3 ms·

Oh well - sure. I didn't want to criticize (sp?) the habit at all. Nor did I want to mock anyone's morale or ask for the removal of NSFW tags. What you just de

Oh well - sure. I didn't want to criticize (sp?) the habit at all. Nor did I want to mock anyone's morale or ask for the removal of NSFW tags. What you just described is just - in my little world - a tiny, little version of the original problem discussed in the thread. For a part of the world the service vb.ly was not safe for X (work, family, whatever). For a part of the world (as explained by you) the blog entry and its sexual references/ads/etc are not safe for work. I wanted to point out the parallels, which seem (mildly) funny to me. I visited the link at work and I'm sure nobody would ever complain, let alone _think_ about bad consequences for me. Not that I imply that it should be that way or that this is in any way superior to different positions or morale standpoints. It is just - different. NSFW is in that regard a kind of a lowest common denominator (sp?), tagged on links with good intentions for sure. But using the lowest common point means also that we put a label on something that might be excessive/overly protective to others. I guess I cannot explain my feeling about these similarities in judgement, inparticular around sex/nudity/pornography, any better, sorry. Short version: I don't question the "NSFW". I want to remind the readers that the reasons why this is necessary in the first place are an interesting thought in light of this discussion.

jacquesm 16y ago
In this particular case the NSFW status is not even remotely up for discussion.
ErrantX 16y ago
There is, I think, an important distinction, now that you have raised the point. In that the application of Sharia law makes a moral judgement on the content - censoring it for the promotion of, in their eyes, illegal content. In a work environment many things are not appropriate; even in the most liberal of societies pornography is much more of a private thing, enjoyed by smaller groups of people rather than being shared with the world at large. There are also other issues; like, for example, that pornography is connected with sexual excitement and sexual acts - all of which are also socially inappropriate in most workplaces (and public). So rather than a moral judgement it is a practical limitation designed to avoid awkwardness, or offence or distraction. That link, in particular, is a marginal case, where the pornography is incidental to the reason for being on the page. But within a corporate structure that doesn't matter. For what it's worth, no one will blink an eyelid where I work either.

jacquesm 16y ago

In this particular case the NSFW status is not even remotely up for discussion.

ErrantX 16y ago

There is, I think, an important distinction, now that you have raised the point. In that the application of Sharia law makes a moral judgement on the content - censoring it for the promotion of, in their eyes, illegal content. In a work environment many things are not appropriate; even in the most liberal of societies pornography is much more of a private thing, enjoyed by smaller groups of people rather than being shared with the world at large. There are also other issues; like, for example, that pornography is connected with sexual excitement and sexual acts - all of which are also socially inappropriate in most workplaces (and public). So rather than a moral judgement it is a practical limitation designed to avoid awkwardness, or offence or distraction. That link, in particular, is a marginal case, where the pornography is incidental to the reason for being on the page. But within a corporate structure that doesn't matter. For what it's worth, no one will blink an eyelid where I work either.