Board 8 > Belle Delphine topics moderated as censor bypassing

(+) Yeah! (+)

Wanglicious posted...

well no, the video literally does not exist.
when i'm saying literally nothing i'm meaning literally nothing. this content does not exist. it has not been created. there is absolutely nothing of that content anywhere.

Again, this doesn't matter - he mentioned the name of the site, so case closed - and I think given the rest of your post you know that so this is confusing

As for your other examples: those posts likely weren't marked, or there's a possibility that it was accidentally no-actioned. Pretty simple.

Maybe there's an argument that an auto-warning should be put on site names, sure, especially something that's in slightly - slightly - more of a grey area like that particular site.
---

XIII_rocks posted...

Again, this doesn't matter - he mentioned the name of the site, so case closed - and I think given the rest of your post you know that so this is confusing

well no, the confusion is because of two things.

1) the name of the site isn't the actual issue because the name has been said plenty of times before with no issue and places that literally have porn in the name have been mentioned before without issue. as a result, it's not clear what exactly makes it moddable. hell porn memes have been mentioned by name for as long as either of us have been around. things like lemon party, 2 girls 1 cup, etc.

2) it literally doesn't exist, so the context is "on this site, there is a future video that may exist." to that end i don't get how it's any different than saying on pirate bay you can find future games and movies or something. granted, pirate bay is infamous at this point, so maybe the scale changes things. but in the end you're basically just pointing to a site and... something that doesn't exist. hence, you're modded for something that literally doesn't exist. if the goal here is no linking to porn, good news, there isn't any.


---

UltimaterializerX posted...

The site Corrik mentioned is not a porn site just because sex workers use it as a paywall for content. The purpose of that site (which I won't mention but everyone knows it) is that literally anyone can use it as a paywall to skip the middle man (most of them, anyway) and take in more of their earnings from fans. I don't support it at all, but it's a bit silly to compare it to actual dedicated porn sites. I would hope a web site like GameFAQs where you have to be 13+ to have an account is smart enough to understand this.

i mean right now the purpose is one that's changing because of people like Cardi B, Bella Thorne, and other people with fame who want a pay wall and don't need to think twice about the content as much. while porn is still the bulk of income, traffic, and probably marketing, the shift to being viewed as more than that is something that only did get pronounced in the past year. you can totally argue it both ways right now but it's clearly more on the "it's hosting porn" side.

---

Wanglicious posted...

1) the name of the site isn't the actual issue

Gonna stop you right there because it literally is - and I really can't say that any more clearly than I am - the posts just need to be marked first
---

XIII_rocks posted...

Gonna stop you right there because it literally is - and I really can't say that any more clearly than I am - the posts just need to be marked first

I just find that hard to believe based on everything we've seen over the years here, at CE, at PotD, etc. you're seriously saying that this entire time we've been on nobody marked phrases like lemon party or 2 girls 1 cup or god knows how many different porn sites. Not the linking of, but just the sheer name alone.

This totally makes me also now ask what's in the clear, the way spoilers was. OF? OnlyPropellers? LoneFan? SingularWindPerptuatingMachine?

---

UltimaterializerX posted...

This is a huge issue with the moderation system on this site. If you personally see something that should be deleted, you should have a button to do it right there on the spot. You know, like how every other site on earth does it.

I can neither confirm nor deny the existence or non-existence of such a button.
---

Our role isn't to patrol the site looking for shit to delete
---

i agree with that. moderators shouldn't be there to create rules or take control, they're to enforce rules in place. when there's leeway, it's good for said enforcement to be done based on the community more so than the mod's sole discretion. sure there's workarounds to that but as a principle, it's a good one.

---

I think the part of this that's most annoying is that someone took the time to marked Corrik for just saying the words, and a mod didn't use their discretion to just let it slide or NKL when it's not even autobanned.

If you can talk about a subject at all, seems weird to warn people for off-handedly typing it out.

---

Sounds like that mod was a Belle Delphine simp who bought her bathwater.

(Lol I just realized I can actually get modd d for this post.)

---

XIII_rocks posted...

He mentioned the name of a porn site so no, it's not, and it is in line with the usual policy.

no, he didn't. go look up the wikipedia article about the site. at no point does it say it's a porn site. it has adult content on it, sure (the same goes for fucking youtube) but it's not a porn site.

nice to see xic has become a typical "i have to defend every bullshit moderation" mod now. he'd fit right in on hellhole.

