Question Question to staff about rule 5 changes

[Lurker]

I have a couple of questions regarding this announcement:

UPDATED 1/18/24: Small update to Rule #5 regarding NSFW images, to now include private conversations as well as threads on the forums.

Can you please share the reason for this change? I was under the assumption that NSFW content in a private(*)​ conversations between consenting adults is nobody's business.

And yes, I know that PMs are not completely private, as staff can access them.
But, again, I was under the assumption that staff respected the users' privacy and did not look into private conversations unless there was a specific and serious complaint by one of the participants.

That said, this rule change raises the concern that staff will start reading private conversations using the excuse of enforcing that rule.
I am sure that this possibility will make many members very uncomfortable. Can you please clarify the policy?

And finally, how does this affect old conversations?
For example, I have had some interesting conversations started by people who are no longer on the site, and therefore cannot change the title.
If those conversations had contained NSFW imagery posted by the other person, they would appear to be in violation of the rule.

Thank you.

 

[Solo]

We do not have the ability to browse PMs at will. Only Vekseid has the ability to do that, and will only do so in extreme cases, such as if we need to investigate to see if members have been sending law-breaking content.

This is more to give a bit of protection to those who are sent unsolicited and unwanted NSFW against their will, so they have a course to report it to staff attention so we can speak to members sending this content without warning. We will only be handling this on a case-by-case basis where the unwanted and unlabeled NSFW has been reported to our attention by recipients.

We are not going to go back and enforce this in a ret-con manner like the Rule 4 change.

 

[Lurker]

Thank you for the explanation, Solo, it is much appreciated!

But if that is the case, wouldn't an exchange in which all parties agree to receiving NSFW content from each other be enough?
In my humble opinion, phrasing it as "do not send people NSFW content without their consent" would have achieved the same results, with less confusion and less loopholes.

 

[The Malefis]

Right no sense punishing everyone, if someone's being sent unwanted NSWF links or pics against their wishes in the pm then the troublemaker can be reported and dealt with. If someone answers someone's else's sexual request thread then 8/10 the two parties are probably aware that the content is gonna be NSFW because they're writing smut.

You guys created a Non Sexual request thread for those who want to enjoy SFW content in which case they shouldn't be seeing anything NSFW in the PM because that wasn't what they agreed to.

 

[Seranda]

So I guess if I'm having a conversation with a potential partner, they've seen my RT, and are talking about a character featured on the RT already in a NSFW image, I have to change the title of the conversation to (NSFW included) if I want to re use that image while discussing a request which they are responding to?

Very confusing. I'm definitely going to get in trouble with this.

 

[Sync]

If you embed any NSFW images inside a spoiler tag and include NSFW in the spoiler title (for example) that will cover the Rule 5 change.

If you link directly to a NSFW image, then add (NSFW) after the URL link, and Rule 5 will be satisfied.

Not too difficult, really.

 

[Lurker]

If you embed any NSFW images inside a spoiler tag and include NSFW in the spoiler title (for example) that will cover the Rule 5 change.

If you link directly to a NSFW image, then add (NSFW) after the URL link, and Rule 5 will be satisfied.

Not too difficult, really.

The issue is not the difficulty or the lack thereof, but the requirement to spoiler images in a private conversation between friends who are perfectly OK with those images being unspoilered.
Of course, one can proactively include "NSFW" in all their discussion titles, but it feels kind of stupid.

 

[e v i e]

Does this mean that I have to go through all my old PMs and label them or does the rule only apply for new ones sent after the rule change?

Edit, since I read it was mainly added for members to report unwanted NSFW pictures received in PMs. Does this mean that if you slip up, no one will look into it unless your partner reports it? Or did I read that wrong?

 

[Kosmik_Khaos]

The rule has been put in place more for the protection of members receiving unsolicited messages that contain NSFW images. If you're getting replies from your NSFW rt you are already pretty aware what the message will contain and you will open it in a safe area. If you get a cold call message and open it up out of curiosity and suddenly there is porn playing on your screen without warning. In that case you would not be able to report the unlabeled NSFW because it caused/could cause issues.

You do NOT have to go back and retcon your PMs.

 

[e v i e]

The rule has been put in place more for the protection of members receiving unsolicited messages that contain NSFW images. If you're getting replies from your NSFW rt you are already pretty awesome what the message will contain and you will open it in a safe area. If you get a cold call message and open it up out of curiosity and suddenly there is porn playing on your screen without warning. In that case you would not be able to report the unlabeled NSFW because it caused/could cause issues.

You do NOT have to go back and retcon your PMs.

Thank you for clarifying!

 

[Galisenae]

Goodness, for a place that purports to hate Loli so much, these colour plates sure do enjoy treating the userbase like children.

