Explanation of update to Rule #0 for consistency and clarity especially in regards to racism

Under a restricted standard in the context of certain offensive imagery I’d be okay with that under the reasoning that y’all already banned stuff like certain anti-Semitic tropes long ago. If it were to extend to say, “this screencap from 4chan has X thing in the background”, then I would most certainly not be okay with it.

The truth is that Derpibooru’s lax moderation norms and anti-censorship culture don’t exist to protect objectionable political content; this imageboard is unmoderated because it is an enormous repository of fan-made My Little Pony pornography.

@Derpy Whooves
So the titanic image decision was an “exeption”?

If you want to be consistent then there should be no exeptions from rules. The picture either breaks them or not.

 
An image may or may not break a rule - that is true. But we decide what we are willing to host. For example, this image arguably is Rule #3, and there certainly are users who have reported it for breaking that rule.
 

This image is blocked by your current filter - click here to display it anyway

your current filter.

 
But we decided to host it
 
This site is not so draconian, nor can the rules ever be crafted so finely or inclusively that every edge case is documented, that we are slaves to the rules. All enforcement of the rules, as well as the decision as to whether something is or is not acceptable for us to host, is ultimately left up to the discretion of the site’s staff. And sometimes the staff will say that we will make an exception.
 
Have you ever been on a jury? Juries do have the ability to say that a ‘rule’ doesn’t apply in any case they jury. It’s kind of like that.

so we are making an exception this time for ‘grandfathered’ images that are tagged either “Racist” or “Nazi”

using images that were uploaded prior to the changes in June and July as proof of inconsistency.

There is a big diference between making an exeption to allow a picture to be hosted and making an exeption to delete a picture(the first one is like if a cop lets somone drive with broken light in his car without giving him a ticket and the second is like if a cop just shoot random person on the street without a reason) …

So only old “racist” or “nazi” images are getting the axe? Why not “communism” or other political images? I know that there are staff members that have some bias towards the communism but i hoped that you all can at least try to act impartial in all of this mess

But the only similarities

Derpibooru staff started that by making Aryanne and ‘nazi content’ exceptions to the grandfather clause at the start of this whole thing with the initial deletions that started the DNP protests

Calling someone a bastard for instance, that should not be okay under any circumstances given the wording of rule 0, nevermind the spirit of the rule.

as you yourself pointed out previously, many users — yourself included — have called us out for inconsistent enforcement across current and past images.

and no more rule breaking than saying “all politicians are bastards” or “all lawyers are bastards”.

If you’re cleaning house clean it properly, don’t half-ass things and satisfy no one.

It’s a worrying trend that people predicted right from the start and absolutely nothing you (the staff) are saying or doing is assuring people that it’s going to stop any time soon.

My point is and always has been that calling anyone or group a ‘bastard’ is violating rule 0 so i’m not sure what you’re trying to argue by saying this.

Deleting an image because we determine that we do not want to host it (in this case, because it broke one of our rules)

The reason we are looking images tagged “Nazi” is because that is where we are finding most of the anti-semitic images, or images that are ponifications of the Christchurch shooting or similar mass murders, or images supports discrimination based on sexuality or race (but somehow not tagged ‘racist’)…

You earlier said that this picture was an “exeption”

So basically you are not making an exeption in grandfathering only for nazi and racist images but rather you are making an exeption for all images that break new rule #0? Is that correct?

It is an exception to the guiding principle that artists retain their rights and generally speaking are the only ones who may successfully request a takedown of an image. Even though the artist retains their rights, we have chosen to not host that image, which is an example of our right as a host taking precedence over that of the artist. Talking about this in terms of ‘which rule did it break’ can be useful, but not all situations fit into a list of bullet points. In this case, it seems to best fit under ‘Rule #0’, in that it is not being excellent to others.

No, I would not say we are reviewing all images on the site. And within those sets we aren’t giving the same level of review of every image — for some the image is obviously fine and we don’t have to review it. Some, especially images that are in any way seminal to the fandom, will take more discussion before we can make a determination.

It would also explain it being deleted under rule 0 instead of rule 1. It was done so we would target staff with our anger instead of targeting milky creator.

The information that I have is personal and confidential and I do not have permission to discuss it publicly.

This image has been deleted

Reason: Artist Takedown Request

This is an art site, and artists push boundaries and look at things in unexpected ways, so it’s not surprising that we keep finding our selves dealing with unusual situations and edge cases.