avoid putting off some people and hopefully increase participation.
teethering:
--- Quote from: EhJayArr on Jun 14, 2012, 04:08:55 PM ---The SGU forums is not the place for naughty language, and I can use the exact same arguments as the anti-porn folks to support that:
Naughty language is off-putting to some users.
Naughty language is not necessary for the forums.
If we ban naughty language, we'll avoid putting off some people and hopefully increase participation.
--- End quote ---
It's not the same, as was discussed elsewhere. Strong language is part of language and it's used as part of the conversations we have. The porn threads are entirely outside of the conversations we have, they each have separate threads with just pictures and occasional comments. They are a thing onto themselves, rather than being part of a way of expressing ideas and thoughts we all want shared, which is what strong language tends to be.
If we had dedicated threads in explicit for just swear words and we'd see them nowhere else I'd understand your analogy. Otherwise I see it as entirely frivolous.
Beleth:
Naughty language is already banned in subject lines. But this is a topic for a different thread.
Johnny Slick:
We should have a tiered voting system like Ireland. :P Option #3 was my first choice but I'm okay with #1 as well. At this point that may be a moot point though (you only go to different options when one of them doesn't get 50% on the first vote).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version