One cannot stop people from sending unsolicited images through PMs without removing the ability entirely, and anyone that would is sure as hell not going to care enough to give a sodding warning, so why hinder everyone else over an extremely minor issue that this poxy little rule change isn't going to do anything to address? All it's doing is forcing everyone to jump through yet another meaningless hoop.
​

 

[Seranda]

I don't really see the purpose of this. If a user who registered 5 days ago sends me a clearly copy pasted "cold call" request to write as his teenage daughter with a gif of people going at it, I'm just going to leave that conversation.

Rules are rules and I don't need to understand why this one was created. Just seems goofy to me.

I could be talking to a partner with years of rapport. If I catch him on a bad day, or after an argument, he can turn around and say I've sent him NSFW content without him wanting it?

Making it harder and harder for the people who have been here to stay here.

Just how I feel anyway.

 

[Solo]

Again, as previously stated, we will not be enforcing this for existing conversations. If you continue the conversation after the NSFW was sent, clearly you’re alright with it being sent. This is more for if someone is sent a first message that contains unexpected and unwanted NSFW, they can report it and we can deal with it accordingly.

This is not going to be something we are “on the hunt” for, this is not going to be something that is retroactively applied, and this is not going to be something that will affect 99% of people. This is solely for those who are sent content they are not expecting and do not want.

If you don’t mind the NSFW content being sent to you, just don’t report the message. If you aren’t sure if a partner is okay with embedded NSFW, just ask before sending or spoiler/link and label as I’m sure most people do.

 

[Blackmane]

I think having a written clarification in the rules would solve the issue? Seems clear to me that the intent is to give users a way to report abusers. If the other party is consenting to receiving nsfw imagery then it shouldn't be a problem?

 

[Saber]

To put it in laymen's terms, this addendum was implemented so people who receive NSFW content and did not ask for, or did not enjoy receiving it, can report the situation. Staff has had issues in the past with members not reporting things because it isn't stated clearly in the rules. This also makes it so reported members can't go back to the rules and claim they didn't break any rules because it wasn't stated.

If you're already in a conversation with a partner with NSFW content and you don't care, this change does not apply to you.

If someone starts a conversation with you and sends NSFW imagery and you didn't like it, you can report it.

It's impossible for Staff to go through member's PMs, as Solo stated above. Only the site owner has that ability. This rule change only works on the reporting system. If you don't report it, Staff doesn't see it. If this was a minor issue, it wouldn't have been added to the rules. Just because a member doesn't have issues with seeing NSFW content, that doesn't apply to others.

I could be talking to a partner with years of rapport. If I catch him on a bad day, or after an argument, he can turn around and say I've sent him NSFW content without him wanting it?

This issue would be easily solved with screen shots and most likely would never happen. It's easy to disprove a report of a conversation by asking the other party involved.

 

[batman4560]

No, the others are right. If something is reported and only one person can check messages anyway, the tag is a waste of everyone's time. This is a hoop, no other way to look at it. We are on an adult rp site. If anyone is opening their stuff at work or a birthday party or whatever, they should know 18 plus, and adult means NSFW.

 

[Solo]

People have the right to browse the site safely. That is the whole purpose of Rule #5 and Rule #6. Yes, this is an adult-oriented RP website, but not everyone is constantly RPing smut at all times, and anyone using the site has the right to avoid NSFW imagery if they are in a setting where they do not want to be viewing it.

This is simply a safeguard for those who receive unwanted content, nothing more and nothing less.

 

[Saber]

No, the others are right. If something is reported and only one person can check messages anyway, the tag is a waste of everyone's time. This is a hoop, no other way to look at it. We are on an adult rp site. If anyone is opening their stuff at work or a birthday party or whatever, they should know 18 plus, and adult means NSFW.

Again, this is what screen shots are for. Just because this rule doesn't seem useful to you, that doesn't speak for others.

Simply, if you don't care, don't report it. If you do care, report it.

 

[batman4560]

Then why not just make that the rule? It was that simple right?

Then you don't need one person to scour through messages, and any mod could act on the report the way you should be able to do, or am I wrong about that?

 

[Saber]

Then why not just make that the rule? It was that simple right?

To put it in laymen's terms, this addendum was implemented so people who receive NSFW content and did not ask for, or did not enjoy receiving it, can report the situation. Staff has had issues in the past with members not reporting things because it isn't stated clearly in the rules. This also makes it so reported members can't go back to the rules and claim they didn't break any rules because it wasn't stated.

Rules get edited as reports get made.

 

[Solo]

Just for transparency's sake, staff is going to discuss the exact wording of the rule.

 

[Saber]

Then you don't need one person to scour through messages, and any mod could act on the report the way you should be able to do, or am I wrong about that?

Yes. Again, this rule runs off the report system. As I stated above, members sometimes will claim that no rule is broken because it is not stated clearly in the rules. Which then usually causes backlash because they will accuse staff of "overstepping".

