Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Remove ALL Adult Content from SW? 🔞🚫

Poll - Total Votes: 370

Remove ALL Adult Content (allow up to "Non-Adult")

Remove Most Adult Content (allow up to "Mildly Adult")

Remove Some Adult Content (allow up to "Adult")

Remove Extreme Content (up to "Mild Nudity" - No "Fetish")

No Change - Leave everything as it is now

Show Results

You can only vote on one answer.

At Similar Worlds, our role as Admins and Staff revolve mostly around providing the Features and Experience that you the users want.

We do understand that many niches of users exist on this platform [i](most coming here initially from EP)[/i].

From the beginning of SW, it has always been our primary aim to [b]"Rebuild a Home" for our incoming members, while being as tolerant and unbiased as possible, to the preferences, interests and beliefs of our very diverse member base[/b].

For one dimension of diversity:
The divide [i](or more so, spectrum)[/i] between [b]Non-Adult and Adult[/b] type users,
does tend to contribute to numerous conflicts or disagreements between users, especially regarding the way this site should or should not be managed & promoted.

We the SW Staff have always been earnestly discussing many ways on how we can improve the environment here for mostly all of our users.

[u]What we would like to know is:[/u]

[c=#004A59][big]Up to what level of "Adult Content" do you feel should be acceptable on Similar Worlds?[/big][/c]

We have provided some options in the attached Poll to choose from,
however, please feel free to be detailed (but respectful) in the comments.

This consideration regarding removing/limiting the level of adult content on SW, is geared towards accomplishing:

[b]• Improved overall SW environment - More enjoyable to most. [/b]
[i](ideally, less of the more dangerous/extreme types of users)[/i]

[b]• Less objectionable content to risk unwantedly coming across.

• Safer for use at work, sharing with family & friends.

• Safer for younger users & women.

• A more focused effort towards a slightly smaller, more defined niche, rather than attempting to "please most/everyone" and lose direction.[/b]

Please note that [b]we are very much aware that many EXCELLENT users of this site, do engage in very adult content, on Similar Worlds[/b], and we have had no problem with this at all, as long it remains within the site's TOS.

[sep]

If we will consider making such a large change, we are aware that we will need to re-define many terms and rules,
especially regarding what is "Mildly-Adult", "Sensitive"...
if we will keep the "Adult" tag at all (we may, but re-defined) ...etc.

We are not announcing that a change will be made (but it is in discussion),
nor do yet have a defined list of what those changes will all be.

This post is mainly to gain feedback and opinions on our member's preferences, to help us serve you better.

Since we consider this a "Major" / "Important" topic and potential change,
please consider informing other SW user friends of yours to Vote/Comment,
so that we can together, decide the best path forward for Similar Worlds.

Thanks for reading and for your support!
Kind regards,
[c=#1F5E00][i]SW Team[/i][/c]

[sep]

[center]--- To Add ---[/center]

[quote][b][u]Regarding the "Nudity Tag/Option" which was introduced after initial development:[/u][/b]
[i](We have seen this mentioned many times before - so addressing this now.)[/i]

[b]The addition of the "Nudity" option/tag actually improved things for those who did not want to see any nudity at all,[/b]
as many explicit images were being pasted all across the site, in full view of everyone.

[b]Ever since introduction of the Nudity tag, it greatly controlled (reduced) this issue.
[/b]
[i](We could definitely tell that this was the case, as reports of inappropriate images landing in the wrong place greatly dropped,
and much fewer incidents of unwantedly coming across nudity on SW.)[/i]

The option was added to help contain content that rule-breaking users were posting anyway, while breaking our TOS.

[i](Not to make SW into a more "Adult" site. Many seem to have this misconception.)[/i]

If we do fully remove allowance of "Nudity", and other "Adult" types of content,
we will be definitely placing more more advanced, automated features, to be sure the same does not happen as did before.

NSFW Image Detection [i](with high accuracy rates)[/i], for example, is something we have been discussing and working on, to help make SW much safer for users.

[i](This, and other features is already in the works, either way.)[/i][/quote]

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

ThePerfectUsername · 70-79, M

I don't think any of the options you suggested are workable in the long term.

The way I see there's two separate issues, [b]content[/b], and [b]access to that content[/b].

[big]Access to content:[/big]
On the issue of access to content I'm not against sexualised posts as such - but I believe it would benefit both the site and users alike if access to adult content were selectable by a switch in individual users settings.

