I've been getting complaints about footage that is technically non-violent but leaves enough to the imagination that it apparently bothers people, so I wanted to get input regarding where the NSFW line should be drawn.

The video posted here is a perfect example of where I think the limit is. The only complaint I can see is the discharge of a firearm. Does that count? Is 'being able to put 2 and 2 together to know what happened' enough to warrant flagging as NSFW? Was the previous status quo good enough?

Setting aside the obvious "I know it when I see it", please share your thoughts.

Until a better consensus of where the line should be for the community I will leave it temporarily flagged as NSFW.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don’t think the issue folks had was the firing rifle but rather the knowledge that a second layer the dude was blown up.

The comments specifically said it was about seeing the last moments of someone’s life.

A NSFL tag would be what is appropriate when “showing death” is what I think folks are advocating for.

[–] Burstar@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What they 'think' was the last moments. The follow-up drone shows no body, or even blood, so it is likely they got away.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It kinda feels like you’re playing dumb here.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I've seen a lot of drone videos over the past years. Those drones often carry only small grenades with a directed warhead. So there's a good chance that guy just got some shrapnel in not life threatening parts of his body and limped away. Is there also a chance his head got blown off and the body flew off the truck? Yeah. But neither scenario is actually visible in the video.

If this matter is so important to you I'd suggest to raise a feature request for more in depth tags on Lemmy's Github page, because there's also a lot of people who draw the line at actual visible gore and want to filter just that out.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

The matter isn’t important to me, but I am trying to understand what the people who it is important to are asking

[–] Burstar@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm being objective. It is an assumption either way as there is no concrete evidence visible in the video. Do you think every drone cam that cuts to static should be flagged as NSFW?

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

All combat footage should probably be flagged nsfw, honestly.

Since nsfw flagging is just a tool and doesn’t mean “boobies” it’s likely the best method. Otherwise folks who don’t want to see combat footage only have the option of unsubscribing or blocking the community from preventing autoplay of videos on some clients.

[–] Burstar@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

All combat footage should probably be flagged nsfw,

I think that is too aggressive. There is all kinds of footage that is clearly safe (eg: drone on drone).

I'm thinking a rule requiring NSFW for combat footage where bodies (living or otherwise) are visible.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

You’re introducing a subjective measure of what is ok by interpreting the line.

Just make the line combat footage. Then you don’t have to police it or make judgement calls.

I personally don’t need anything flagged, I’m fine with the content as is but I’m trying to take an objective stance here with the input from others. Take the subjective decisions out of it and make it an easy line for all to follow.

[–] Burstar@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

@LaFinlandia@sopuli.xyz this will probably affect you most. Thoughts?

[–] LaFinlandia@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 week ago

I believe a [Combat] tag/flair in the title would be a fair compromise.