91–100 of 199 posts
Just confused about the outrage.
Generally speaking, only images/videos are NSFW-taggable. The argument can be made than an app which displays religious imagery is not suitable for the workplace, but if it's just a reader with texts, then not. If someone wants to spy over your shoulder to read text on your screen, and it doesn't jibe with their religion, that is their problem. And, if that's where the goalposts lie, then atheistic texts could be off…
There is a world outside the USA where most of what you wrote doesn’t apply. Here I think the labelling doesn’t really make sense but it never does anyway and pretty much means "this content is part of a corpus American think is objectionable and wouldn’t want to be seen with in public”. I enjoy the controversy for putting in light the usual imperial blindness however.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it does , and explicitly - it isn’t a matter of interpretation. Repeatedly god commands his followers to slaughter men, women, children, and even the animals of their foes. Repeatedly god tells his followers to enslave people, and that it’s fine to treat them abysmally as long as it’s not so bad that they die. This isn’t my opinion of what the bible contains - any more than I could argue that Hellraiser is a cute…
"The bible is not a matter of interpretation" is literally, literally how you end up in religious wars. Seriously?
Now, anyway, you need to stop talking smack about my mother, and I disliked the death threat you made just there, and I don’t need to know about what you do with fish in the bedroom.
Because they are?
Why would it be surprising for them? I guess the never read the book they are preaching.
F-Droid "Anti-Feature flags" are not block lists. They are for users to filter content. The content is still available. >> When reviewing apps to accept, F-Droid takes the user’s point of view, first and foremost. We start with strict acceptance criteria based on the principles of free software and user control. There are some things about an app that might not block it from inclusion, but many users might not want t…
F-Droid is no longer accepting "NSFW" apps (as they dubiously define them) and will eventually remove them from the repo. This tag is only a stopgap until they figure out how to move them out of the F-Droid repo.
So... what's the big deal? Putting aside the various arguments whether religious texts should be marked as such, the wording of this policy, etc, etc... literally what difference does it make that these apps now have this flag? Do people think users will see this flag and be like, "Oh dear me I had no idea the Bible was NSFW; won't be reading that now!"? Just confused about the outrage.
But I get it at the same time - some people may want them on their devices.
I'm more concerned in this case that NSFW section contains "political incorrectness". Who's going to decide here what's incorrect and what's not in some cases? A "committee" of experts on discord?
Don't moral police people especially on something that is as controversial as this.
I mean, yes, these are religious texts, but if we are to judge them on a level with other content, they absolutely warrant a warning. The abrahamic religious texts intersect largely around the Old Testament, which is a smorgasbord of genocide, slavery, casual murder, infanticide, sexual abuse of all flavours, and all the rest. I guess the question is whether religious texts should be exempt from content warnings, in…
From an App Store rating perspective, this particularly affects children, which leads to a much more focused question: Should minors have the right to install and use apps without parental approval that grant them access to content that is accepted to contain: > genocide, slavery, casual murder, infanticide, sexual abuse And if so, then what categories of apps are exempt from otherwise-mandatory content restriction p…
>> genocide, slavery, casual murder, infanticide, sexual abuse
Like wikipedia?