tos schmos
Dec. 18th, 2018 04:06 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
stainlesshttps://fail-fandomanon.dreamwidth.org/345071.html?thread=1996634863#cmt1996634863
Wait, so pillowfort didn’t just announce that drawings of prepubescent characters aren’t allowed after people decided to migrate there from Tumblr (which is just bad timing), they actually banned someone for posting clearly marked loli without even telling them it was a bannable offense?
While I’d prefer that not be in the TOS of a site that capitalized on people running afoul of idiot censors, I wasn’t necessarily going to die on that hill. (Though I did think their tos sounded like it might ban, say, flashback scenes in a graphic novel depicting a character’s csa, and I think that seems... a bit lacking in nuance of so.)
But not letting someone know loli is banned and banning that person entirely rather than sending a heads up or just deleting the post in question?
Yeah, I’m less okay with that. Loli is not against US law; this person’s ignorance of the rules wasn’t about being an Illegal Thing Doer, but about... well, I could be wrong, but my guess is the mods seeing something they’d meant to ban but never mentioned and losing their shit.
Which I’d get if it was something obscure they hadn’t thought of that was clearly iffy, but if people are fleeing Tumblr, where antis yelling about “pedos” Are basically fandom herpes?
Not Very Thought Out.
Wait, so pillowfort didn’t just announce that drawings of prepubescent characters aren’t allowed after people decided to migrate there from Tumblr (which is just bad timing), they actually banned someone for posting clearly marked loli without even telling them it was a bannable offense?
While I’d prefer that not be in the TOS of a site that capitalized on people running afoul of idiot censors, I wasn’t necessarily going to die on that hill. (Though I did think their tos sounded like it might ban, say, flashback scenes in a graphic novel depicting a character’s csa, and I think that seems... a bit lacking in nuance of so.)
But not letting someone know loli is banned and banning that person entirely rather than sending a heads up or just deleting the post in question?
Yeah, I’m less okay with that. Loli is not against US law; this person’s ignorance of the rules wasn’t about being an Illegal Thing Doer, but about... well, I could be wrong, but my guess is the mods seeing something they’d meant to ban but never mentioned and losing their shit.
Which I’d get if it was something obscure they hadn’t thought of that was clearly iffy, but if people are fleeing Tumblr, where antis yelling about “pedos” Are basically fandom herpes?
Not Very Thought Out.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-20 04:07 am (UTC)If you're here from Tumblr I'd prefer to know who you are before I grant access to locked posts/do the equivalent of follow you back, but otherwise go ahead. :-)
And yeah, that's more my problem than the ban. Like I said I would have preferred an AO3like TOS because it aligns more with my personal views, but I wouldn't have left over it. I don't have any need for that content.
But I've run afoul of TOSes before and my big problem with them is that very often they have policies that come across to me less as "we thought about this and decided to ban X because Y" and more "well, some content sort of like that might be okay, but don't be TOO on the nose," and that doesn't so much come across to me as "don't glorify this" as "don't talk/think about this."
Like, I remember when I was a college student and curious about kink, and I looked up the obscenity statutes in my area to see what I could and couldn't post on the webspace at me dot wherever dot edu, and the specific wording I still recall was "depictions of sadomasochistic abuse." And... knowing how conservative a lot of this state is, that probably meant "we assert that BDSM is inherently abusive" but my brain kept going "but what if you don't think all sadomasochistic activity is abuse? what then?"
So I'm usually wary of TOSes or laws or whatever else, because very often they boil down to "we're not going to ask what the context was in which you created or presented this, we're just going to assume you are motivated by whatever we're afraid of."
When humans typically have very varied reasons for engaging with any content, controversial or upsetting content especially.