6 ms·

[nsfw]

by mi_lk 4y ago

[nsfw]

sschueller 4y ago
No it's not. EDIT: It is not NSFW. If you think this is NSFW, then I don't think you should be spending any time on the internet. The internet is not safe for you.
- metadat 4y ago
  No it's not nsfw? Now I'm really confused, can I very paste this into slack #random or not?
  - moron4hire 4y ago
    I could at my job. My company is 80% women. They'd find it hilarious. EDIT: Actually, just checked. They did find it hilarious.
    - googlryas 4y ago
      Women aren't the arbiter of what is sfw or nsfw. I'm curious why you jumped to "women" here, when they aren't relevant to the conversation. Do you think women need to be protected from unsafe imagery at work, or "nsfw" is designed to protect women?
      - jlkuester7 4y ago
        Pretty sure that your interpretation of their intent behind bringing up "women" says more about you then it does about them.... An alternative interpretation would be "many women find phallic humor to be funny". As the HN comment guidelines suggest: > Assume good faith. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        brirec 4y ago
        GP isn’t necessarily assuming bad faith. Suggesting that women are any more or less likely to be offended by something is Considered Harmful because it enforces gender binaries and stereotypes. Most people don’t have malicious intent. The biggest reason that the tech industry is so infamously misogynistic is because people don’t actually know much about the issues of gender, and don’t really know what is misogyny. Let me make this a little clearer and more to the point: suggesting that a company of 80% women would appreciate a mild dick joke in the context of whether or not the joke is safe for work is enforcing a gender binary that both separates women from men (by suggesting that there’s different senses of humor between them) and erases non-binary people. If you can think about it this way I’m pretty sure you can see why it’s also misogynistic even if you’re being “positive” towards women, as well as problematic in general, without GP needing any malicious intent whatsoever. And it could be avoided just as easily by being educated and aware. This isn’t some sort of “snowflake” shit, either. We just live in a society that perpetuates these harmful gender stereotypes even during water cooler chit-chat, and the only way to change it is to point it out. Please also assume good faith. Edit: I don’t like the tone that I wrote this comment in, and so I want to make myself clear that I’m not trying to attack anybody either. My point is really that comments can be harmful without being written with malicious intent, and pointing it out when possible is important if anybody wants to see that aspect of society change.
        googlryas 4y ago
        > Pretty sure that your interpretation of their intent behind bringing up "women" says more about you then it does about them.... Ah yes, the classic "You're sexist for pointing out sexism" argument. > An alternative interpretation would be "many women find phallic humor to be funny". An interpretation which has nothing to do with the comments at hand, which is determining if some content is SFW or not. > As the HN comment guidelines suggest: > Assume good faith. Yes, that means assume good faith when there is uncertainty. I don't see much uncertainty in the post in question, they are fairly explicit about their point.
  - CharlesW 4y ago
    Generally, it's considered best practice to not post "vaguely penis" content to official work communications channels.
    - bogeholm 4y ago
      Advice of the day! Kant or Heidegger probably wrote something similar.
  - numpad0 4y ago
    NSFW had become an euphemism for p-o-r-n(w/exposed parts) and in that sense it’s not NSFW because. In literal sense it is. And that discrepancy is somewhat confusing.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    It's just that gif of David Hasselhoff in a speedo where it keeps zooming in on his crotch and it's just more David Hasselhoffs in speedos forever. An image that I assume anyone who's even heard of the Internet has already seen a hundred times. I wouldn't call it NSFW, personally. [EDIT] I mean, contextually, if you're being weird about it or posting that kind of thing all the time, yeah, it could become NSFW. But I don't think sharing this particular thing maybe with a "warning: low-quality gif of Hasselhoff in speedo" in case anyone cares, is over the line.