---

I'd probably have an easier time finding porn on Youtube starting from the homepage than I would starting at the home page of that other site. Especially because that stuff is mostly gated behind paywalls or subscription walls.

It's actually funny because Belle Delphine had her Youtube account recently suspended for posting suggestive videos, but nothing that was worse than something like the WAP video, meanwhile again you can find literal naked people on Youtube who are very much posing naked for suggestive reasons while veiling it behind 'education'.

---

Wang is coming across as such a boomer here

---

yeah, if videos that are not straight-up porn but merely just suggestive are not allowed on youtube, there's no excuse for the WAP video being allowed. it was trending and has about 290 million views lol.

and of course, WAP is just one example. there's tons of suggestive and sexy music videos on youtube (call on me by eric prydz is another famous example). there's a reason "this porn has nice music" is a meme.

---

The ban was bs yeah. Fortunately she's already back on YouTube, they ain't gonna actually pull her from the site.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

yeah, if videos that are not straight-up porn but merely just suggestive are not allowed on youtube, there's no excuse for the WAP video being allowed. it was trending and has about 290 million views lol.

and of course, WAP is just one example. there's tons of suggestive and sexy music videos on youtube (call on me by eric prydz is another famous example). there's a reason "this porn has nice music" is a meme.

There are literally videos of women doing yoga completely nude, everything hanging out and zoomed in on. No age restriction and you just need to do the obvious search on YouTube.

And WAP was not only allowed on YouTube, but they also personally featured it with no age restriction as well.

---

We can't say "google belle delphine" cuz it will come up porn?

XIII_rocks posted...

Our role isn't to patrol the site looking for shit to delete

This is very important too. The mods just see what the users mark. It's the mods' fault but equally the weirdos who mark you.

---

Honestly yeah, Twitter and Reddit are much more of a "porn sites" than Only**** is

I feel embarassed to censor this name holy shit the TOS here is really really bad


---

When I see a m*d in topics I start literally shaking.

---

Oh Twitter is totally the best porn site ever made.
Curated lists from bots that tweet what you like into your feed with no additional work? Nothing has rivaled that one.

Reddit i guess is more dependent on specifics but if you've got a fetish there's probably a board for it.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

no, he didn't. go look up the wikipedia article about the site. at no point does it say it's a porn site. it has adult content on it, sure (the same goes for fucking youtube) but it's not a porn site.

nice to see xic has become a typical "i have to defend every bullshit moderation" mod now. he'd fit right in on hellhole.

I generally don't post in topics like this. I know for a fact I've actively avoided several over the last 18 months. You are taking an isolated incident in which you disagree and making an overarching character judgement. If somebody did this to you, you would cry foul about it for years.

The site has determined that due to the high amount of adult content posted on that site it is an inappropriate thing to put on the boards. It is thus characterized here as essentially a "porn site", whether you agree that it should be or not. So to be clear, the moderation itself is a fair application of our current rules (apart from the fact the first one should have been offensive rather than censor bypass), in that it has been characterized as something that should be deleted. That is what I am defending specifically, and it's also why the examples Corrik posted have not been deleted.

You can however argue that the rule itself is dumb and that particular site should be allowed. That's not a hill I'm particularly prepared to die on either way; if it was allowed, I'd be fine with that. That site is at least in a grey area as opposed to certain others, so I'm not against it or anything. And there is certainly scope for a warning before you post it so stuff like this doesn't happen. But as the rules currently stand it is a fair moderation, and notably different from the other examples Corrik posted. That has been basically my sole point in this topic. You're arguing something different, that the rule itself should change or that this site should be made an exception, which is a discussion I'm fairly ambivalent towards.
---

XIII_rocks posted...

I generally don't post in topics like this. I know for a fact I've actively avoided several over the last 18 months. You are taking an isolated incident in which you disagree and making an overarching character judgement. If somebody did this to you, you would cry foul about it for years.

ok, that was kind of a flippant remark that i shouldn't have made. sorry.

The site has determined that due to the high amount of adult content posted on that site it is an inappropriate thing to put on the boards. It is thus characterized here as essentially a "porn site", whether you agree that it should be or not. So to be clear, the moderation itself is a fair application of our current rules (apart from the fact the first one should have been offensive rather than censor bypass), in that it has been characterized as something that should be deleted. That is what I am defending specifically, and it's also why the examples Corrik posted have not been deleted.

