As admins, we removed the scat communities, thinking that scat was covered by the NSFL. However, some people have opposing views on this matter. What do you think about it? If people want it allowed, then we can restore content.

https://strawpoll.com/wby5Ae7PXyA

Edit: My answer for friends in the comments; The main reason NSFL was banned is because we currently don’t have the tools to separate porn from NSFL. I’m in favor of the ban because I think its the same way in scat. If we had enough tools right now, we wouldn’t be ban the NSFL either. Although, I agree that voting for niche fetishes doesn’t make sense.

Edit 2: Also I don’t want to think about shit anymore. I’m out 😀 https://lemmynsfw.com/post/117500

    • @[email protected]English
      10•1 year ago

      It’s only a fallicy if it doesn’t happen, and in this case I think there is a clear path to this.

      • @[email protected]English
        -2•1 year ago

        It’s only a fallicy if it doesn’t happen

        But it hasn’t happened yet. You just state that it will, with no evidence to support that.

        and in this case I think there is a clear path to this.

        Then support your assertion. What do you base this claim on?

        • @[email protected]English
          0•1 year ago

          1. The basis of the argument to ban seems to be that user do not want this in their instance feeds (and without more mod/admin tools this can happen).

          2. The path to other communities facing a popular vote ban is that if a precedent is set here for how we deal with this, and the ban is successful, it’s an effective way of solving the issue (1).

          3. Once we have an effect way of removing communities, it can be used again. To say it will never be used again is unrealistic.

          What I’d suggest instead is a clear set of rules on what is acceptable, without targeting specific communities which the general userbase may find unappealing.

          • @[email protected]English
            3•1 year ago

            Once we have an effect way of removing communities, it can be used again. To say it will never be used again is unrealistic.

            You’re just restating the Slippery Slope Fallacy, here.

            • @[email protected]English
              -1•1 year ago

              Eh idk. The segmant you quoted says basically “if it happened once it could happen again”, which really isn’t a Slippery Slope Fallacy.

              A Slippery Slipe Fallacy says that one thing could lead to something else which could lead to even more something else. That isn’t a good argument, but to say that one thing could lead to the same thing again is a valid argument and self evident if you see that certain factors lead to that one thing, so those same factors would lead to it again.

      • @[email protected]English
        1•1 year ago

        Likewise.

        Edit - actually, no. I was not arguing that the fallacy made the conclusion false. I’m arguing that the fallacy made the conclusion unsupported. Simply pointing out a fallacy doesn’t constitute the Fallacy Fallacy.

        • ⱿeusEnglish
          1•1 year ago

          alright. i’d say it’s hard to guess what you were arguing, as you just said the name of an logical fallacy without any other context though.

          but as a response to that, i’d say it’s not - in order to not be a slippery slope, there needs to be an obvious line where we ban legal content, and were we don’t. where is that line? piss? humiliation? normal bdsm? none of these are things i want to see; but all i know is if they come for the scat fetishists, and i don’t speak out, because i am not a scat fetishist…