I’m talking about this sort of thing. Like clearly I wouldn’t want someone to see that on my phone in the office or when I’m sat on a bus.
However there seems be a lot of these that aren’t filtered out by nsfw settings, when a similar picture of a woman would be, so it seems this is a deliberate feature I might not be understanding.
Discuss.
You seem to be really cross about people wanting to use the completely optional Not Suitable For Work filtering and/or blurring features to help them curate their feed to make it Suitable For Work.
I think you need to realise that not everyone on the internet has the same priorities as you, and if you want to only browse lemmy away from work and you want to see things folks consider NSFW then that’s great - go ahead. Absolutely fine. Just tick the boxes on your settings and then it literally doesn’t affect you at all. You can hand-curate your feed to your heart’s content.
But please let those of us who want to use the optional NSFW feature use it in peace and please stop shouting at people who disagree with you.
We’re on a thread about whether certain pictures should be marked “NSFW” or not.
A subject on which, as is both obvious to anyone who doesn’t have their head up their own arse and evidenced by this very same thread, no agreement is possible. An objective demonstration of why this tagging nonsense not only doesn’t work, but can’t possibly ever work.
You might as well be discussing about whether it’s better to use the western horoscope or the Chinese one to decide which threads are “suitable for work”.
And I’m sorry, but this kind of wilful stupidly just fucking irks me to no end.
I don’t get your problem. You like to filter by community or whatever, and I like to use the NSFW filtering. We’re different. Why get cross about it?