- hahamrfunnyguy 4y ago
  It really depends on the degree to which your co-workers and clients lack a sense of humor. For example, in the early 00's I was working for a company that built a lot of CMS sites. One of the test images my co-worker used was Yoda driving a go-kart. A customer got offended, so we were instructed to use really boring images that just had the word "test" on them.
  - gw99 4y ago
    Some people are waiting to be offended. I used Mighty Boosh as a test image a couple of years back and was told off for it. https://imgur.com/a/hOfmKpy https://imgur.com/a/hOfmKpy
    - egeozcan 4y ago
      This offended me by refusing to show anything without js! (I'm not serious, just in case that wasn't clear)
      - nerdponx 4y ago
        I am serious about that!
  - osrec 4y ago
    What about Yoda driving a go-kart is even remotely offensive?! A client being offended at something like that is a bit of a red flag for me...
    - prange 4y ago
      Perhaps the client is an ‘American Jedi’. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/american-jedi-documentary_n_5a355dfae4b01d429cc943c2 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/american-jedi-documentary_n_5...
    - Rebelgecko 4y ago
      Since their story happened 20 years ago its probably not related, but Reddit banned r/LegoYoda because of the captions on some photos of Yoda driving a 2003 Honda Civic.
- googlryas 4y ago
  They said "nsfw", not "not safe for me" or "this is porn". They're making a comment about workplace conditions, not their own viewpoints. You aren't badass for "being cool" with this imagery.
  - em-bee 4y ago
    the image is boring and dumb. but a place where this is considered not safe is not a place where would want to work.
    - ohbtvz 4y ago
      Good for you, but your values are not universal and not everyone has the same opportunity to choose their workplace as easily as you apparently do.
      - em-bee 4y ago
        this is not about different values but about oppression. if a colleague were to share this image at work, i would tell them to stop wasting my time with this dumb stuff. if it was a member of a team i am leading i would tell them to stop goofing around and get back to work. if on the other hand, someone would denounce this person for sharing inappropriate images, i would consider that an act of oppression. we are supposed to work together, and not against each other. a work culture where every little transgression has severe consequences is not healthy. if this image makes someone uncomfortable, they are welcome to talk to me and i will listen to learn why. i suspect most likely, it's not the image itself that's the problem, but the attitude of those who laugh at it. i will then talk to those people and do my best to get them to improve their attitude about such matters. there are things that are inappropriate to do at work, and one of them is to make dumb jokes like this, but that doesn't make the image itself not safe for work. and as for choosing my workplace, i come from a country where employees actually have rights. and one of those rights is to share their personal opinions, even if others disagree, as long as doing so is not disruptive. the idea that the leaders in the company can tell their employees what they are allowed to talk about or not is rather alien to me. this doesn't mean that it's ok to say or share things that are hurtful. it only means that there is no topic that is a priori not allowed to be discussed at the work place. if this image comes up because someone in my team actually did mistype their url, they may share it with the team, and if they have the appropriate attitude, they will dismiss it, denounce the maker of that website as juvenile and move on. if someone walks by, having no idea why this image is there on the screen, they may inquire about it, or come to me and ask me what that is supposed to be about. we'll check, find out and move on. calling this image not safe for work, creates an environment of fear, that itself is not healthy and in the country where i come from, not acceptable.
- amelius 4y ago
  You mean their boss.

[nsfw]

by mi_lk 4y ago

[nsfw]

No it's not. EDIT: It is not NSFW. If you think this is NSFW, then I don't think you should be spending any time on the internet. The internet is not safe for you.

metadat 4y ago
No it's not nsfw? Now I'm really confused, can I very paste this into slack #random or not?
- moron4hire 4y ago
  I could at my job. My company is 80% women. They'd find it hilarious. EDIT: Actually, just checked. They did find it hilarious.
  - googlryas 4y ago
    Women aren't the arbiter of what is sfw or nsfw. I'm curious why you jumped to "women" here, when they aren't relevant to the conversation. Do you think women need to be protected from unsafe imagery at work, or "nsfw" is designed to protect women?
    - jlkuester7 4y ago
      Pretty sure that your interpretation of their intent behind bringing up "women" says more about you then it does about them.... An alternative interpretation would be "many women find phallic humor to be funny". As the HN comment guidelines suggest: > Assume good faith. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - brirec 4y ago
        GP isn’t necessarily assuming bad faith. Suggesting that women are any more or less likely to be offended by something is Considered Harmful because it enforces gender binaries and stereotypes. Most people don’t have malicious intent. The biggest reason that the tech industry is so infamously misogynistic is because people don’t actually know much about the issues of gender, and don’t really know what is misogyny. Let me make this a little clearer and more to the point: suggesting that a company of 80% women would appreciate a mild dick joke in the context of whether or not the joke is safe for work is enforcing a gender binary that both separates women from men (by suggesting that there’s different senses of humor between them) and erases non-binary people. If you can think about it this way I’m pretty sure you can see why it’s also misogynistic even if you’re being “positive” towards women, as well as problematic in general, without GP needing any malicious intent whatsoever. And it could be avoided just as easily by being educated and aware. This isn’t some sort of “snowflake” shit, either. We just live in a society that perpetuates these harmful gender stereotypes even during water cooler chit-chat, and the only way to change it is to point it out. Please also assume good faith. Edit: I don’t like the tone that I wrote this comment in, and so I want to make myself clear that I’m not trying to attack anybody either. My point is really that comments can be harmful without being written with malicious intent, and pointing it out when possible is important if anybody wants to see that aspect of society change.
      - googlryas 4y ago
        > Pretty sure that your interpretation of their intent behind bringing up "women" says more about you then it does about them.... Ah yes, the classic "You're sexist for pointing out sexism" argument. > An alternative interpretation would be "many women find phallic humor to be funny". An interpretation which has nothing to do with the comments at hand, which is determining if some content is SFW or not. > As the HN comment guidelines suggest: > Assume good faith. Yes, that means assume good faith when there is uncertainty. I don't see much uncertainty in the post in question, they are fairly explicit about their point.
- CharlesW 4y ago
  Generally, it's considered best practice to not post "vaguely penis" content to official work communications channels.
  - bogeholm 4y ago
    Advice of the day! Kant or Heidegger probably wrote something similar.
- numpad0 4y ago
  NSFW had become an euphemism for p-o-r-n(w/exposed parts) and in that sense it’s not NSFW because. In literal sense it is. And that discrepancy is somewhat confusing.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  It's just that gif of David Hasselhoff in a speedo where it keeps zooming in on his crotch and it's just more David Hasselhoffs in speedos forever. An image that I assume anyone who's even heard of the Internet has already seen a hundred times. I wouldn't call it NSFW, personally. [EDIT] I mean, contextually, if you're being weird about it or posting that kind of thing all the time, yeah, it could become NSFW. But I don't think sharing this particular thing maybe with a "warning: low-quality gif of Hasselhoff in speedo" in case anyone cares, is over the line.
hahamrfunnyguy 4y ago
It really depends on the degree to which your co-workers and clients lack a sense of humor. For example, in the early 00's I was working for a company that built a lot of CMS sites. One of the test images my co-worker used was Yoda driving a go-kart. A customer got offended, so we were instructed to use really boring images that just had the word "test" on them.
- gw99 4y ago
  Some people are waiting to be offended. I used Mighty Boosh as a test image a couple of years back and was told off for it. https://imgur.com/a/hOfmKpy https://imgur.com/a/hOfmKpy
  - egeozcan 4y ago
    This offended me by refusing to show anything without js! (I'm not serious, just in case that wasn't clear)
    - nerdponx 4y ago
      I am serious about that!
- osrec 4y ago
  What about Yoda driving a go-kart is even remotely offensive?! A client being offended at something like that is a bit of a red flag for me...
  - prange 4y ago
    Perhaps the client is an ‘American Jedi’. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/american-jedi-documentary_n_5a355dfae4b01d429cc943c2 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/american-jedi-documentary_n_5...
  - Rebelgecko 4y ago
    Since their story happened 20 years ago its probably not related, but Reddit banned r/LegoYoda because of the captions on some photos of Yoda driving a 2003 Honda Civic.
googlryas 4y ago
They said "nsfw", not "not safe for me" or "this is porn". They're making a comment about workplace conditions, not their own viewpoints. You aren't badass for "being cool" with this imagery.
- em-bee 4y ago
  the image is boring and dumb. but a place where this is considered not safe is not a place where would want to work.
  - ohbtvz 4y ago
    Good for you, but your values are not universal and not everyone has the same opportunity to choose their workplace as easily as you apparently do.
    - em-bee 4y ago
      this is not about different values but about oppression. if a colleague were to share this image at work, i would tell them to stop wasting my time with this dumb stuff. if it was a member of a team i am leading i would tell them to stop goofing around and get back to work. if on the other hand, someone would denounce this person for sharing inappropriate images, i would consider that an act of oppression. we are supposed to work together, and not against each other. a work culture where every little transgression has severe consequences is not healthy. if this image makes someone uncomfortable, they are welcome to talk to me and i will listen to learn why. i suspect most likely, it's not the image itself that's the problem, but the attitude of those who laugh at it. i will then talk to those people and do my best to get them to improve their attitude about such matters. there are things that are inappropriate to do at work, and one of them is to make dumb jokes like this, but that doesn't make the image itself not safe for work. and as for choosing my workplace, i come from a country where employees actually have rights. and one of those rights is to share their personal opinions, even if others disagree, as long as doing so is not disruptive. the idea that the leaders in the company can tell their employees what they are allowed to talk about or not is rather alien to me. this doesn't mean that it's ok to say or share things that are hurtful. it only means that there is no topic that is a priori not allowed to be discussed at the work place. if this image comes up because someone in my team actually did mistype their url, they may share it with the team, and if they have the appropriate attitude, they will dismiss it, denounce the maker of that website as juvenile and move on. if someone walks by, having no idea why this image is there on the screen, they may inquire about it, or come to me and ask me what that is supposed to be about. we'll check, find out and move on. calling this image not safe for work, creates an environment of fear, that itself is not healthy and in the country where i come from, not acceptable.
amelius 4y ago
You mean their boss.