Updates on NSFW, Mod Applications, and Staff Organization

[Nohbdy 4,108]

Borderline NSFW Is Dead

 

In response to user feedback, we've updated our rules to reflect concerns regarding NSFW content. In the past, a common complaint was that the NSFW rule, and especially the Borderline variant, was too ill-defined to make for consistent moderation. We heard you, and we agree. 

 

Yes, Borderline NSFW is dead. And, quite frankly, we're glad that it is. Nobody, not even our staff, was quite sure what it meant. Something's either acceptable or it isn't, and we owe it to you to clarify where that line is. As a result, the NSFW warning now stands by itself. While subjectivity can't be removed entirely from the equation, I'm sure you'll agree that there are objective standards of measuring the severity of NSFW. Sex is sex, underwear is underwear, blood and guts are blood and guts, etc. 

 

The guidelines are as follows (see also: NSFW: what is it, and what content does it cover?):

 

Material that may be considered appropriate include the following: swimsuits (but not underwear), sexualized but non-explicit depictions of body parts, bloody but non-gory violence, and casual mentions of clopping and fetishes (but not discussion). In other words, we allow sexy, but not saucy; suggestive, but not explicit; bloody, but not gory.

 

There will be exceptions, and, as always, the staff have the final say regarding these matters.

 

As a general rule of thumb, avoid posting content that may be considered shocking, disturbing, explicit, or illegal. We do have younger members, so please keep them in mind.

 

As you can see, we did keep some degree of nebulosity in our definition, but that's because it's quite impossible to list everything. As always, we invite you to message a mod or admin if you're unsure whether something is safe to post.

 

 

---

Moderator Applications and Sectional Moderation

 

Next, let's discuss mod apps. After months of nothing happening, you probably thought mod apps were a bust, huh? Well, you might be pleased to know that you haven't wasted your time. Here's an update on what's happening.

 

We've been working on a way to maximize our staff's efficiency. For the past year, all of our mods had global permissions. While this was convenient in that it allowed mods to respond to emergencies as needed, it had the negative effect of distracting mods from focusing on proactive moderation, in which moderators handle problems before they're reported (e.g., fixing titles and prefixes, moving misplaced threads, and merging/locking/removing duplicate content). 

 

This time, it's the perfect opportunity to revisit an old system: sectional moderation. In this system, staff are assigned, based on personal preferences and activity, to specific sections (small groups of forums) that they'll focus on. It's our hope that, by having fewer distractions to eat away at their time and attention, they'll be able to help improve the user experience. Specialization isn't just for insects!

 

Those of you who were here before June 2013 may remember that Global (now Support) Mods and Sectional Mods were two distinct, but complementary, roles. One of the problems with sectional moderation back then was the unequal staff distribution between the two roles, number-wise. While this created several problems, moderation was efficient and timely, and didn't require a huge number of people. Ultimately, we've decided to revisit this ancient concept, armed with more experience and a few tweaks to the idea, with the aim of creating a more pleasant experience for both member and staff alike.

 

So with all that said, we've organized a team to interview, recruit, and train these new staffers. If you've ever read the "Who does what here?" FAQ, you might've wondered who Team Leaders were. Well, the idea's been there for ages, but it was never utilized to a significant degree. We hope to change that. In addition to managing the staff in their respective sections, they're also the ones you should approach should you have any questions regarding a particular section, including questions, concerns, or disputes regarding staff of that section. 

 

Now, I'm sure many of you are wondering when you'll hear back about your mod applications. That depends. If you were accepted, you'll be contacted within the next few days or weeks for a follow-up evaluation. If you don't receive word on your application by then, don't fret! We promised to contact you, and we'll make good on that promise. You weren't necessary rejected, either. Often, we like to keep an eye on promising candidates. Other times, we might've found that your qualities were better suited for another role within Poniverse.

 

 

---

As always, feedback is appreciated. If you continue to have concerns about the NSFW rule or the mod apps, feel free to share your thoughts.

[yeet 2,026]

Seems pretty fair with the nsfw rule. *shouts at everyone to post swimsuit ponies with belly buttons*

[SCS 7,443]

I'm glad to see the borderline NSFW rule go. It was way too vague. There's no way we can expect people to follow a rule if they don't understand what exactly does or does not count as a violation of it. There's no way we can list out every possible violation of a rule, either, but we owe it to you guys to make it as clear and reasonable as possible. As always, if anyone feels this or any other rule requires further editing/clarifying, you are more than welcome to let us know about that.
 
