Ask the mods anything
CaptainXtra 
STOP KOSA!
Mods, when’s the last time you called your parents?
(NO, this is not the start of some Jigsaw role-play.)
🂾𝕃𝕚𝕟𝕔𝕠𝕝𝕟𝔹𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤𝕥𝕖𝕣𝔽𝕒𝕟🂽 
Goodbye guys ;)
@Badheart
Is that 3:16 in your personal title box a reference to John 3:16? Just wondering cause I personally love it ;3
Is that 3:16 in your personal title box a reference to John 3:16? Just wondering cause I personally love it ;3
CaptainXtra
STOP KOSA!
Mods are you aware of a recent development related to the Digital Services Act?
I want to point out this portion especially:
The note expressed support for the proposal of the European Commission, which defined search engines as an ad hoc category that would be required to take down illegal content once it is flagged to them. At the same time, Didier proposed a few changes to the Commission’s text.
The note asked to remove a part in the text’s preamble providing examples of ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ and ‘hosting’ services, categories with different liability regimes established in the eCommerce Directive, the predecessor of the DSA. These examples were overly descriptive for the rightsholders that prefer a case-by-case in court.
Another change would mandate that if illegal content is flagged, not just the relevant web pages but the entire website should be delisted, namely removed by the search results. In the most extreme case, that would mean that if a video is illegally uploaded on YouTube, Google would have to remove the entire platform from its search results.
Finally, a modification to an article would oblige search engines to remove all search results referring to the flagged illegal content, not only the specific website. In other words, the platforms would have to monitor all websites searching for unlawful content.
For search engines, that would entail nothing short of a general monitoring obligation; a principle rejected in the Copyright Directive. By contrast, the rightsholders consider this to be ‘specific’ monitoring, as it is targeted at illegal content that is recognisable via specific electronic patterns.
Moreover, search engines note that, compared to other platforms, they do not have a direct relationship with those managing the websites. Therefore, they might not know if a specific content, like a movie, is provided on a website illegally and on another one legally, as they are unaware of the contractual relationship between websites and the rightsholders.
In other words, the search engine would have no way of knowing if a takedown request is justified without contacting the website owner, which currently it has no way of doing. As a result, search engines might have to establish a contractual relationship with the website owner.
So far, the websites have been liable for hosting illegal content. Still, search engines now fear that by including them in this liability regime, they would become the primary targets for takedown notices, increasing their administrative burden exponentially.
Mikey 
Moderator
Ayriana
@CaptainXtra
This is supposed to be for fun and random questions, not serious stuff.
This is supposed to be for fun and random questions, not serious stuff.
GenericArchangel 
Moderator
Free the Tantabus
@Cosmas-the-Explorer
I’d love to go see France, if I could afford it right now.
I’d love to go see France, if I could afford it right now.
Background Pony #00AC
Deletion reason: Spambot
🂾𝕃𝕚𝕟𝕔𝕠𝕝𝕟𝔹𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤𝕥𝕖𝕣𝔽𝕒𝕟🂽
Goodbye guys ;)
Probably wrong asking thread, but will you guys ever consider adding an option to Derpibooru for users to selectively remove a message from a PM conversation, without having to hide or delete the entire conversation? Just wondering :)
Also how come you can both fave and dislike an image? I did it by mistake yesterday but I found that odd :o
JP 
I miss the show so much
Also how come you can both fave and dislike an image? I did it by mistake yesterday but I found that odd :o
Dragonpone 
Moderator
Badge Dragon
@☬ ᏝᏆᏁᏨᎾᏝᏁᏰᏒᎬᎳᏕᎿᎬᏒᎱᎯᏁ ☬
@JP
It’s for showing your appreciation to this image while simultaneously giving it its mandatory downvote.
@JP
It’s for showing your appreciation to this image while simultaneously giving it its mandatory downvote.
🂾𝕃𝕚𝕟𝕔𝕠𝕝𝕟𝔹𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤𝕥𝕖𝕣𝔽𝕒𝕟🂽
Goodbye guys ;)
Also how come you can both fave and dislike an image? I did it by mistake yesterday but I found that odd :o
Cool :D
@☬ ᏝᏆᏁᏨᎾᏝᏁᏰᏒᎬᎳᏕᎿᎬᏒᎱᎯᏁ ☬
@JP
It’s for showing your appreciation to this image while simultaneously giving it its mandatory downvote.
Uh…nice ^▽^;
2,196 downvotes is a record catastrophe ゜Д゜
CaptainXtra
STOP KOSA!
@Dashiebooblover98
Not a mod but I’m gonna guess that at the very least, I’d say your cutting it pretty close…
Not a mod but I’m gonna guess that at the very least, I’d say your cutting it pretty close…
Do the Mods have set guidelines on what can be a user avatar and what can’t?
saby
Moderator
extra fun at parties
@CaptainXtra
site rule 7 covers unfilterable content and has a dedicated point for avatars, usernames, and user titles. They must not feature rapid flashing that might trigger seizures, and must be “reasonably safe for work”.
site rule 7 covers unfilterable content and has a dedicated point for avatars, usernames, and user titles. They must not feature rapid flashing that might trigger seizures, and must be “reasonably safe for work”.
Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!