Hi all! As promised, here is the proposed text of the newest version of the rules. The staff has gone through like eight drafts and literally thousands and thousands of matrix posts to get here, so please be kind. You can see @limeey’s comment on the transparency post if you want more insight into how this sausage was made.

We are opening these rules to commentary from the community before they go into effect. To be clear, this isn’t a vote, but we will take all community feedback into account and answer whatever questions we can before finalizing anything.

Please keep in mind that we are not Reddit, we do not have Reddit’s resources, and safety and consent are our priorities.

I’ll post the draft in two parts in two comments: The new sidebar, and the FAQ/clarifications page.

  • Mikey Mongol OPMA
    link
    English
    111 year ago

    Yeah, it’s a sticky wicket for sure. Because look, if someone reports an image to me as noncon and I look at it and it’s an obvious studio shot, multiple lights, professional hair and makeup, model looks like she’s posing for the camera, I might say this is probably fine even if I don’t recognize the model. Is it possible it’s noncon? Sure, but on balance it likely isn’t.

    But if it’s like a smartphone shot of a ambiguously-youthful young lady in a dark bedroom, who I don’t recognize and I can’t source it easily because the source is undefined and there’s no watermark and/or I can’t quick google image search it, I’m going to give serious consideration to removing it. There’s other factors involved, of course, including context and identity, but I think as a society we’re starting to move into the realm of explicit consent being the gold standard. If I can’t see or at least strongly imply evidence of that consent, I’ve got to at least consider removing the image.