Mastodon.social should already be heavily limiting nudity or pornography on its instance due to German youth protection law, which mandates age verification systems to prevent kids from accessing adult content.
But they are taking a legal risk there and ignoring this law.
The point that I've made occasionally is that I don't understand why I need to
Sensitive content --> Media display --> Always hide media
Always hide everything so that Gargron doesn't have to address the presence of very hard-core, full contact homosexual, non-CWd pornography on @Mastodon
OK: it's a small minority (not redundant) of the overall posts, but why do I need to hide everything everywhere to cover the very few times I browse the /public/ feed on my instance?
I keep reporting the porn to MastoSoc and nothing perceivable happens
If I want porn (which I don't) I'll go to PornHub (which I won't)
I don’t know how well it works as I usually have a suspend/don’t suspend decision, but don’t we essentially have this? You can refuse to accept media, that’s one of the server limit options, isn’t it?
This is Mastodon’s available options, but Threads could implement same, and possibly better (so avatars/banners still appear, but inline images must be viewed “elsewhere”).
Also, it wasn't too long ago that Switter had to modify all outbound media to be marked as sensitive because people keep complaining about nudity in the federated timeline.
Acting like the fediverse has always been accepting of adult content is rewriting the truth & history.
Some instances have historically accepted it, but many others don't. Heck, Misskey even has adult content filtering built in using NSFW.js
Add comment