139

Can we get a consensus on whether our community should de-federate with servers that host loli? I personally think we should block them, and if that ends up not being the consensus here then I'll probably sign up on another server. I hope we can all agree to set that boundary though because I like it here and it seems otherwise pretty cool.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Supermariofan67@lemmy.fmhy.ml 55 points 1 year ago

Please do not. Although I don't personally want to see lolicon stuff, many of the servers willing to host it have communities I want to interact with. For instance, burggit.moe is where the touhou communities went and is otherwise a pretty nice instance aside from loli communities.

It is content which, while understandably offensive to some, harms nobody. All fictional porn, no matter how deviant it is, is ultimately more ethical than real porn can be.

It should be up to users to block or hide instances with content they don't wish to see, and defederation should be reserved for communities that consistently cause interference, not for communities that simply have content which one disagrees with.

[-] Finnagain@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

As I've pointed out in a few spots on this post: regardless of your moral stance, loli is considered the same as child porn by many government agencies. You may not be "harming" anyone, but you're harming the people that host and view that content in a criminal sense.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] theory@feddit.uk 10 points 1 year ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] darkwing_duck@sh.itjust.works 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No need to defederate. I just went and blocked loli and related communities that popped up. I will never see them again.

So, my vote is NAY.

load more comments (15 replies)
[-] InfiniteVariables@sh.itjust.works 43 points 1 year ago

To everyone saying just block the communities:

  1. I don't want to have to block communities. In order to know I need to block a community, I have to see content which I feel is worth blocking. That's fine for most cases but in this case that is not fine (to me personally).

  2. I don't necessarily want to associate or interact with people who are fine having a server with loli as their home server. Not to be mean about it but that's just how I feel flat out.

I think this is an instance where de-federation is the correct course of action.

[-] lodion@aussie.zone 20 points 1 year ago

I'd like a feature for user specific defederation of communities as you've mentioned. Not sure it is possible though.

[-] J_C___@lemmy.place 10 points 1 year ago

Sir thats the block button

[-] lodion@aussie.zone 8 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I meant entire instances.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] J_C___@lemmy.place 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don’t want to have to block communities. In order to know I need to block a community,

so you're puttin the onus on the admins? its the same process with different steps, just block the communities you dont want to see as they pop up. No need to search them out.

EDIT: spelling

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] MorksEgg@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Isn't that the point of decentralization allowing users to pick and choose what they want to see? If you don't want to see Loli all you have to do is block the server from your feed. I'm not a fan of Hentaiof any of its subs. But I digress, I'm not on your server so I guess I don't really have a say. 😁

[-] sexy_peach@feddit.de 18 points 1 year ago

No the point of decentralization is not that the user has to do all the moderation work themselves.

[-] AgileLion@feddit.de 18 points 1 year ago

I don't want to see gore to block it, though.

[-] Velkas@lemmy.cock.social 27 points 1 year ago

Why not just leave it up to users on user by user basis? Are we already trying to regulate stuff on this platform? Block stuff if you don't like it, ignore if not. I'm by no means for loli personally, but that's going to start a snowball of overstepping and pretty soon it'll be like R where everything is locked, deleted, blocked, or hidden.

If it's not illegal, ignore it.

[-] amminadabz@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

The "slippery slope" argument is a logical fallacy.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] TiredSpider@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'd like that shit gone too. I understand not wanting to close ourselves off too much but I think things like avoiding groups that are ok with shit like loli is a no brainer.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Cracks_InTheWalls@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 year ago

I too would like the ability to block at the instance level as a user. Haven't come across loli, but @lemmynsfw.com does show up quite a bit when looking at All.

I have no problem at all with other sh.it.heads wanting to look at/interact with nsfw stuff from that instance, but I'm personally not interested. Given this, defederation seems extreme, but blocking on a community-by-community basis is time consuming and, as others have said, necessitates seeing the content to some degree (pretty sure you can choose whether stuff is blurred or not in your feed via the settings). I'd rather key '@lemmynsfw.com' into a block list once, and go back to what I'm doing.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] starrox@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 year ago

I dont think defederation is the way to go here. It could be another scenario that could be solve elegantly via a tagging system.

But I agree that stuff which is in a legal grey area or outright forbidden in many countries should not show per default on All. There already is a NSFW setting that you can activate and deactivate (this btw can solve the issue to 99% for you right now if you're willing to pass on other NSFW content).

There could be an additional setting to see things that "might be illegal in your country of residence" or simply NSFL. If you then mark such communities appropriatly it could solve the issue for people that want a) no exposure and b) no legal risk due to being shown such communities. And I count myself among those that dont want anything to do with loli or the likes.

