NEXUS OR SEXUS? THIS IS THE PROBLEM

[WursWaldo]

Then I think there would be perhaps...10, 11 files left...ha ha ha

There are mods on this site and others that I find deplorable. The solution isn't for me to whinge and try to get them removed. The solution is for me to block the content I don't agree with or not go to sites where the content is hosted.

 

The people doing the complaining have a social agenda, plain and simple. As long as the content isn't illegal then it becomes a matter of taste; and taste is subjective. If members are not forcibly subjected to adult content and they have to actively seek it out then it is not an issue. The old tried and true "It denigrates women, cry-cry-whinge-whinge." should fall on deaf ears.

 

If religious fundamentalist came to Nexus and started complaining about things they found offensive and making demands would anyone give their arguments credence? If not, then why are the same arguments made by secular activists being taken into consideration? The end results are the same; they are dictating morality.

[sunshinenbrick]

I'd say, either option pushes a social agenda. But there is nothing wrong with or immature about discussion or trying to come up ways to help the community and those within it to feel like they are able to contribute and make things the way everyone would like them to be.

 

While I am perhaps of the more liberal or freedom of choice type, there have been laws past recently in the UK that do make some of the 'roleplay' content of some interest at least. It only applies to stuff 'created in the UK' so unsure about hosting or whether it even applies if it doesn't feature real people... But bad press, even if not totally accurate, can still cause big problems - as I'm sure many are aware.

[WursWaldo]

Nothing can be done about the law, but not succumbing to social pressure and culture warrior agendas is within our means. There is nothing wrong with shining light on the dubious or pointing out hypocrisy, especially when the freedom to make choices is in jeopardy. I might not want to look at adult content, but I want the freedom to if I do.

 

The irony is one small group of liberals trying to tell a mostly liberal Nexus what is or is not acceptable. There should be a new Nexus rule; Check your agendas at the door.

Edited February 28, 2016 by WursWaldo

[Farvat]

 

Read the whole thread.

The posts initiating and driving this 'issue' reek of social activism. There is a very small minority in the membership (less than 1%) attempting to change something they don't agree with. Their problem is not that they can see adult imagery and content, but that it exists period. Factually, the content they oppose cannot be viewed unless they intentionally change their settings to enable it. If they hadn't done that, the content wouldn't display and thus they wouldn't be subjected to it.

 

If you read the activist posts all of the key phrases are there. 'How Nexus is perceived', 'What other people think', etc. Basically they want to change Nexus culture from within because that's how culture warriors and social activists operate. They don't like what is going on so they are going to attempt to change it, regardless of what others want. Less than 1% of the Nexus population is trying to dictate what the other 99.9% get to view and download. All of the signs are there. What's presented as 'concerns' are in fact attempts at shaming to guilt and scare people into doing what they want. We see this in real life and the internet on a daily basis. They want Nexus to be another Safe Zone.

 

Infuriating that they want to limit and censor a forum that's provided them a venue to upload mods and participate in a community. Perplexing that this topic gets consideration at all.

 

All of the forum mechanics needed to completely block 'offensive' content is already in place. The 'problem' isn't that this vocal minority can see things they don't like, it's that the things they don't like exist at all.

 

EDIT:

As for the ‘Mango’ mod mentioned in this thread specifically; it is not only a topic of conversation here but on another site as well. On this other site the focus of the conversation isn’t about the content of the mod, but the reactions of a few members here at Nexus.

Members on the other site are questioning the negative reactions being posted here publicly. To them, the perception of Nexus is we are immature; based solely on the nature of the mod’s comments.

If ‘what people think’ is a litmus test for Nexus content and how others perceive us dictates what is or is not allowed, then by those standards the comments in that upload thread need to be removed. Realistically those comments need to be removed anyway since they violate Nexus rules about trolling upload threads, but that is another matter. Though those posts could be viewed as Nexus allowing trolling of uploads and mod authors. Is that how we want to be perceived?

If we are going to start banning content by what others think, then it should be across the board and not just the mods a tiny minority here find offensive. I find the attitude of 'I don't like it so you can't have it' offensive.

