this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2023
605 points (86.4% liked)

Blahaj Lemmy Meta

2447 readers
25 users here now

Blåhaj Lemmy is a Lemmy instance attached to blahaj.zone. This is a group for questions or discussions relevant to either instance.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
605
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Edit - This is a post to the meta group of Blåhaj Lemmy. It is not intended for the entire lemmyverse. If you are not on Blåhaj Lemmy and plan on dropping in to offer your opinion on how we are doing things in a way you don't agree with, your post will be removed.

==

A user on our instance reported a post on lemmynsfw as CSAM. Upon seeing the post, I looked at the community it was part of, and immediately purged all traces of that community from our instance.

I approached the admins of lemmynsfw and they assured me that the models with content in the community were all verified as being over 18. The fact that the community is explicitly focused on making the models appear as if they're not 18 was fine with them. The fact that both myself and one a member of this instance assumed it was CSAM, was fine with them. I was in fact told that I was body shaming.

I'm sorry for the lack of warning, but a community skirting the line trying to look like CSAM isn't a line I'm willing to walk. I have defederated lemmynsfw and won't be reinstating it whilst that community is active.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 39 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I guess Trans Littles can just go fuck off then? One of the biggest Trans comics artist is openly a little. Why are we in the business of regulating what consenting adults do?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Don’t be disingenuous. Genuine consent practices also consider that not everyone else consents to witnessing their play, so they don’t do it where it’s not welcomed. And it’s not welcomed on Blahaj Zone, in this case. That’s all.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Exscuse me but you're the one being disengenious, a NSFW instance had what!? Porn!? Stop the fucking presses. Are we going to defederate from all porn instances or just the ones you find icky? Where can I post my objection to having to be subjected to porn at all?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Let me know when you find out what the word “disingenuous” means.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Responses are pointless, I'm going to remake my account in another instance when I'm done with work. Enjoy insulting people and living your prudish dreams

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think it's a little more complicated than that. If it were just a matter of not consenting to seeing their play, that community would be blocked. But instead, the entire instance has been defederated, so that's not really a fair comparison.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm sorry, could you rephrase that? I'm not sure I understand

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Leigh made an analogy to how in kink communities, it's generally not cool to involve people in your kink who didn't consent to it, and that defederating was basically just Blahaj Zone saying that they don't consent to seeing any sort of ageplay-adjacent content.

I'm saying that's a bad analogy, because they could just ban the offending content if that was the only concern; instead they've banned the entire instance by association. I'm not saying it's a bad call, just that it's a step beyond "don't involve me in your kink", it's now "I don't want to see anyone who lives in the same house as you while you do your kink, even if it has nothing to do with your kink."

[–] KairuByte 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It goes beyond even that, actually. This isn’t one individual making the decision for themselves, this is one individual making the decision for their entire household. “I don’t want anyone who lives in the same house as me to see anyone who lives in the same house as you, because you did your kink, even if it has nothing to do with your kink.”

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

At some point the metaphor starts falling apart a bit...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

Ah, I see. I agree

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Is it actually possible to instance-level ban a community that’s hosted by another instance without defederating? I’m under the belief that it isn’t, but if I’m wrong on that, then I think I’d agree with you here.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

It is possible as far as I'm aware, I think Ada mentioned doing it before.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No one is looking at a little and thinking that they're physically 15.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Young looking adults also aren't the issue.

The issue is a community that focuses heavily on models that are framed to look like they're not adults.

Not adults roleplaying. Not adults that incidentally happen to look younger than they are.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Again, the issue is a community with models that are framed to look like they're not adults.

There is no scenario where something that can be mistaken for CSAM will have a space here.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 years ago (1 children)

And again, these are adults on an instance that was explicitly designated for NSFW works. Defederating was entirely within your right but these justifications seem really poorly thought out, and could have unintended consequences.

Should we shun non consensual play? Should we defederate from anything that shows BDSM? Because I can't see any reason why your justifications wouldn't apply to them

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

Defederating was entirely within your right but these justifications seem really poorly thought out, and could have unintended consequences.

You disagreeing with the decision doesn't make it poorly thought out.

Because I can’t see any reason why your justifications wouldn’t apply to them

There is no outcome here that leads to me saying "Ah, good point, this makes me ok with content that can be mistaken for CSAM"

Hypotheticals and what ifs do not change the fact that I encountered something that looked like CSAM, and when I looked at the community in question, I encountered more of it.

That's a hard no.