I'm well aware of the current [b]adult[/b] switch but it really isn't fit for purpose for various reasons that have already been discussed elsewhere - the most obvious one I think being the failure to mark posts appropriately in the first place.

The "BLOCK" button likewise is akin to using Thor's hammer to crack a peanut... user XYZ might well enjoy posting in an adult environment... but using the BLOCK button on XYZ automatically preclude anyone from seeing the wholesome side to their character and creates a totally unnecessary and false divide between [b]them[/b] Vs [b]us[/b] which forces people to take sides. Real life doesn't work that way... your parents were obviously sexual beings - but I doubt they talked about it in your (or their parents') presence just for the sake of entertainment.

What I'd like to see therefor is for all groups to carry a flag describing their content. And for undesirable groups NEVER be offered in the feed without the individual user concerned (of appropriate age) having fist checked a "[b]Show Adult Groups[/b]" box in their personal settings.

I'd also like to see "[b]Hide Adult Groups[/b]" become the default setting for all users both new and old alike so that everyone can start over and decide for themselves whether they want to see it. I don't condemn people out of hand for having a sexual side... I just want them to talk about it in a room I don't have to enter rather than here in the family room where all the kids the uncles the maiden aunts and the grandmas spend most of their time. If a user decides to subscribe to an adult group, fine - allow that group to show up in their feed - and if they don't subscribe - don't allow it.

[big]Content:[/big]
I'd like to see the separation of adult and non-adult content better enforced. If a post arrives in the HEALTH category and a scan finds adult keywords then by all means automatically move said post to a flagged adult group and send a notification to the user informing them what happened. If the user disagrees and can give a sensible reason why not they would be able to appeal in which case a human would take a look and make the final decision. Keyword selection might be a bit hit or miss at first till you decide what works and what doesn't but even that's not rocket science.

I'd also like to see a far more open and robust decision making process regarding the report procedure than there is at present. That report I sent in citing the user who was posting about "consenting incest" between a 13 years old and an adult was handled appallingly. [b]You don't deal with a user [/b]who's patently pro-incest and claiming to be a mental health professional [b]by hiding the age of their victims[/b]. That's nothing short of despicable. It's still talking about incest in a way forbidden by the ToS and it's not that users first post on similar subjects so why on earth simply hide the true nature of what their doing and pretend it's done? It was not done. It was far from done, and users who persist in talking about any sort of "consenting" sexual activity with minor should have no place here. The post should have been deleted on sight, the poster given a public warning to the effect that pro-incest content had found in their post, and any repeat offence of any sort should have triggered an automatic ban.

That's how you beat this stuff IMO. By giving honest to goodness adult individuals the option of a private place where they can talk as sexually as they like with each other within the realms of decent society and the law without being discriminated against, by making the SW default settings as wholesome family friendly and well protected as possible, and by making the worst of the hard core fetish fanatics feel distinctly unwelcome here.

Andrew · Admin

[quote=ThePerfectUsername]That report I sent in citing the user who was posting about "consenting incest" between a 13 years old and an adult was handled appallingly. You don't deal with a user who's patently pro-incest and claiming to be a mental health professional by hiding the age of their victims. That's nothing short of despicable. It's still talking about incest in a way forbidden by the ToS and it's not that users first post on similar subjects so why on earth simply hide what their doing and pretend it's done?[/quote]

I'm unfamiliar with (or can't remember) what you are referring to.
I believe that no SW staff has ever "hid a user's age" in order to mask an issue of abuse.

Staff act upon what information/evidence is available to them at the time.

In many cases, there may be much more, and different information, available back-end to staff, than there is to public users.

There are many situations where things are much different that it originally seems,
and actions taken by staff, may not always be understood.

There is also a limit as to how much information we can reveal (for obvious reasons),
however, we have always tried where we are able to, to be open about certain procedures and actions by staff.

[b]I recommend that if you see this case you mention, as a serious and active issue,
[u]please submit a Support Ticket with more details[/u].[/b]

This voting thread isn't the correct place to discuss a particular reporting case.

In regards to the general about topic of: ["consenting incest" between a 13 years old and an adult]

Content of this kind, is not allowed on Similar Worlds.

We do understand however that "consenting incest [u]between adults[/u]" is a very different and much more complex issue,
one that is even legally protected/allowed in many established countries around the world.

ThePerfectUsername · 70-79, M

You didn't hide a users age. You hid the age of a 13 year old SW User's potential abuse victim.