 

Thanks for this really appreciable comments

The problem is not however this. my "social activism" is not suspended in the clouds. It is based on respect of the rules established by Nexus. In particular on the first directive concerning the prohibition of uploading material that exceeds certain levels of violence or messages that invite to it. My opinion joined those of many others is that the mod "mango follower" in the connection between the description and the pictures that it have, contains a message inviting the rape. The message is not explicit, but implicit and it's really very smart, simple and damn efficient. The mod on this basis, and also thanks to the controversy arose around it was very successful. But despite repeatedly has been reported as a mod that it violated the rules, it has not been removed, why? other mods have been removed and thisnot? An oversight? How come none of the moderators, nor his Admin have refuted the claim that the mod violate the prime directive through precise arguments, but they are limited to inviting people the use of tags of the filtration system. If a mod is breaking the rules of Nexus, needs be removed or modified. The mod was not necessarily removed, but you had to invite to defuse the implicit violent message that it was carrying from his clever author. From there raised the question about how Nexus is ultimately veering towards the dissemination of Hentai and porn material with some insistence. Clearly this is a strategic choice, as in the past Nexus was much averse to this kind of material. Since there is much demand for such contents and that the main competitor site can not host it, Nexus seems to have decided to occupy such "market segment". this is a perfectly comprensibile choice and that on even I almost agree. The Hentai certainly has many shades, some are less perverse than other more. The question then is how far you can get?

The filtering system using tags, it seems in the intent of the nexus administrators, to be more and more to replace of the rules in the name of a supposed freedom that the Nexus users seem invested. My observation that this is just a classic "imaginary freedom", that the use of tags is comfortable, but it is also the way in which the subject exempts himself from his moral responsibility to the world that he lives, and are kept on the nature of the objects present in it. The tags is a system that definitely needs to be improved and made more selective, but it can not be elected as more and more is being done, to a surrogate to get around the problem of the ethical control over the content of the mods. If all we activate the tags, for example on the pornographic, the question is who controls that these contents do not violate the rules? If the answer is: the moderators, this response is by its nature not acceptable, as they may hide conflicts of interest, given the nature of these mods, they get a lot of support and they have an economic impact. The answer to the question of who controls the controllers? It is that it must be the same users together with the moderators through a collective surveillance work. For example If the site spreads such as nature material pedophile and all those who disagree about the presence of such materials activate the tags to filter out adult content, they never realize that such material is present. Then who will guard the guardians? the answer is the pedophiles. Clearly this is an extreme case, but in my eyes it is clear that the tags system is a foreshadowing of a mass system of government clearly dystopian. It is on the nuances that opens the debate. The freedom you configure where there is a choice between different options all on the table, the results of which are unknown but whose "cards" are visible. Freedom is a card game where all the cards are on the table, not hidden from the power system that chooses for me with the excuse to make my life easier. I do not want the easy life, I want to see the world I inhabit. And I want to see when a mod is breaking the rules. And the administration of this site, instead they answered me from the start bypassing the issue of infringement: Use the Tag Luke! No thanks.sorry.

You say that I am part of 1% of users who want to decide for the other 99%. No I am part of the faction that wants to give back to others users the ability and the conditions of possibility of being able to have power of choice and his voice heard, clarification and respect for rules . Dark0ne established the rules? Then they must be respected! The debate in this post should focus on whether "Mango followers" has violated these rules or no, not however, as some here do, debating on the complexity of the system of tags. This is a secondary issue.

The mod "Mango follower" created a dangerous precedent, then what comes next? The strategy until now has been used, to treat me as an eccentric religious moralist catholic-communist, and generalize the request for explanations on reducing it to a deliberate attempt to repression and censorship by a minority Puritan faction. Weird because I am considered among users here, one of the darkest stories tellers of the nexus images area and among my female followers made by me, many have in their background even rape, but I've never used such unworthy means to attract users in the mood for strong and forbidden emotions. I also agree that it is better a permissive freedom instead of a fascist censorship and moralistic. But They made the rules, not me. My accusation is that Mango Follower has violated these rules. The word to lawyer of the defense...

[Zaldir]

The answer to whether or not the Mango follower mod violates NexusMods rules is quite simple: no, it does not.

 

Had it violated NexusMods rules, it would have been removed.

[WursWaldo]

@farvat

Thank you for proving my point. You're trying to get a mod removed that you don't agree with. And despite your attempts to say otherwise, you are attempting to dictate morality to other adults.

 

As far as the mod in question violating the rules, it doesn't and that's why your efforts are being wasted. For the mod to violate Nexus rules (and UK law) there would have to be actual rape content in the files. This doesn't include implication, innuendo, referencing it in an artistic form, or any loose interpretation. It means the act itself, and the mod doesn't have the mechanics for assaulting the NPC in a sexual manner, any mechanics for sex, or anything else that might perpetrated by a downloader and construed as non-consensual sex. The criteria doesn't exist. By your standard every movie, TV show and book that references rape as a plot device should be banned. It doesn't matter if they didn't show the assault, they're talking about it and that is enough. What you're saying is just as ridiculous.

