As a mostly-lurker, I can say I’m ambivalent to links to gory material, but I’d rather not have it embedded into posts. People should be able to opt in and out of seeing that content as they choose.
Extremely graphic violence
- Thread starter ZeEa5KPul
- Start date
Cool, well you can find other forums for that, where things are less "strange".
Right now, links or embeds of graphic violence isn't clearly stated in the rules, but if anyone wants to test this then go ahead, and we can and will make it official. And yes, even without it being in the rules as an official clause at the time, people can still be banned for it, at the discretion of the moderators.
It is difficult to police that. How would you know which link applies to your opt-in vs that which doesn't? I would say use best judgement, those who post graphic links, etc. include warning (i.e., NSFW, etc.) and then it is up to the user if they want to click on it.
From my perspective as long as I can scroll through a thread (not clicking anything) without seeing that stuff, that counts as good enough prevention for me.
I think that's what they mean by embedded.
Last edited:
Honestly, and you surely know my stance in being very strict in this issue - embedded often means it is anyway visible and this is something I rate inappropriate.
As such I hold the line, NO such imagery in any thread and who want such images, better looks for another forum.
I don't see what's the value of seeing this sort of thing here.
I mean, think about it. Does it really enchance the forum experience? Does it really provide something of value that the forum can't go without? The forum is what, 20 years old and still growing happily by staying true at its own core mission but also expanding and evolving with the times by adding geopolitical and war threads which although less moderated, they still have a baseline of what's acceptable and what's not
As the forefront of the PLA-watching community, SDF should strive to be professional and SFW. Leave the gore and that stuff to other places
I mean, think about it. Does it really enchance the forum experience? Does it really provide something of value that the forum can't go without? The forum is what, 20 years old and still growing happily by staying true at its own core mission but also expanding and evolving with the times by adding geopolitical and war threads which although less moderated, they still have a baseline of what's acceptable and what's not
As the forefront of the PLA-watching community, SDF should strive to be professional and SFW. Leave the gore and that stuff to other places
Last edited:
Exactly, I don't think seeing people mutilated, shot at or otherwise blown up is providing any useful information. Bullet kills people is not exactly some secret knowledge, nor is it valuable to PLA watchers.
@Staedler’s correct. I meant I don’t want inline previews of gore while casually reading on the bus or train, but I want to be able to “opt in” by clicking on a reasonably described link.
For the descriptions of links, best judgement seems fine. No need to have a one-size-fits-all rule. Obviously outright lying about what’s being linked is shitty, but if I’m opening combat footage for example, I’m reasonably resigned to seeing whatever’s there.
In terms of actually policing it, if a post with online preview gets a bunch of people saying “jfc I really didn’t need to see that this morning”, it probably should have been an unpreviewed link and description instead.
This way mods don’t have to make calls about whether something is relevant enough to stay up, and instead just have to make a call on whether something’s too gory to be displayed in-line.
Last edited:
Make a point in the official rules of behavior and be done with it.
It is the most common sense approach for an online internet forum.
It is the most common sense approach for an online internet forum.
What if it involves Chinese weapons in those foreign wars?