3 ms·

>It seems like maybe you just wanted to tee off on the idea of anybody, anywhere, implementing any sort of community standards? No, but thanks for the talking

>It seems like maybe you just wanted to tee off on the idea of anybody, anywhere, implementing any sort of community standards? No, but thanks for the talking down to. I have no problem with them having limits, it's - at the very least - a practical necessity to running their business. Furthermore, for what their business and product are I don't much care what level of control they want to exert. I mean uncomfortable art. The kind of things that don't fall into their existing categories of "safe to hang in an office", "MPAA R risque" or "fucking".

JohnBooty 5y ago
No, but thanks for the talking down to Apologies. You're right. That was unnecessary, and I actually edited my post to remove the snark right before I'd even seen your reply. Probably at the same time you were typing.
JohnBooty 5y ago
The kind of things that don't fall into their existing categories of "safe to hang in an office", "MPAA R risque" or "fucking". I'm not entirely sure what you're asking for. It seems like you want a comprehensive list of what will and won't be allowed? Have you ever run a community, or attempted to create or enforce community guidelines? Coming up with comprehensive rules to cover the spectrum of human expression is an absolutely intractable problem. What about photos of casualties of war? What about historical photos that feature Nazi symbols? What about photos of lynchings? What about art based around those things, particularly when it's steeped in so many layers of irony and subtext that it's impossible to tell whether or not they're actually endorsing evil, protesting it, or something else?
- dogleash 5y ago
  > I'm not entirely sure what you're asking for. It seems like you want a comprehensive list of what will and won't be allowed? No. I'd just prefer they don't lie in their marketing. Because it always gets walked back to "Well obviously that blanket statement had all the exceptions that were obvious to me at the time but convenient to ignore. Plus all the exceptions we've discovered in the meantime." >Have you ever run a community Yeah, but it was a community back in the old phpBB and IRC days of the internet. I have not been in charge of cooperate communication to a product userbase I've branded a "community." I didn't find myself having to talk out of both sides of my mouth to merge lofty marketing proclamations with the hard "if"s and "buts" of reality. Because we talked about community standards, it wasn't a decision of what worked for our business handed down from on high. It was what we as a group were comfortable with. What personal tastes are fine to be violated regularly in front of your face? What things they were willing to tolerate if it was contained in a different sub-forum? What can't be there at all etc...
  - JohnBooty 5y ago
    Yeah, similar experience here. Never done it on a corporate, internet-wide scale ala Flickr. I'm honestly confused - what's twofaced about Flickr's approach? I just sort of assume any host of user-created content will have some restrictions, so it doesn't feel to me like they are "talking out of both sides" of their mouth when they announce/implement such restrictions. I may be completely missing what you're reacting to, though, apologies if I'm being dense.

JohnBooty 5y ago

No, but thanks for the talking down to Apologies. You're right. That was unnecessary, and I actually edited my post to remove the snark right before I'd even seen your reply. Probably at the same time you were typing.

JohnBooty 5y ago

The kind of things that don't fall into their existing categories of "safe to hang in an office", "MPAA R risque" or "fucking". I'm not entirely sure what you're asking for. It seems like you want a comprehensive list of what will and won't be allowed? Have you ever run a community, or attempted to create or enforce community guidelines? Coming up with comprehensive rules to cover the spectrum of human expression is an absolutely intractable problem. What about photos of casualties of war? What about historical photos that feature Nazi symbols? What about photos of lynchings? What about art based around those things, particularly when it's steeped in so many layers of irony and subtext that it's impossible to tell whether or not they're actually endorsing evil, protesting it, or something else?

dogleash 5y ago
> I'm not entirely sure what you're asking for. It seems like you want a comprehensive list of what will and won't be allowed? No. I'd just prefer they don't lie in their marketing. Because it always gets walked back to "Well obviously that blanket statement had all the exceptions that were obvious to me at the time but convenient to ignore. Plus all the exceptions we've discovered in the meantime." >Have you ever run a community Yeah, but it was a community back in the old phpBB and IRC days of the internet. I have not been in charge of cooperate communication to a product userbase I've branded a "community." I didn't find myself having to talk out of both sides of my mouth to merge lofty marketing proclamations with the hard "if"s and "buts" of reality. Because we talked about community standards, it wasn't a decision of what worked for our business handed down from on high. It was what we as a group were comfortable with. What personal tastes are fine to be violated regularly in front of your face? What things they were willing to tolerate if it was contained in a different sub-forum? What can't be there at all etc...
- JohnBooty 5y ago
  Yeah, similar experience here. Never done it on a corporate, internet-wide scale ala Flickr. I'm honestly confused - what's twofaced about Flickr's approach? I just sort of assume any host of user-created content will have some restrictions, so it doesn't feel to me like they are "talking out of both sides" of their mouth when they announce/implement such restrictions. I may be completely missing what you're reacting to, though, apologies if I'm being dense.