 

What would create a dangerous precedent is the staff here letting members decide what content is allowed and what isn't. If a mod doesn't violate rules or the staff's interpretation of the rules then it doesn't violate the rules. Anyone who's ever challenged this has ended up looking like a fool.

 

I'm confused at this point why you simply don't come out and state that you don't like the mod and you want it removed. That would have saved 11 forum pages of people trying to discuss a non-point in a rational manner.

 

EDIT: Zaldiir ninja'd me. The mod stays, so now what?

Edited February 28, 2016 by WursWaldo

[Farvat]

The answer to whether or not the Mango follower mod violates NexusMods rules is quite simple: no, it does not.

 

Had it violated NexusMods rules, it would have been removed.

This may be, but you have to argue why it has not violated the rules. You're assuming the nexus behavior was of integrity. my opinion is that it might not have been. well No one is perfect. But I do not understand why so many of followers like mango only this has raised this hornet's nest. because she had her tits to the wind and winked? Many other does the same thing. But there is a difference between saying that the girl was raped, and then put her then with her tits to the wind. the words matter, words weigh. And Mango deserves justice. Mango is a symbol, is the absolute victim. Itis the woman caught in a vicious chauvinist system.

[WursWaldo]

This may be, but you have to argue why it has not violated the rules. You're assuming the nexus behavior was of integrity. my opinion is that it might not have been. well No one is perfect. But I do not understand why so many of followers like mango only this has raised this hornet's nest. because she had her tits to the wind and winked? Many other does the same thing. But there is a difference between saying that the girl was raped, and then put her then with her tits to the wind. the words matter, words weigh. And Mango deserves justice. Mango is a symbol, is the absolute victim. Itis the woman caught in a vicious chauvinist system.

AHAH!!! The truth comes out. *Pats self on back for seeing it first.*

[NexBeth]

WurSWaldo, constantly and derisively pinning members here with labels such as social activist, doesn't exactly exclude you from being an activist yourself because you are certainly coming across as one--a political activist who wants to make assumptions about others motivations and political affiliations based on an open discussion here on Nexus that YOU don't agree with.

 

The concern with the mod in question is valid. The Mango follower is depicted as someone who has been sexually exploited, yet is dressed up and presented in the pictures as a playboy bunny. Rape in entertainment media is touchy business, and even the motion picture and video game industry acknowledges that. However, a woman who is a victim of imprisonment and gang raping and then portrayed as a sex kitten is extremely offensive to most women (and thankfully to most men as well). The only ones that do that are in the porn industry where many videos are not suitable or in many cases not legal either.

 

As for placing kids faces on voluptuous and sexually provocative female bodies, well, that's pushing it to the limits too.

 

I'm not a prude, nor do I have a social agenda. I'm not religious, nor am I a liberal. I'm not a feminist either. So you may want to check your accusatory tone and guesswork at the door.

[budrick007]

"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description 'obscenity', and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, ..." - U. S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Steward, 1964

 

Yet here we are, arguing about obscenity.

 

Every persons definition of "obscene" is different. To some, Michelangelo's David is obscene as it displays the human male penis; yet to others, it is a great work of art. To some, the photographs of unclothed women in the center of the magazine are obscene, while others see that as art.

 

Is the display of condoms on the end cap of a market display obscene? How about the display of feminine hygiene products? Or the display of "toilet tissue"? At some point in history, each of these products was hidden from sight "under the counter" as they were considered obscene.

 

So, what is obscene is an individual choice. We each decide what is (or is not) obscene.

 

Furthermore, we choose what we do about those things you decide are obscene. We can ignore then, attempt to hide them, paint over them or put fig leaves on them. Alternatively, we can scream and shout until enough people agree with our opinion and then we can force our choice on everyone else.

With that, I have read this (and re-read) this thread and I have reached a conclusion. Farvat finds some of the content on NEXUS obscene. Obviously Farvat has chosen not to ignore that which Farvat has determined to be obscene. Farvat cannot paint them over or put a fig leaf on that which Farvat has determined to be obscene. Farvat chooses not to take advantage of the facilities which would facilitate ignoring the material which Farvat has determined to be obscene.

So my conclusion is that Farvat has chosen the last option. Farvat is screaming and shouting in the hope that enough people will agree with the opinion expressed in the post which initiated this thread. Once Farvat has built up a base of support, Farvat wants to have some form of "oversight censorship" implemented.

I vote "Not only no, but HELL NO"!

Farvat, use the facilities that already exist to "hide" the material you find offensive. If that isn't enough, report anything you think violates the "Terms" of NEXUS.

If those actions are not satisfactory, then you should take advantage of other services which fit your views.