By editing the rule it basically makes it so people can't try and loophole staff. And yes, members try and loophole staff a lot unless it can be read easily in the rules.

So again, as simply as can be, if you care about it you can report it. If you don't, then don't.

 

[batman4560]

So then this massive wall of a rule change blow shouldn't read as it does and instead should read something like...

See more

UPDATED 1/18/24: Small update to Rule #5 regarding NSFW images, to now include private conversations as well as threads on the forums. This is solely to safeguard against unwanted NSFW. If you and your partner both agree to include NSFW images without labeling them, this does not break the rule. Staff will only be handling this on a report-by-report basis; we can not open PM conversations of other members at will. Only the site owner can access others' private messages.

5. If you would like to use NSFW (Not Safe For Work) images in any thread or private message (PM) conversation, you have a few options. If you would like to embed NSFW images without using spoiler tags or links, you must include the term "NSFW" in your thread or conversation title, just as it is written here. If you are using spoiler code or links (how to do so using BBCode can be found here) for NSFW images, they must be individually labeled as NSFW or have an easy-to-read disclaimer before the spoilers or links that any spoilers or links may be NSFW. The site must always be safe for members to browse. NSFW imagery is defined by staff as any image that contains visible genitalia, visible nipples on female breasts, backside spread in a way to show the anus, people or creatures (drawn, animated, or real) engaging in sexual acts, or scenes of excessive gore. These will be judged at staff discretion.

Warning: I am not a mod, this is not the rule, I am just giving an example:

"UPDATED 1/18/24: Small update to Rule #5 regarding NSFW images, talk with your partner before sending NSFW images. Reports will be taken seriously and investigated by staff if a complaint is lobbied with screenshots of the offending images and the last (insert number here, 3 for example) messages prior."

That ensures no false reports, gives staff what they need and doesn't force anyone to do add an extra few steps for no reason since you guys can't go check posts anyway.

 

[Solo]

So then this massive wall of a rule change blow shouldn't read as it does and instead should read something like...

See more

UPDATED 1/18/24: Small update to Rule #5 regarding NSFW images, to now include private conversations as well as threads on the forums. This is solely to safeguard against unwanted NSFW. If you and your partner both agree to include NSFW images without labeling them, this does not break the rule. Staff will only be handling this on a report-by-report basis; we can not open PM conversations of other members at will. Only the site owner can access others' private messages.

5. If you would like to use NSFW (Not Safe For Work) images in any thread or private message (PM) conversation, you have a few options. If you would like to embed NSFW images without using spoiler tags or links, you must include the term "NSFW" in your thread or conversation title, just as it is written here. If you are using spoiler code or links (how to do so using BBCode can be found here) for NSFW images, they must be individually labeled as NSFW or have an easy-to-read disclaimer before the spoilers or links that any spoilers or links may be NSFW. The site must always be safe for members to browse. NSFW imagery is defined by staff as any image that contains visible genitalia, visible nipples on female breasts, backside spread in a way to show the anus, people or creatures (drawn, animated, or real) engaging in sexual acts, or scenes of excessive gore. These will be judged at staff discretion.

Warning: I am not a mod, this is not the rule, I am just giving an example:

"UPDATED 1/18/24: Small update to Rule #5 regarding NSFW images, talk with your partner before sending NSFW images. Reports will be taken seriously and investigated by staff if a complaint is lobbied with screenshots of the offending images and the last (insert number here, 3 for example) messages prior."

That ensures no false reports, gives staff what they need and doesn't force anyone to do add an extra few steps for no reason since you guys can't go check posts anyway.

As stated, staff is discussing the wording and updates will be made if needed. As written, in the meantime, if a message is not reported, no action will be taken.

We appreciate your suggestions.

 

[Lurker]

This is simply a safeguard for those who receive unwanted content, nothing more and nothing less.

Then is should be stated as such.
I applaud you for wanting to address the problem, but please do it right!

How difficult is it to say "Do not send any NSFW material in PM without obtaining prior consent", without trying to prescribe the format of private communications?
Not to mention that a rule that (by your own admission) won't be enforced in 99% of the cases is bad.

Yes. Again, this rule runs off the report system. As I stated above, members sometimes will claim that no rule is broken because it is not stated clearly in the rules. Which then usually causes backlash because they will accuse staff of "overstepping".
By editing the rule it basically makes it so people can't try and loophole staff. And yes, members try and loophole staff a lot unless it can be read easily in the rules.

On the contrary, the rule as stated opens loopholes.
A person can send unsolicited pictures that are inappropriate even when tagged NSFW.
A person can send unsolicited text that is more inappropriate than, say, artistic nudity.
Both cases are not covered by the rule, and the wording gives that person an excuse to say that they are compliant.

This really needs to be a separate rule rather than something tucked upon Rule 5, because it addresses different scenarios and deals with different issues.

I believe that everybody agrees that the intent of the rule is good, but people take issue with the wording.