fandomsecrets | (no subject)

Since there's been some debate about which secrets get linked and which don't, I'd like your input!

Unfortunately, I can't link everything that's NSFW because what's NSFW varies. In some cases, things as commonly found in secrets as profanity in large text would be considered NSFW.

Things currently on the "link" list:
- explicit guro
- explicit nudity (of the pornographic type; art is fine)
- anything containing outright porn
- images that contain common triggers in visual (that is, not text) form (e.g. signs of self-injury, images of dub/non-con between characters, pictures of emaciated human beings. Things like images of real murders and genocide victims have also been used before)
- flashy "seizure" gifs
- anything in which children are sexualized (yes I did go back and link the Boku no Pico one, I'm sorry about that)

None of those things above are up for debate.

But there are times when it's not so clear cut. Like something that is censored but barely, or something that is definitely sexual but isn't explicitly showing any body parts. For example, there's a secret in this week's batch of two half-clothed people, and one is about to reach (consensually) into the other one's pants and is halfway there but hasn't quite made it yet, and there's kissing and touching that makes it obvious where it's heading. There's another secret of a character in a dress pulling the skirt part up, with a small censor over the genitalia but otherwise overtly sexualized.

What about things like that?

[Poll #1673008]

Remember, nothing is going to be censored - the secret will be posted like any other, in the body of the post, not in the bar at the bottom - just linked instead of embedded. And some people are more likely to pay attention to secrets linked for being porny anyway, so there's that!

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Personally, I think that the tiny-half-assed censor bars like you find on imageboard porn still qualifies as explicit and should probably be linked along with the rest of the porn. (I personally don't have much problem with the NSFW pictures, but I certainly understand why some people would.) But an image where nothing explicit is happening, I don't see why it would need to be linked. Even images where sex is imminent but not actually happening are not explicit.

As far as I'm concerned, as long as no one's going to glance over your shoulder and say "OH MY GOD IS THAT (insert name for genitalia here)", I don't think it should have to be linked.

Oh, yeah, if things can clearly be seen through the censors they're not censors.

I personally would tend to agree with what you said, but I'll go along with whatever the majority says.

Yeah, I'm going to go with this. If its something that has the person looking my shoulder go 'D-Dude, the hell is that?!' Then link it.

^ I'm going to go along with what you said.

yeah pretty much this!

I feel like it's ultimately a judgment call. The two examples you provided are pretty clearly distinct from one another; one is implicit, the other is pretty plainly explicit while laughing in the face of those who would censor. The line's pretty easy to draw there.

or you know i could go fuck myself and just say

mirai_gohan said it better than i did

Honestly, I don't bother clicking/reading secrets that get linked. I have always assumed that F!S is not for reading at work/school/in the presence of others who are not F!S readers and that some secrets would be explicit, so I was rather confused as to why certain secrets were suddenly linked after what, about two years of not having been linked?

The problem is the people responding to agree with that comment - two voted "err on the side of caution and link those secrets." But

But an image where nothing explicit is happening, I don't see why it would need to be linked. Even images where sex is imminent but not actually happening are not explicit.

According to that, both would be posted normally.

It's a tricky thing to make judgment calls about because nobody agrees. All I can do is go with the majority. ):

On an unrelated note: thank you for running this comm, I love this place and have so much fun here. The fact that you care so much about making sure that it's a safe place for everyone is an added and very appreciated bonus.

As far as I know, things like explicit guro or explicit sex have always been linked (at least, after '08). It's just rare that we get any.

People shouldn't be looking at LJ while they're at 'work' :P

Fffff awww thanks, I'm glad to hear you enjoy it! (:

Could be on break? HAHAHA give 'em the benefit of the doubt!

Either way people are gonna bitch and moan.

I don't remember how long I've been reading FS, but I know I've seen a good few secrets with sex where dongs are very, very present. I've also seen a couple "guro" secrets, but to be fair those weren't very explicit.

But I guess that raises the question of what is considered explicit guro and/or sex here at FS?

Looking at the numbers it might end up "do whatever no one can decide anyway" but it can't hurt to ask.

...really? I don't recall any dongs/genitalia being posted at all in the past year or so.

And uuuh, guro involving blood and realistic body parts? And sex involving clear pictures of genitalia/obvious nudity/sexual intercourse etc etc

Edited 2011-01-27 08:30 (UTC)

What if their jobs have to do with social networking?

My boss is interested in social networking, and I've shown him LJ before as an example. It'd be pretty damn embarrassing for me if the above-the-cut secret was of the "questionable" type when it could instead be linked.

/$0.25

Let me go check and see how long I've been reading F!S then? Cause I know I've seen maybe 3 or so secrets with them in it. I want to say the last one I saw was from longer than a year ago though.

Regardless, I personally don't care what shows up in F!S and just assume that stuff will be explicit. And if it's linked, I just don't bother checking it.

Either way it goes, I am/have been avoiding putting anything of the "could go either way" type above the cut, so dw!

I don't want to see guro or real life gore images ANYWHERE.

Porn is fine (:

I...never read the linked ones anymore, I'm too lazy.

I tend to think that the questionable ones perhaps shouldn't go above the cut, but underneath, I'd rather just see them posted normally. Above the cut, it'd be nice to be spared potential embarrassment if someone happens to be around when the post pops up on your flist; below the cut, though, I tend to assume that you clicked it knowing that you're going into a wretched hive of scum and villainy anyway, and you'd know better than to do so in front of someone who's going to gasp and clutch their pearls about impending sexytimes.

I remember there being porny secrets, yeah, but as far as I remember, they were all linked and not embedded (unless I messed up, and I'm sure people would have called it for dong-related action if I did...)

That's probably the safest attitude to have re: the nsfw stuff though. (:

Those two images are very different though, I don't think there is enough on the first image to call for censorship, it still SFW and not explicit.

Images with character touching and kissing, as long as there is no explicit nudity or a hand posed over intimates areas in a sexual manner (both under and over clothes), shouldn't be linked. In short, anything that children can see on network television should be okay. On the other hand, an image with a censor bar should be linked. The bar doesn't hide what any onlooker could see over your shoulder, a woman with her legs open and a censor bar covering her doesn't hide the explicit nature of the image and suddenly makes it SFW.

Page 1 of 6