At the risk of hindering coordination efforts, Pillowfort sounds inadequate to me.
“All reblogs of a post will also be deleted when the original post is deleted by the user”
“While the specifics of what constitutes a bannable offense are complex and covered in our ToS, we can generally say that threatening another user, encouraging suicide, etc. will be grounds for account termination, as will promoting the ideologies of violent hate groups such as Nazism.”
“We will also try to come up with a way to lower the barrier to entry for new users, though we don’t want to drop the entry fee entirely because a) we feel that would be unfair to our users who have paid for their registration keys and b) we don’t think our servers could handle a massive influx of new users right now, so we’re going to try to allow as many new users as we can without capsizing the boat.”
Hmm, deletes cascading to reblogs does have a bunch of advantages – less possibility of a post getting out of hand and potentially leading to harassment years down the line, better control over your own content. People who want to add a lot or debate will just need to link to the post in question/quote passages. Or am I missing something?
The suicide thing seems iffy, but I’m willing to wait and see how it’s actually handled. Banning Nazis is good.
Also a sign-up fee is annoying but hopefully will keep the pornbots at bay.
My issue with the sign-up fee isn’t that I have to pay it, it’s that it will limit the site’s user base to only those that are willing and able to pay.
Also, while most social media sites will have enough information to track down their users in theory, in practice the paper trail from a sign-up fee is significantly more direct.
((Also leaves pillowfort as susceptible to outside pressure : it’s not like PayPal has hesitated to cut off people where even a small amount of the money involved adult content.))
Chained deletes have good motivations, but I’ve not been especially impressed by their implementation on other sites. The entry fee might keep pillowfort’s userbase better than Twitter’s, but Twitter pretty rapidly adapted such that there is a norm to screencap if there’s any reason to expect a tweet will be deleted.
looks kind of terrible
the old mantra about how tumblr is both uniquely terrible and yet, somehow, still the hands down best social media platform out there continues to hold true even in our time of need
Solar panels could increase productivity on pastures that are not irrigated and even water-stressed, a new study finds. The new study published in PLOS One by researchers at Oregon State College finds that grasses and plants flourish in the shade underneath solar panels because of a significant change in moisture. The results bolster the argument for agrovoltaics, the concept of using the same area of land for solar arrays and farming. The idea is to grow food and produce clean energy at the same time.
doubt it. it’s not really about skin tone per se – more like out-and-out race.
when an America-based, corporate company starts talking about ‘allows tasteful nudes’ but ‘does not allow sexually arousing nudes’, you have to think about what they’ll count as depicting something to arouse vs depicting something because ‘art’. because that standard is – despite what some would like to say – absolutely a matter of interpretation, which means somebody is going to have to sit at tumblr headquarters interpreting nudes all day.
historically speaking – in America, mind, I have no damn clue about elsewhere – images of cis female Latinx, Black, First Nations, and East Asian bodies are far more likely to be perceived as intended to arouse than images of cis female white bodies. this is partially because white bodies are ‘default’ and therefore seen as effect neutral (whether tanned or not, by the way), partially because of our ugly history of racism, slavery, colonialism, and imperialism, and partially because of the interactions of economic situations, race/cultural background, and sex work.
so if you present a white person and a non-white person in artsy nudity, in the same pose and with the same camera angle, it’s more likely the non-white person will be flagged as intended to sexually arouse.*
is it possible that a white person who sufficiently tans will be mistaken for a brown person, or a brown person who is sufficiently pale will be mistaken for a white person? yes, because race isn’t a clear-cut thing (and it’s pretty racist to imply it is). but overall, I promise you the n sfw ban will have more negative consequences for non-white people than white people, and any artist who depicts non-white people.
*the joke is: even well-intentioned activists will potentially flag images of non-white people more than white people on suspicion of exploitation/exploitative imagery. (this is what happens when activism doesn’t center the decisions and voices of people it’s supposed to be advocating for.)
There’s no excuse to shame anyone’s relationship to sex. You love sex? Cool! You hate sex? Also cool. You do or do not like to talk about sex? Great.
What isn’t okay is acting like people understanding and appreciating their personal relationship to sex is a bad thing. Your decisions and feelings about sex are entirely yours. To make fun of, belittle, or demean someone based on their relationship to sex promotes the idea that others have a say in what we do with our own bodies. That’s not up to you. So don’t do it.
Urocyon's Jaunts 2.0 
You must be logged in to post a comment.