morsecodex (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
morsecodex) wrote2018-12-11 06:11 pm
morsecodex) wrote2018-12-11 06:11 pm
Entry tags:
pillowfort thoughts
Pillowfort has moved to ban shota and loli content from its platform. While I'm fairly anti-censorship and feel like website policies re: fictional content should be based on legality standard (the model the AO3 employs) rather than decency standard, I do understand the move. Lolicon and shotacon are a hard sell to most people- it is hard for many folks to see the artistic value in sexualized depictions of children. I even, conceptually, agree that a website can and should make its policies to align with their values. If a website's values include "no loli or shota," then that's their prerogative.
The part that's getting to me is the way this policy was implemented. I have zero respect for the manner in which it was done.
An artist uploaded some lolicon drawings. Presumably, these were reported.
The artist was then banned, with no notice, from the site.
According to the artist, they had to email Pillowfort three times to get a response as to why they couldn't log in. They were then informed that they were banned because of the content they'd posted.
When they responded, Pillowfort acknowledged that the content wasn't against their TOS (and also not illegal, which is covered in the TOS) and therefore the user could have their account reinstated, with the lolicon art removed.
As of about 4 AM my time, approximately 12 hours after the artist's blog was "reinstated," their other, not-banned content had not been fully returned to their account. I'm not sure if it's all back yet or not.
Pillowfort then announced the changed policy and a pending update to their TOS to reflect it.
Everything about this was wrong. This is not how policy changes should be made, at all. Since lolicon and shotacon are not illegal under US law, the correct way to do this would have been
-Announce the policy
-Warn the user
-Remove the content
This is BASIC. This is how website moderation works. If someone isn't breaking a rule, they shouldn't be treated the way you would treat someone who'd repeatedly, flagrantly violated the rules.
A lot of my friends are worried that any restriction at all on fictional depictions of characters could lead to antis getting a foothold. I'm less afraid of that than I am the danger signs of policies being put in place without warning, of policies being enforced before implementation, and the relative lack of communication from the moderation team regarding content that they find to be objectionable. The policy on underage content does contain wiggle room for creators, provided they can uphold the standard. I do slightly worry that antis and anti-minded people will attempt to get positions as Pillowfort content moderators, but this is something we will have to just wait and see about.
If Pillowfort had made this policy on loli/shota apparent from the start, or if they had implemented it in the manner I stated above, I wouldn't be writing this post.
I'll leave this post with an question posed by one of the people who are skeptical of this policy: "So if I draw tits on a 10 year old character, is she still a loli?"
I guess we'll find out.
The part that's getting to me is the way this policy was implemented. I have zero respect for the manner in which it was done.
An artist uploaded some lolicon drawings. Presumably, these were reported.
The artist was then banned, with no notice, from the site.
According to the artist, they had to email Pillowfort three times to get a response as to why they couldn't log in. They were then informed that they were banned because of the content they'd posted.
When they responded, Pillowfort acknowledged that the content wasn't against their TOS (and also not illegal, which is covered in the TOS) and therefore the user could have their account reinstated, with the lolicon art removed.
As of about 4 AM my time, approximately 12 hours after the artist's blog was "reinstated," their other, not-banned content had not been fully returned to their account. I'm not sure if it's all back yet or not.
Pillowfort then announced the changed policy and a pending update to their TOS to reflect it.
Everything about this was wrong. This is not how policy changes should be made, at all. Since lolicon and shotacon are not illegal under US law, the correct way to do this would have been
-Announce the policy
-Warn the user
-Remove the content
This is BASIC. This is how website moderation works. If someone isn't breaking a rule, they shouldn't be treated the way you would treat someone who'd repeatedly, flagrantly violated the rules.
A lot of my friends are worried that any restriction at all on fictional depictions of characters could lead to antis getting a foothold. I'm less afraid of that than I am the danger signs of policies being put in place without warning, of policies being enforced before implementation, and the relative lack of communication from the moderation team regarding content that they find to be objectionable. The policy on underage content does contain wiggle room for creators, provided they can uphold the standard. I do slightly worry that antis and anti-minded people will attempt to get positions as Pillowfort content moderators, but this is something we will have to just wait and see about.
If Pillowfort had made this policy on loli/shota apparent from the start, or if they had implemented it in the manner I stated above, I wouldn't be writing this post.
I'll leave this post with an question posed by one of the people who are skeptical of this policy: "So if I draw tits on a 10 year old character, is she still a loli?"
I guess we'll find out.