Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
People who want NSFW stuff in their feed can tick "Show NSFW content" and untick "Blur NSFW content". There's no reason to argue with other people for wanting to use the NSFW tag for exactly what it was designed and named for.
Yes, there is.
Should XY be tagged as NSFW is not asking about if the tag should exist on certain topics (that's indeed something you can ignore with your own settings) but about if people should be forced to flag stuff as NSFW. And I refuse to tag stuff as NSFW just because I can imagine someone, somehow, in some rare context wanting that tag. Because by then it lost all meaning and we should do an "Yes this is safe for 4 years olds"-tag instead.
I claim that it's quite clear that this is not suitable for work. HR are not going to get cross with me for browsing memes in my lunch break on my phone, but if this comes up, it's clearly not OK, and I don't think I'm at all unusual in having a work environment like that.
I'm just asking that we try to use Not Suitable For Work to mean not suitable for work. You might feel that my workplace is weird, but that's not what you're arguing, so I think you're kind of missing the point of the tag. Yay internet freedom and all that, but tagging something that's very likely to get someone in trouble at work as NSFW is just being a considerate person. That's all. People are still free to see it, but it gives them the freedom to choose to filter it out and use their phone when they're on a break at work.
Again, I think you're on the wrong site at work then. Lemmy is not suitable for your workplace and you're asking us to make it suitable for your workplace.
You can say I shouldn't be on social media at work as much as you like, but until you're writing my pay cheques, it doesn't mean anything. We lead different lives, you and I. I'm sorry that your work doesn't allow you down time at lunch, but try not to hate on me for working at a place that does.
All I'm asking is that folks use the Not Suitable For Work tag on things that are not suitable for work. I just don't see that as a particularly big or bad thing to ask.
What makes you so keen to see this stuff at work anyway?
I didn't say that. And I am completely allowed on social media at work. But that image wouldn't get me any heat for being on my phone. You are not the authority on what is and is not suitable for all work places and I'm glad that's the case because your aim is to create a more censored internet. Just because you are sexualizing that anime woman, does not mean we all need to.
But the NSFW tag isn't censorship, it's filtering. You can turn off NSFW filtering in your settings. You can unblur it all. J
ust because your workplace is happy for you to browse scantily clad women, doesn't mean most workplaces do. We're not all the same as you.
Scantily clad? What are you 80? Woman regularly walk about in public wearing little more than I'd what is depicted. I'm sure you think they're all hussies too dontcha? Such a harlot that cartoon woman. You're not winning here. Like I said, the image is only sexual if you sexualize it. You're the one with the problem here.
Women can wear what they like on the beach, but they would absolutely be sent home if they came into my workplace dressed like that, it would be deemed highly inappropriate, and I can't be looking at pictures of all that on my phone in my lunch break, it would similarly be deemed inappropriate.
I don't dress formally at work because of my own preferences for clothing, or because I sexualise people who don't, I do it because my workplace has rules about that.
Memes, yes, midriffs, no. That is all. I don't get why you find a formal work environment like that so incomprehensible.
Yes. One easily and simply solved with the Not Suitable For Work tag. No need to get all cross and condemnatory about it, just use the tag as designed and we all win. We can filter and curate them whenever we like to whatever extent matches our own preferences and situational demands.