You can however argue that the rule itself is dumb and that particular site should be allowed. That's not a hill I'm particularly prepared to die on either way; if it was allowed, I'd be fine with that. That site is at least in a grey area as opposed to certain others, so I'm not against it or anything. And there is certainly scope for a warning before you post it so stuff like this doesn't happen. But as the rules currently stand it is a fair moderation, and notably different from the other examples Corrik posted. That has been basically my sole point in this topic. You're arguing something different, that the rule itself should change or that this site should be made an exception, which is a discussion I'm fairly ambivalent towards.

i still don't think it's a fair moderation, though. at no point does the ToU mention that mentioning that particular site is not allowed. and other sites that host porn ARE allowed to be mentioned here (several people have already named obvious examples: twitter, youtube, reddit). how are we supposed to know which sites that host porn are allowed to be mentioned? should we just try mentioning them and see whether or not we get modded?

like, i'd probably care less if corrik had gotten an NKL. that's a reasonable way of letting him know "you can't mention the site here, don't do it again." to give him a warning because he broke an unwritten rule he had no way of knowing existed is dumb. it's kinda like how back in the day, b8'ers got harshly modded for posting on PotD, even though it said nowhere in the rules that doing so wasn't allowed. i don't think breaking unwritten rules should result in harsh penalties.

---

Corrik didn't get an immediate warning. He received an NKL, then made this topic to complain and mentioned the name of the site a bunch of times in here even when he was told that was exactly what he'd been modded for. Whether you agree with the rule or not, repeatedly and consciously breaking said rule after an NKL always leads to a harsher punishment

I agree the messaging could be clearer on things like this.
---

yeah, what was moddable about corrik's posts could have been communicated more clearly. it took me until post #78 to realize that the fact that corrik mentioned the site was the problem and not that he was talking about belle delphine's porn video.

corrik probably could have handled this better too but yeah, i don't think either side handled this situation perfectly.

edit: unless corrik was immediately told that he shouldn't have mentioned the site. then he doesn't really have an excuse, yeah. in post #42 he still seemed to be confused why he got modded, though, so i don't think that's what happened.

---

Post 57 shows the original moderation, which literally said "you aren't allowed to post the names of pornsites." It was entirely clear what he got modded for. This is every inch the classic bad-faith Corrik argument.
---

Nanis23 posted...

Honestly yeah, Twitter and Reddit are much more of a "porn sites" than Only**** is

I feel embarassed to censor this name holy shit the TOS here is really really bad

ok you guys keep saying OF isnt a porn site but who is actually using it a non-porn capacity? I only ever see it come up in that context.
I saw one comedian make the its not just for porn! claim after he made a joke suggesting a teenage girl make an account on the site and some people called him out for the joke, but have never seen someone link to a not porn OF account.

Do any of you actually know of a creator using the website for something totally unhorny?
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

it's kinda like how back in the day, b8'ers got harshly modded for posting on PotD

What
What?

Can someone give more info about this i'm curious

---

"board invasion" stuff, much of which was just cross posting between boards.
probably related to ali, pew pew.

---

yeah, back in the day, if one person from board 8 posted on PotD, they'd get modded for "board invasion" lol

---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

ok you guys keep saying OF isnt a porn site but who is actually using it a non-porn capacity? I only ever see it come up in that context.
I saw one comedian make the its not just for porn! claim after he made a joke suggesting a teenage girl make an account on the site and some people called him out for the joke, but have never seen someone link to a not porn OF account.

Do any of you actually know of a creator using the website for something totally unhorny?

'Unhorny' isn't the same thing as porn though, is it? Post #101 has examples of that. None of them are nude related.

---

buncha karens in here complaining

---

Onlyfans

---

Only fans

---

If only, mans

---

Raider supporters are the only fans I despise with a passion.

Oh damn I guess I'm banned now.

---

only vornado.

---

kingdom charts

---

Delphine Onlyfan Boobs

---

XIII tenderly tonguing Lasa's member on onlyfans. Corrik watches in the corner clutching his empty wallet.

---

(For the record i do agree with xiii's explanations entirely and think it was obvious to anyone even paying a little bit of attention to the topics that corrik was not arguing in good faith and instead was trying to push the gray area bit to an extreme)

---

There is a baseball player that can't hit a change up. He swings and he swings but he only fans.

---

Forceful_Dragon only fans the flames of Bacon's ire by disputing multiple mafia scum moderations

Peace___Frog posted...

corrik was not arguing in good faith and instead was trying to push the gray area bit to an extreme

I mean this is Corrik's MO

---