I'm happy to see progress being made in regard to staff organizational concerns. Quite frankly, the system the moderation team has used for the past year or so has been pretty disorganized. Through a combination of experience and innovation, I'm sure we can find an optimal system that will rectify our problems.
 
 

Global (now Support) Mods

 
This is something I would like to expand on. The former role of "global moderator" that some may remember is being renamed to "support moderator." This is completely separate from Q&A/technical support staff. They aren't related at all. 
 
 

nebulosity

 
This word is sexy.

[King 5,625]

Borderline NSFW is dead.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Seriously though, that rule always did come off very vague. Im glad its being removed and the existing NSFW rule being altered to better suit the communities needs.

 

Im also glad the term "Global Moderator" is being changed to "Support Moderator" since all mods have global permission sets. Makes more sense to me that they be called Support in light of what they actually focus on.

 

All in all, a few good changes that will likely serve us well in the somewhat immediate future and hopefully long term.

 

[yeet 2,026]

 

 

 

 

Seriously though, that rule always did come off very vague. Im glad its being removed and the existing NSFW rule being altered to better suit the communities needs.

Im also glad the term "Global Moderator" is being changed to "Support Moderator" since all mods have global permission sets. Makes more sense to me that they be called Support in light of what they actually focus on.

All in all, a few good changes that will likely serve us well in the somewhat immediate future and hopefully long term.

Does this mean I can spam you with sexeh ponehs?

[King 5,625]

Does this mean I can spam you with sexeh ponehs?

Only Rainbow Dash and Spitfire, and only if its not against the rules. Then yes...you definitely can.

[yeet 2,026]

Only Rainbow Dash and Spitfire, and only if its not against the rules. Then yes...you definitely can.

Even with the rule being more spefic, I'll probably end up posting something against it accidentally.

This one seems to not be explicit.

 

[Deae Rising Shine~ 52,332]

Only Rainbow Dash and Spitfire, and only if its not against the rules. Then yes...you definitely can.

DASHIE!!!

 

Good to know about the changes. Still keep an eye to not post too much explicit ones^^

[Shanks 10,811]

So far that sounds pretty good, with this new change in place we will see how it works out in practice. I am pleased to know that the feedback of myself and others has been taken seriously and hope this new policy works out for the best.

[Rainblow H. Ash 5,090]

Word.

 

I'm glad to see the staff taking user feedback.

[M'aiq the Liar 5,804]

Sounds all and well for now, i was beginning to wonder why this was the only fourm with all global mods. Good to see user feedback was taken

Edited September 29, 2014 by M'aiq the Liar

[Ashen Pathfinder 16,151]

My thanks and appreciations to the admins, moderators, & other staff for keeping us in the loop on these matters. Thank you for keeping us informed, and I do appreciate any effort to make the board a better experience for us. ^^

[~SadisticFluttershy~ 779]

I'm still alive and kicking.

 

Thanks for the update and letting us know on what's going on.

 

Cheers!

[Jeric 46,834]

 

 

nebulosity

 

 

 

This word is sexy.

 

The search function confirms that this is a highly prized word on our community  You could say it's a fetish of sorts for some users

 

Seriously though, I'm glad that we now have a common sense simplification of the NSFW policy. Good job on implementing this!

[Dattebayo 2,850]

 

I gotta say, I was positive that nothing was gonna be done with this diseased rule.

Color me surprised, mods. Good on all of you.

 

You won't be missed, BNSFW.

[Thrashy 2,798]

Glad that borderline NSFW has been struck down, however, this little bit mystifies me:

 

Material that may be considered appropriate include the following: swimsuits (but not underwear), sexualized but non-explicit depictions of body parts, bloody but non-gory violence, and casual mentions of clopping and fetishes (but not discussion). In other words, we allow sexy, but not saucy; suggestive, but not explicit; bloody, but not gory.

 

Just wanted to put forth that many people (myself included) don't necessarily find ordinary underwear to be inherently sexual…as evidenced by the fact that the mental image of me in nothing but a pair of boxers gets nobody hot and bothered.

 

Lingerie I can understand; it is, after all, a form of underwear that's meant to be evocative of sexual fantasies. But at the same time, a string bikini is also meant to titillate onlookers in a way that an ordinary one-piece would not.

 

...Yeah, I know. Diggin' a hole. Still, it seems to me like ordinary panties = ordinary swimsuit = sexy, while revealing panties = revealing swimsuit = saucy.

[Dattebayo 2,850]

Glad that borderline NSFW has been struck down, however, this little bit mystifies me:

 

 

Just wanted to put forth that many people (myself included) don't necessarily find ordinary underwear to be inherently sexual…as evidenced by the fact that the mental image of me in nothing but a pair of boxers gets nobody hot and bothered.