[-] Oinks@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago

Users viewing illegal content is one thing but instance owners hosting it is also an issue.

I might be wrong about how content mirroring on Lemmy works but I'd imagine instance owners would clearly be liable for "publishing" any illegal content hosted on their instance.

There's not really a way out of this using tags. And the moderation log probably needs to be purged from the actually offending content as well. And in the specific case of CP (which can include loli depending on the jurisdiction) having the content in a database might also be illegal.

So that's a whole headache...

[-] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago

No content from other instances are hosted here. When you see an image from a community on another instance, what you're seeing is an embedded image linked from the other instance.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kadu@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

I'd also like to have the ability to block entire instances. Not sure if the architecture would allow that, but at least the mobile apps should be able to filter out all posts from a specific instance

[-] ArtisanalRuntime@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 year ago

Yeah, full agree. So far I've only had to block a few communities to get the loli to stop popping up on all, but a rogue instance could really start to spam people with pretty horrible stuff. That's what defederation is for, it seems, but there needs to be some rules in place for when the instance ban-hammer gets called upon.

It would be very nice if clients like Jerboa allowed users to choose to ban/filter specific instances for themselves without affecting everyone else, though.

[-] _uc@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Absolutely block instances hosting illegal content - the way federation works means copies / caches of content can end up on this server? Or even if that’s not how lemmy does it, it risks using this server to facilitate the spread of something incredibly harmful & damaging.

As far as I’m concerned there’s no argument for allowing / normalising content produced which quite literally ruins peoples lives.

Edit: Even stuff that’s purely cartoonish in nature for me is just grim, and I don’t want to be a part of a community which supports it.

Edit2: If a server can block a specific community posting CSAM then maybe that's a better solution than blocking the underlying infrastructure. If that's not possible, I think defederation is the only real way to deal it, as frustrating as that would be for legitimate users.

[-] Whooping_Seal@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For the sake of argument I’ll approach this from a different perspective than everyone else.

Depending on jurisdiction there might be implications in hosting an instance that is federated with instances that host loli. I’m not familiar enough with Canada’s laws and / or le Code Civil du Québec to know if it is considered CSAM, but assuming it is does federating with those communities replicate the media on this instance as well? Would this count as ‘redistributing it’?

[-] frankyboi@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Canada laws on CSAM are very strict. even written fictional text are considered csam by law definition. And yes, a known horror novel writer has been charged for csam production in a fiction book. he's been acquitted tho, fortunately. But that raise an alarm that tell us that cops can arrest you for pretty much anything . If you sculpt a loli into ficello string cheese , that enter the definition of CP in Canada.

there is a part of definition saying: "and other visual representation " which is very vague and broad .

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-163.1.html

[-] hardypart@feddit.de 10 points 1 year ago
[-] Martineski@lemmy.fmhy.ml 14 points 1 year ago
[-] birdmancaw@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

That's not true. It's a petite anime girl, not underage. People keep trying to conflate the two. It's weird because even if they have big boobs and are obviously legal people still try to shove them into the title of being underage. (like the petite sensei, Uzaki, and Hestia from Is it Wrong to Pick up Girls in a Dungeon).

[-] delmain@beehaw.org 18 points 1 year ago

I mean yeah of course. That character is actually a 9000-year old vampire, not a child

/s

[-] birdmancaw@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh come on, the examples I gave are one in their twenties, one in college, and one who's a god. Their stories completely revolve around them being their ages. You are doing the exact conflating of the two I was talking about.

[-] Faceman2K23@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 year ago

I agree with you technically kinda, but the average person doesn't (and never will) see a difference and trying to explain it just makes it seem to them that you are defending it.

If a normal person sees it and says .. "thats wrong" then it shouldn't be included in a default feed.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] lohrun@fediverse.boo 9 points 1 year ago

I think as a user you can block a particular instance from showing up in your feed (for just you obviously).

[-] daBeans@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 year ago

You can't block instances, as a user. There's an issue for it opened on Lemmy's git repo though. You can block communities, though that gets more tedious as more communities pop up.

[-] ValetteRenoux@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

Im afraid to ask, but what is loli? Definitely don’t feel like looking it up if people are that put off by it.

[-] InfiniteVariables@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 year ago

Hentai of underage persons. A lot of the time they'll try to pretend it's not by dressing it in a fantasy or scifi setting but that's what it essentially is. I personally see it as cp

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

needs to be at least easy to make sure default all is sane, once a user signs in and does what they will they can see or block what they please, with start being the same sfw default .

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2023
139 points (100.0% liked)

sh.itjust.works Main Community

7693 readers
2 users here now

Home of the sh.itjust.works instance.

Matrix

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS