Resolved NSFL Options

[Rachel]

the parent raping thread is giving me the reason to post something that has been on my mind for awhile.

I know the general tone of the new GW forums is that we are all adults etc. But I have been thinking if it is worth considering some kind of NSFL option for current events. I've seen a few threads with headlines like the thread in question, in the news forum. I know "it's just words." But it's deeply disturbing. Maybe a way to permanently filter out NSFL tagged threads if a user wants to.

If I'm the only one who feels this way I'll shut up about this. Maybe it's because I'm a mother now. I know very bad things, NSFL things happen to children but sometimes this haunts me pretty bad.

 

[Mark]

I’m not sure if we currently have the ability for members to filter out threads by prefix, but I don’t see why it would be an issue if such a thing exists. If not, one of the geniuses here might be able to rig something up. We have a generalized “NSFW” prefix already, but it looks like an origin was chosen instead.

 

[Raine]

I'm always in favor of allowing the option for trigger warnings and filtering of troublesome/problematic content.

I wonder, at face value, if an opt-in style would be more feasible than an opt-out? Like we already have a variety of filters across the forums that make things unviewable without a certain group permission, so in theory a field should be able to be added wherein certain usergroups can't view certain filters/things... maybe?

Kind of, but not exactly, like this perhaps? Came up with a little digging, but not really seeing anything specific:

[OzzModz] Hide Thread From Guests

Requirements: XenForo 2.2.0+ Commissioned by @El Porcharo Description: Allows to hide any threads from unregistered users Features: Permission to hide threads InlineMod support Forum overview filters ACP thread search criteria support ACP...

xenforo.com

Can also get a little creative with the Hide tags and manually reworking thread titles, since I would presume the number of offending threads will be quite low per month/year. Not, like, elegant by any means but y'know.

 

[Ben]

I'll look into this. I'm not sure if it'll be as simple as just making a custom field for the "Hide NSFL Content" option, and sticking an if-condition into the template, but I'll try that first. If it doesn't work to axe the entire line item for matching threads, perhaps I can at least make it blur out the titles, which would also solve the problem.

 

[Rachel]

Yes, I think either of those would be fine. I was actually picturing blurring as a possible option. I am talking about threads where even reading the title can be disturbing or NSFL.

And I'm sorry, I think the trick with this is also what is the definition of NSFL. Probably different for each person. My sense is that each of us in the forums (and the mods) would do the best they can, and that's really all I ask. My starting point is definitely anything really, really bad that involves children. And yeah Raine, I've only had this thought a few times since the forums started, so not many each month, if any.

 

[Raine]

And I'm sorry, I think the trick with this is also what is the definition of NSFL. Probably different for each person. My sense is that each of us in the forums (and the mods) would do the best they can, and that's really all I ask. My starting point is definitely anything really, really bad that involves children.

Ostensibly, following best practices and common sense should suffice? A lot of common content warnings would just get auto-nuked by a staff member, so touchy subject matter that might get talked about but not necessarily be a problem for everyone would include:

- Suicide/Ideation
- Sexual assault
- Domestic/Child abuse
- Animal cruelty
- Ableism/body shaming

Which I feel like probably covers all of the major stuff for people approaching the community in good faith (read: the people already here)?

 

[Rachel]

Yes, I think that is a good list. Last one might depend who is reading or what the story is. Like I've never had anorexia but someone else might not want to read about something like that (as an example).

Another example, I am putting this in spoilers, it's about animal abuse and a real story but I don't go into huge detail:

Spoiler: Recent animal abuse story

This conversation is reminding me of something I saw recently on Reddit:

The headline was "Ringleader of global monkey torture network is charged"

That is pretty awful but the key for me was that the headline didn't go into more specifics. So I did not click on the story! But if the headline had said more specifics, like "the torture king arrested after flaying baby monkeys alive and streaming" or something. You know?

Anyway, I don't want to confuse the "limit" of where the line is so I think Raine's list is a good guideline.

 

[Raine]

Yes, I think that is a good list. Last one might depend who is reading or what the story is. Like I've never had anorexia but someone else might not want to read about something like that (as an example).

That's a good example, yeah. My headspace was also into, of course in addition to actual physical disabilities and the like (often WRT accessibility concerns being hand-waved in stories/articles), stories from like school teachers being fired for the way they look - whether they be too attractive (and/or have an OnlyFans lol) or like that one ostensibly trans teacher with the very large prosthetic breasts. I just reckon if people don't wanna deal with that - might as well throw 'em on the pile while we're at it to be safe? But folks should feel free to share their viewpoint on adding/removing things.

If Ben can get some sort of blurred/marked spoiler-like system in place, then it's just a matter of figuring out how to note with category the headline/discussion falls under.

animal cruelty bit

The depravity of some people astounds me. Just... why.

 

[Crystal]

We'll absolutely look into this! There must be a way to filter out content, we might even create a forum that you have to opt into in order to see those types of threads. It won't change to suddenly allow grotesque gore and such, but we can hide the more sensitive subject stories.

 

[Ben]

Quick and dirty fix for right now, I just obscured any NSFW thread title until you mouse over it.




I was screwing around with making a profile "unblur" option to take it off if you opt to, but that hasn't worked so far and I want some of my night back. I'll keep fleshing it out though.

That aside, I think we probably need another "Sensitive" prefix and guidelines around what to flag as sensitive, and/or rely on moderators to adjust things that might be uncomfortable.

(I did only do it for the thread list though, so it won't be blurred out inside the thread, or in your notifications if you post in there, etc. I should go back in and see if I can blur out the "last active thread" title on the forum view, though.)

 

[Ben]

Hmm... I can get the title blurred out on the forum view easily enough, it just also blurs the NSWF tag... Not a huge deal though.

