Because the other thread was such a great success, I wanted to start a new one in which people can offer ideas and suggestions regarding the sensitive content filter. This is not a thread for political or philosophical debates regarding what warrants being marked as sensitive. Start another thread for that.

Now, with an aim towards user-friendliness in mind, I like the idea of sensitive films/releases being visible to all users, but presented with a generic placeholder image of some sort for users with sensitive content filtered. It could be an image with text explaining that images for the release are blocked according to their settings.

I think it's also important for users with sensitive content visible to have some kind of unobtrusive visual note/indicator ("This film has been marked as sensitive" or something) on main film/release pages, instead of requiring them to check submission history to find out in every case. Even a red dot or something could suffice, especially when it comes to browsing through search results.

It also seems like general good practice for users to give clear notes in their own submissions as to why they deem something potentially sensitive, particularly if it's in what they consider a grey area.

As long as the majority of users don't abuse or manipulate the system to their own ends, this level of transparency might help users gauge what is/should be considered de facto "sensitive material" within the grey areas surrounding obvious/deliberate cases of porn, real-world gore/violence exploitation and hate propaganda. Ideally, it would enable the community to set the standards for itself, without the need for endless moral/technical/philosophical debates and whining.

It might also be nice if users were able to toggle specific entries sensitive/non-sensitive on their own profiles, but I can already think of some reasons why that's not worth the trouble of implementing. Namely, I don't consider that degree of user-end customization essential, or even particularly productive. It basically boils down to a feature aimed at appeasing people who don't want blood in their orgies and vice versa.

Any thoughts? Are these all reasonable suggestions (I'm not counting the last one)? How could they be improved?

Agree with all of this I did add a title on Bookogs which was difficult for me to find as I realised I had the filter turned on. I like the idea of a red dot or something similar.

Hi morgue_sludge,
These are good points and definitely reasonable suggestions. I agree that the sensitive/offensive content filter could be more nuanced, however for us as a small team it's an issue of time and prioritisation

It also seems like general good practice for users to give clear notes in their own submissions as to why they deem something potentially sensitive, particularly if it's in what they consider a grey area.

Absolutely agree. I thought the guidelines covered this, but just expanded on that point. I think we could clarify this next to the checkbox in the submission form too.

Thanks for the suggestions and getting this conversation started. I can't make any promises about when and if these will be implemented but we'll definitely discuss these ideas and take them into consideration.

On this topic.

I found all these actresses profiles classed sensitive content because it says pornographic in the information sector why is this?.

The user was banned though.

For example

https://www.filmo.gs/credit/295215-brittany-oneil

https://www.filmo.gs/credit/296106-alexis-payne

I can understand if it was nudity of somesort but am confushed just because it says either bondage or pornographic.

This is something I've thought about as well. What should even be considered for marking as sensitive? To me, credits are purely informative, even though they may link to sensitive materials associated with credited entities/individuals.

It should go without saying that there's no reason to upload pornographic images for actor/company credits, where non-copyright-protected head shots, public photos or tasteful cropping would suffice in most cases.

It's important to know that the user you mention was (at least from my perspective) being intentionally disruptive and trying to stir the pot by marking obvious exceptions like generic, R-rated slasher movies as sensitive. They gave some very disingenuous, coy justifications for marking things like that as sensitive, presumably to "make a point" that everyone here is a prude or something.

Also, thanks for your response, falsepriest. I don't expect things to be implemented or perfected over night. I'm glad people are contemplating it for the future, though.

I think some credits from adult movies were marked as sensitive because the images they used were explicit in nature.

But I'd agree that there is no need for this, surely those people have images available that aren't explicit and those are the ones that should be used for the profiles. I don't think there is need to mark anything as sensitive just because their profile contains specific words.

Login or Register to post a reply to this topic.