Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the thing entirely. So much of the NSFW content is abusive. The HN crowd is mostly safe from such attacks so this is a real blindspot.
I'd be more sympathetic to the abusive/revenge porn argument if these companies didn't keep applying the same rules to drawn images.
Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content
421–430 of 476 posts
Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content
#422Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a narrowing of the Overton window, not any one specific topic being accepted in public discourse.
Despite the fact that the Victorian era was quite conservative? So your point doesn't make a lot of sense to me. We're moving to a neo-victorian(more conservative/prude) era that is also shutting down Conservative speech?
Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content
#423Earlier quoted context omitted.
paid-only no thanks
I don't have an opinion about the service, but that's why image hosts always die or end up like this. They have ongoing costs and almost no one wants to pay.
Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content
#424The pendulum has clearly started to swing back to sexual repression. Society has started to see sexual freedom and expression as grotesque. Now the only question is how far it'll swing.
Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content
#425Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be more sympathetic to the abusive/revenge porn argument if these companies didn't keep applying the same rules to drawn images.
Why? Aren't you falling victim to false equivalency? One argument can be valid in certain cases but not in others.
Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content
#426Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Aren't you falling victim to false equivalency? One argument can be valid in certain cases but not in others.
It's that I don't believe it's the motivation of these companies, even though that argument is valid in a vacuum.
Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content
#427Earlier quoted context omitted.
Infamously u/Unidan, a very popular figure on r/askscience posting high-quality answers to biology questions, was banned from Reddit when it was revealed that he used alt accounts to upvote himself/downvote those he was arguing against. Such a shame that he felt the need to resort to something so stupid.
It wasn't stupid. It's quite likely that he would have been stuck down in the noise like so many other high quality Reddit posters except that he realized early on that just a handful of early upvotes makes all of the difference to Reddit's algorithm. The Reddit algorithm is seemingly designed to snowball content, so if you want to rake in the worthless karma reliably you need alts.
Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content
#428Tumblr 2.0 incoming? It's a not-so-unspoken fact that a lot of social media platforms are popular because they have tons of pornography. Reddit, Twitter, OnlyFans (more openly) and (until now) Imgur all have massive communities around explicit content. Even Twitch and YouTube are hugely successful as ways for OnlyFans creators to drive users to their explicit content. Going to be very interesting to see if imgur drop…
Re: Imgur Updates TOS, Banning NSFW Content
#429Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a narrowing of the Overton window, not any one specific topic being accepted in public discourse.
Despite the fact that the Victorian era was quite conservative? So your point doesn't make a lot of sense to me. We're moving to a neo-victorian(more conservative/prude) era that is also shutting down Conservative speech?