Reddit Migration

33 readers

1 users here now

### About Community Tracking and helping #redditmigration to Kbin and the Fediverse. Say hello to the decentralized and open future. To see latest reeddit blackout info, see here: https://reddark.untone.uk/

founded 1 year ago

NSFW instance lemmynsfw - drawn NSFW content (updated) (lemmynsfw.com)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by nude@kbin.social to c/RedditMigration@kbin.social

204 comments fedilink hide all child comments

SEE SECOND EDIT DOWN BELOW

Lets not beat around the bush here, lots of people like to look at boobs and dicks.

Lemmynsfw was looking like a good place to go, but reading the "Loli" announcement thread where they equate drawn child porn to petite women, its clear the owner is not the right person to be hosting a NSFW instance for the majority of people.

Is there anywhere else that people can recommend?

There is undoubtably a need for such an instance. Can we discuss this like adults?

edit: UPDATE

Take this update as you will

I'm taking it as a backtrack, but it's still not an instance I want to associate with.

Lots of people keen to offer their opinion of drawn picture of naked kids, haven't seen any alternatives though

Edit 2: At this point I think their updated rules are good. It took a bit to get there, but in the end they appear to be taking a hard stance. Hopefully this is enforced.

I dont think it was a case of "whoops bad English" like they are suggesting, I think it was a total 180 backflip. This doesnt really instill confidence in the admins IMO, but im happy that they have made the right decision in regards to allowed content. Hopefully this is was just some early wobblies and the community can move on.

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

[–] nude@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The post title, direct quote

We’re allowing non-IRL underage looking content

[–] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I see you did not even bother to read the clarification, nor the original question.

[–] nude@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No I did, and they said

We’re allowing non-IRL underage looking content

Then they go on to say there is a difference between teen and child, and then backtrack and say "noooo we banned loli", after posting a thread titled

We’re allowing non-IRL underage looking content

edit:
And now the title of the post is

We're (not) allowing non-IRL underage looking content

[–] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No, it says, and I quote the whole thing for you as you apparently lack reading comprehension, since your quote is literally not part of it:

I have so much respect for @yay but i can't believe how poorly he wrote the update message, lol.

Here is what's happening;

loli/shota are BANNED and not okay in any way.

IRL kids are BANNED OBVIOUSLY because no shit.

characters who are petite/young-looking but not obviously underage are ALLOWED because as an instance the votes decided that banning all of it was destructive, and differentiating between them can be impossible.

The line will continue to be up to the admins discretion, though we always appreciate input. And beyond this, individual communities can decide whether they want to outright ban all flat-chested etc. porn to be safe.

Any other clarifications necessary, just ask below. Thanks for reading. ~Restful

[–] nude@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Yes, the backtrack, which was posted after my initial thread, which is a 180 on what was originally posted, but also goes on to say that its impossible to differentiate if its flat chested content.

All this could have been solved by saying "18+ only", but instead they want to dance the pedo line and come up with their own rules based on breast size and "anime skin tones" and all this other nonsense.

This thread isnt missleading, I posted what I saw. Then they backtracked almost. If people didnt post about it and say they were leaving there wouldnt have been a backtrack.