Do we think it's necessary to keep stuff out of the last active post view too? I'd think yes, otherwise you're still possibly going to read something you don't want to.

If so I'll put this into production too.

 

[Crystal]

Hmm... I can get the title blurred out on the forum view easily enough, it just also blurs the NSWF tag... Not a huge deal though.

Do we think it's necessary to keep stuff out of the last active post view too? I'd think yes, otherwise you're still possibly going to read something you don't want to.

If so I'll put this into production too.

View attachment 13102

I'd say better safe than sorry

 

[Ben]

I'd say better safe than sorry

 

[Crystal]

Thanks, Ben

 

[Rachel]

...wow...y'all are so nice...

Wow...



Hope other people won't mind it...

I was actually thinking, I don't remember this being a problem for me in old GW and I was trying to remember what we did. Was it because I didn't react as much back then or were we more aware of kids browsing the forums etc and had a policy around it.

Raine points

To me it is the difference between "that is a terrible headline but at least I am now more informed about something, I probably don't want to click the link" and "I wish I didn't have eyes by reading this" reaction. It can be different for each person. I generally trust everyone to make that judgement the best they can.

The depravity of some people astounds me. Just... why.

It's a whole industry! Depraved snuff films a subset of people seek out. I'll keep it at that.

 

[Crystal]

...wow...y'all are so nice...

Wow...



Hope other people won't mind it...

I was actually thinking, I don't remember this being a problem for me in old GW and I was trying to remember what we did. Was it because I didn't react as much back then or were we more aware of kids browsing the forums etc and had a policy around it.

Not at all, we don't want anyone to have to read the truly extreme titles unless they choose to. It's a very common sense change to make

 

[Mark]

That aside, I think we probably need another "Sensitive" prefix and guidelines around what to flag as sensitive, and/or rely on moderators to adjust things that might be uncomfortable.

You’re right, and it was a complete oversight when I was setting them up initially.

...wow...y'all are so nice...

Wow...



Hope other people won't mind it...

Fuck ‘em. That nice enough for you? If people have a problem with what Ben’s trying to set up for sensitive people when we let all of the other stuff fly that we do, then I’ll personally tell them what they can do with those complaints.

I was actually thinking, I don't remember this being a problem for me in old GW and I was trying to remember what we did. Was it because I didn't react as much back then or were we more aware of kids browsing the forums etc and had a policy around it.

I’m sure a lot of that has to do with the fact that although those kind of stories still existed, they hit a little bit differently after you become older, a parent, etc.

To me it is the difference between "that is a terrible headline but at least I am now more informed about something, I probably don't want to click the link" and "I wish I didn't have eyes by reading this" reaction. It can be different for each person. I generally trust everyone to make that judgement the best they can.

Right, but having to force the member to provide a degree of consent before even reading a headline is the safest way to go.

It's a whole industry! Depraved snuff films a subset of people seek out. I'll keep it at that.

I wouldn’t even call it a subset. It used to just be Rotten or BestGore, now it has permeated through to even your run of the mill compilation category.

 

[Ben]

Note to me; Still have to take it out of the "Latest Posts" widget.

Editor's Note to me: Yay

 

[Ben]

New "Sensitive" tag for all forums.

 

[Mark]

New "Sensitive" tag for all forums.

View attachment 13119

View attachment 13120

Nice. So, are we good with this, or are you still tweaking it?

Any thoughts, @Rachel? If it’s good, then I’ll make the edit to the forum guidelines as well to include the new prefix and the purpose.

 

[Ben]

I'm going to call the fix complete for now and stop short of blurring it anywhere else. I think the only place it's really not blurred is inside the thread, and in the alert notification window if you've posted in it or marked it watched. However, I assume if you've posted in or watched a thread you're already beyond the warning-needing level.

I may one day implement the feature to unblur things by default, but for now everyone can just live with it.

 

[Rachel]

Yes, I think that works!

Thank you Ben! Thanks everyone!

 

[Mark]

I'm going to call the fix complete for now and stop short of blurring it anywhere else. I think the only place it's really not blurred is inside the thread, and in the alert notification window if you've posted in it or marked it watched. However, I assume if you've posted in or watched a thread you're already beyond the warning-needing level.

I may one day implement the feature to unblur things by default, but for now everyone can just live with it.

Perfect, that’s another one resolved. Go on and give yourself some dopamine. Look at that sweet, sweet green “Resolved”.

 

[Jon]

...wow...y'all are so nice...

Wow...



Hope other people won't mind it...

I was actually thinking, I don't remember this being a problem for me in old GW and I was trying to remember what we did. Was it because I didn't react as much back then or were we more aware of kids browsing the forums etc and had a policy around it.



To me it is the difference between "that is a terrible headline but at least I am now more informed about something, I probably don't want to click the link" and "I wish I didn't have eyes by reading this" reaction. It can be different for each person. I generally trust everyone to make that judgement the best they can.



It's a whole industry! Depraved snuff films a subset of people seek out. I'll keep it at that.

FYI I appreciate your thoughts on this.

I have avoided that particular thread from the beginning because as a father with a daughter that age, that shit is unimaginable to me. And it's hard to not associate.

Spoiler: Potential Sensitive Connection

It reminded me of last year. I found out I was WORKING WITH someone involved in the Waco, Texas cult. Like, worked with, met, talked to... And she happened to be on that Netflix documentary about it. But in it, she talks about how 12 year olds are considered mature and legal in their religion. And how they would let the 12 year old sleep with the leader in some kind of sicko ritual. She was let go to remove the company from liability with our clients, but they were aware she was involved. I could never talk to her the same way. And I'm good friends with her son and her nephew...

But this brought back memories of that... so I'm glad to have this.