I reported the post around two months ago, and a month or so later an unknown admin got round to looking at it decided to remove the kid's age and sent me this. During which time it had had a couple of hundred views and 18 people who presumably approved of sex with a 13 year old had hearted it...

The poster describes herself as being "[b]Bi-sexual l woman, highly sexed.[/b]" and mis-spells words like [b]concent[/b] and [b]reprocussion[/b] and all the while claiming to be a trained clinical psychologist.

It doesn't add up. Trained clinical psychologists simply don't mis-spell career-related words like that, neither do they go around social media websites posing as "Bi-sexual l woman, highly sexed" and repeatedly claiming that their husband gave them away as a sexual present to his golfing buddies.

She's as fake as a $9 note Andrew, she thrives on notoriety and confrontation and SW is giving her a safe haven in which to continue spreading unbelievable nonsense and meeting other like-minded low-key predators and in the process making fools of all of us by pretending the kids age was a typo.

The new TOS say "16.You will not post any content that [b]promotes, sexualizes or encourages behaviors that are seen as illegal[/b] or criminal by general/majority."

Incest is illegal. Full stop. So why are posts that attempt to normalise it or present it as harmless titillation allowed to remain?

She's taking you for a fool Andrew. I say "she" because that's what she says. But anyone who's spent more than a month on the boards will tell you there's a 99% chance she's male. She's a total fake and SW doesn't need people like that.
@Andrew

Andrew · Admin

[quote=ThePerfectUsername]You didn't hide a users age. You hid the age of a 13 year old SW User's potential abuse victim.
...
She's taking you for a fool Andrew.[/quote]

@ThePerfectUsername,
I have noticed many times across your posts, that you are incorrectly using the distinction:
[i][c=#004A59]"Admin Andrew ..."
"@Andrew ..."
"you did xyz ..."[/c]
...etc[/i]

[b]In actuality, I (@Andrew) [u]have no familiarity with this specific case[/u] you are referring to.[/b]

There are other SW staff who also handle user reports daily.
It isn't yet clear to me what the full situation was, what action was taken, or what evidence and basis of judgement was used by the acting staff.

As I have recommended to you in my previous comment,
if you would like SW staff to follow up on this issue,
[b][u]please submit a Support Ticket with more details[/u].[/b]

There is a reason for following protocol and orderly conduct,
and right now, the way you are going about seeking answers, causes confusion,
and can also be misleading to other users.

ThePerfectUsername · 70-79, M

I've never once seen an argumentative post from @Nuno.
I have however seen several from @Andrew and @SW-Admin.
I've also never once seen mod in an arugument.
And I'm totally oblivious of who else there is to blame.

So I'll make you a deal Andrew...

If all SW administrative staff refrain from arguing the toss with users under the pseudo-anonymity of the SW-Admin and you add the name of the admin who dealt with a given report along with it's notification I'll address the person by name and not have to resort to a collective "[b]you[/b]" meaning [b]"some un-specified SW official who's identity was never revealed to me"[/b].

And the day that happens will be the day that petty meta-discussions such as this stop detracting people from the main thrust of the argument...

The main thrust of the argument being that you (SW) did a pretty lousy job of handling a situation involving a user talking about illegal activities that happened to also involve the abuse of a 13 year old.

[b]You personally[/b] are not being accused of anything.
But likewise you're not being absolved of anything either.
You're part of the SW Admin team and you can argue day and night between yourselves as to who handled the report.

But you can't argue that with me because I'm not that easily side-tracked, and I'm still waiting for the real issue to be addressed.

You [b](some un-specified SW official who's identity was never revealed to me)[/b] hid the age of a 13 year old SW User's potential abuse victim and I'd like to know why you did that rather than delete a post about carrying out an illegal activity anyway and warn the users that such behaviour wasn't appropriate or acceptable.

Stop taking it personally Andrew. Unless I specifically name you I'm arguing the toss with an SW representative here - not an individual.
@Andrew

ThePerfectUsername · 70-79, M

[quote]This voting thread isn't the correct place to discuss a particular reporting case.[/quote]

With all due respect Andrew, you invited opinions on whether adult material should stay or go.

And my answer to that depends very much on whether were I to vote for letting adult content stay obviously extreme cases such as incest and underage sex would be policed more effective than they are now.

If the policing stayed as it is I'd say chuck the adult out.

If the policing dramatically improved I'd say let the vast majority of the adult stay.

So I think this is EXACTLY the right place to give examples of how the current policing system is still letting the site down. I have to say it here - because my answer to your post depend on how you address my long-standing concerns.
@Andrew