Their ban of “non-consensual sexual imagery” made several acquaintances of mine – furry art illustrators – move to harmful communities on questionable Mastodon servers.

I’m growing tired of those bans on legal content that isn’t inherently harmful (we are talking about fictional humanized animals here) but considered “icky” by platforms and payment processors.

So I don’t care if the AT protocol is technologically superior to ActivityPub (?) – the Mastodon community has a healthier moderation and mindset than Bluesky, in my opinion.

▲

dragonwriter 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Their ban of “non-consensual sexual imagery” made several acquaintances of mine – furry art illustrators – move to harmful communities on questionable Mastodon servers.

Furry art, including quite explicit furry art, is very common on bluesky and doesn’t seem be especially restricted by policy. I mean, unless they also happen to be depicting nonconsensual sexual interactions, an orthogonal concern to the furry aspect.

> I’m growing tired of those bans on legal content that isn’t inherently harmful (we are talking about fictional humanized animals here) but considered “icky” by platforms and payment processors.

Well, you are free to avail yourself of the forums that lack those policies. Now, I know you’ve complained that they are “harmful”, but... Maybe there is a reason that other forums choose to put bans in place.

	▲	gary_0 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> quite explicit furry art, is very common on bluesky Now there's an understatement. It's bloody impossible to get rid of. People here are sneering at all the political content but they're ignoring the curvaceous elephant in the room. I think maybe bsky has improved things now, but a while back their adult content filters were not up to the task. When I first made an account I almost gave up on it because until I got all the right filter words set up it was nothing but weird porn whac-a-mole (actually that's probably a poor choice of words...)

▲

riffraff 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

FWIW, you don't need to join questionable communities to have your content on mastodon, e.g. Wordpress blogs can meaningfully participate on activitypub (people con repost, like, reply) so that may be an alternative for your friends, without the need to host a complex app, so long as they can get any Wordpress hosting. Discovery suffers tho.

	▲	Diti 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Oh, thanks for the suggestion! I’ll tell them that’s an option – provided the hosting provider accepts the content too.

▲

dmos62 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You're complaining about the banning of illustrations featuring furries being raped? That's what non-consentual means here? I must be misreading this.

	▲	Diti 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Yes, that’s what non-consensual could mean here (it also encompasses consensual non-consent, to be accurate). This kind of content (illustrated & fictional) isn’t illegal in most jurisdictions, as far as I know. Small aside, consent also depends on the jurisdiction – in mine, it must be verbal, so it means that if I were to draw a situation which involves a character being forced to do something but showing their consent non-verbally, it would still be non-consensual, and thus, forbidden by Bluesky’s terms of service if the PDS was hosted in my jurisdiction. Anyway, my point is that all those illustrations should be properly labeled, but not necessarily forbidden by Bluesky’s ToS. As I understand it, fictional non-con content being banned by Bluesky means that even hosting it on one’s PDS is a no-go.
	▲	pessimizer 6 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I guarantee you're reading it correctly, we're talking about Bluesky. And any community that furry rape fetishists are participating in is going to have to be "questionable." If it wasn't before they got there, it is now.

▲

ynab6 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]