 

Lingerie I can understand; it is, after all, a form of underwear that's meant to be evocative of sexual fantasies. But at the same time, a string bikini is also meant to titillate onlookers in a way that an ordinary one-piece would not.

 

...Yeah, I know. Diggin' a hole. Still, it seems to me like ordinary panties = ordinary swimsuit = sexy, while revealing panties = revealing swimsuit = saucy.

One step at a time, One Who Thrashes.

For now, celebrate our victory, shut up, and eat some cake ;o

[Thrashy 2,798]

One step at a time, One Who Thrashes.

For now, celebrate our victory, shut up, and eat some cake ;o

 

What? It's not like they're gonna reinstate BNSFW just because a few lingering questions remain for dum-dums like me. The man said it himself:

 

As always, feedback is appreciated. If you continue to have concerns about the NSFW rule or the mod apps, feel free to share your thoughts.

[Mand'alor Dash 2,224]

Glad that borderline NSFW has been struck down, however, this little bit mystifies me:

 

 

Just wanted to put forth that many people (myself included) don't necessarily find ordinary underwear to be inherently sexual…as evidenced by the fact that the mental image of me in nothing but a pair of boxers gets nobody hot and bothered.

 

Lingerie I can understand; it is, after all, a form of underwear that's meant to be evocative of sexual fantasies. But at the same time, a string bikini is also meant to titillate onlookers in a way that an ordinary one-piece would not.

 

...Yeah, I know. Diggin' a hole. Still, it seems to me like ordinary panties = ordinary swimsuit = sexy, while revealing panties = revealing swimsuit = saucy.

Beat me to it.

 

This swimsuit was designed to show the same amount of skin as most lingerie items. I understand that "sexy" and "saucy" can be a blurry line, but there's got to be a better way to draw that distinction.

 

Personally, I think that the rule should simply be to keep it PG-13. Swimmies and undies are both okay, provided the picture isn't overtly saucy in itself (e.g. a close-up shot of certain areas), but outright nudity is still a no-no.

[King 5,625]

It's not like they're gonna reinstate BNSFW just because a few lingering questions remain for dum-dums like me.

 

Or will we?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just wanted to put forth that many people (myself included) don't necessarily find ordinary underwear to be inherently sexual…as evidenced by the fact that the mental image of me in nothing but a pair of boxers gets nobody hot and bothered.

 

We always have time to iron out things like this as Im sure we'll end up doing in the coming weeks/months. Personally I do find that a little odd, but I believe its because adding underwear/panties/swimsuits kinda sexualises the image.

[Moved to Elsewhere 11,328]

Glad the rule is disbanded. It was pretty confusing. Here's hoping these new policies work for everyone.

[Thrashy 2,798]

Beat me to it.

 

This swimsuit was designed to show the same amount of skin as most lingerie items. I understand that "sexy" and "saucy" can be a blurry line, but there's got to be a better way to draw that distinction.

 

Personally, I think that the rule should simply be to keep it PG-13. Swimmies and undies are both okay, provided the picture isn't overtly saucy in itself (e.g. a close-up shot of certain areas), but outright nudity is still a no-no.

 

Yeah, "PG-13" seems like the ideal way to phrase it, given that nobody below the age of 13 is technically allowed to join the forums. Although the problem I could see with that is that it could be kind of vague, since the waters seem a little muddy in discerning between PG-13 and R ratings in movies. Personally, I'd simplify it as "no depictions of sexual activity, explicit or implied" and "no depictions of genitalia" (which should be a given).

 

Really, as long as folks keep those two things in mind when thinking about sharing "suggestive" content, they should be fine. Although I would pose one additional bit of advice: If you have to ask yourself if something's riding the line, best to err on the side of it being too much and choose something just a smidge tamer.

[yeet 2,026]

I think as long as I can have BreBre in Calvin Kleins and a navel, we should be fine with this rule.

[NavelColt 22,875]

Seems pretty fair with the nsfw rule. *shouts at everyone to post swimsuit ponies with belly buttons*

 

Silly Brechard, swimsuit belly button ponies can't be Borderline; I was posting them long before being staff!

 

Sounds good. Removing Borderline was on the list of things to impliment before I left, hopefully it should help the NSFW rule be more straight-forward.

[yeet 2,026]

Silly Brechard, swimsuit belly button ponies can't be Borderline; I was posting them long before being staff!

 

Sounds good. Removing Borderline was on the list of things to impliment before I left, hopefully it should help the NSFW rule be more straight-forward.

Oh rly. This calls for ponehs. (SFW right? I see nothing really revealing)