Edit - This is a post to the meta group of Blåhaj Lemmy. It is not intended for the entire lemmyverse. If you are not on Blåhaj Lemmy and plan on dropping in to offer your opinion on how we are doing things in a way you don’t agree with, your post will be removed.
==
A user on our instance reported a post on lemmynsfw as CSAM. Upon seeing the post, I looked at the community it was part of, and immediately purged all traces of that community from our instance.
I approached the admins of lemmynsfw and they assured me that the models with content in the community were all verified as being over 18. The fact that the community is explicitly focused on making the models appear as if they’re not 18 was fine with them. The fact that both myself and one a member of this instance assumed it was CSAM, was fine with them. I was in fact told that I was body shaming.
I’m sorry for the lack of warning, but a community skirting the line trying to look like CSAM isn’t a line I’m willing to walk. I have defederated lemmynsfw and won’t be reinstating it whilst that community is active.
I’m a little confused. Above, a comment went really into detail as to why they believe this was just a misunderstanding. One thing they mentioned was this:
Now… you actually replied to the comment that I’m quoting from. So you saw that the only reason that “childlike” was included was because it was copy/pasted - not because of anything malicious. So, did you not actually read their whole comment? Or did you read it and decide to continue with this talking point despite knowing it’s flawed?
I looked at something that looked like CSAM. I looked at the community, and saw more content that was sitting right on the border of CSAM. The sidebar told me childlike content was allowable.
There was no misunderstanding. My exposure to the content in that community was content that appeared to my eyes to be CSAM.
Telling me that if I looked hard enough I would see that they’re all adults, or that “childlike” was only there because of a copy and paste doesn’t fundamentally alter that. I don’t care that they’re all adults. I care that many of them are framed to look like they’re not.
This is not a misunderstanding. This isn’t ignorance. This isn’t confusion.
This is a difference in expectations and understanding of acceptable content.
I’m saying that right now you know that the term “childlike” was only there due to a copy/paste issue, not because of anything malicious going on. And I know you know this as you responded to a comment explicitly pointing it out. In spite of this you’ve continued to parrot the same talking points regarding “childlike” appearing in the sidebar.
And again, I can’t tell if this is due to you not actually fully reading the comment, or if it’s that the truth is simply less convenient and you’d rather continue using the same talking points despite knowing they’re inaccurate.
This has nothing to do with your initial impressions and has everything to do with what you’re doing right now, in this very thread. Your reply somehow has virtually nothing to do with what I called you out on, as nowhere did I criticize or doubt your initial reaction or overall decision. I’m solely criticizing your continued use of the “childlike” term talking point, despite knowing the truth around why it was there.
You’re still under the misapprehension that I didn’t read, or didn’t understand.
A community that actively fosters content that looks like it is being generated by underage teenagers is a problem.
The wording of the sidebar was part of it. The reported image was part of it. The images I saw when I looked closer at the community were part of it.
It looked like CSAM to me. The admins of the instance in question are ok with it.
And that’s an irreconcilable difference.
The fact that it’s not CSAM, and only looks like it, doesn’t change that
Once again, I’m not criticizing your initial impressions. Please actually read my comments. They were perfectly understandable given what you saw at the time.
What I’m criticizing is what you’re doing now. Presently. With all the information that’s available to you at the moment.
So again, within this thread you learned from another commenter why the term “childlike” was used. Not because of anything malicious, but because of them copy/pasting.
You learned this, and despite that continued to use the “childlike” term as evidence to your point, knowing that it was inaccurate.
Again, to be clear, I’m not criticizing your initial impressions when you first discovered the community. Hell, I’m not even criticizing the overall decision you came to. What I am criticizing is your current, continued use of talking points that you know are false.
You misunderstand. They’re not false. Whether or not it was a dictionary quote is irrelevant. It wasn’t accidental and there is no way the moderators of the community were unaware and continued to remain unaware of the implications of that wording. It was a deliberate choice even if it was a dictionary quote
Honestly do you have a fetish for making people see sexually explicit content they don’t want to see?
It seems like that’s what you’re arguing for.
Well I guess piper peri is out of a job then.