Overall, this seems to be one small - albeit annoying, - part of a much larger issue that needs to be addressed, and for those who think it's still not an issue, go ahead and show your kiddies this
SFW Crotch Shot for me real quick (Jun 24, 2020 09:40 PM - taken from page one of browse with no keywords entered, just with SFW on), since apparently that's acceptable to do based on FA's standards.
It’s... not acceptable according to FA’s rating guidelines, though? I probably would have double checked with another staff member who actually worked ratings to be sure, when I was on staff, but that looks to me like it runs afoul of what the AUP describes as acceptable “nudity” in General (emphasis mine):
Free of nudity of any kind, as well as outlines of genitalia, sheaths, female nipples, or detailed/exaggerated bulges. Nudity is defined as the open display of genitalia or exposed female areola or nipples.
I don't have time to go through the front page and just flag all the posts that obviously violate the rules, just so the staff can get rid of it. (Nevermind the fact that even if I did do that it'd take way too long for it to be removed according to your posts)
If it were in any way ethical to do so, I would dare you to post the content you complain about to literally any art site you think is run better, and time how long it takes
them to remove it. The best I can ethically do is suggest you set a timer next time you see a policy violation on whatever your non-FA art site of choice is, and keep refreshing until it’s gone. The point is that it’s unrealistic to expect
any moderation to happen fast enough to meaningfully shorten the time that submissions spend on the front page at most times of day.
(For reference, here’s the oldest and newest submission on the front page loading it up at a very low traffic time of day. They’re not exactly spread far apart in time.)
Far as I’m concerned, though, it speaks volumes that you’re willing to complain about content you’re not willing to report. I wish people didn’t break the rules, too, but I’m going to acknowledge that it’s not on staff that people choose to do so, and that reports are how you tell staff “hey, you need to have a look at this.”
I also agree that this is an issue to a degree that seemingly only FA has, which is odd to me. Why doesn't DeviantArt or SoFurry or [insert art website here] have such an issue with sorting and ratings etc.? I'm not saying this doesn't happen on [insert art website here] but it definitely doesn't happen nearly as much as to warrant something such as this thread.
Quite honestly, scale and site culture are probably the biggest factors. I can’t say for sure with SF (I jumped that ship when they rebranded from Yiffstar, for a number of reasons), but unless things have changed drastically since I last actively used dA, the content you object to just isn’t uploaded to nearly the same extent there, period. And it’s not like dA has a reputation for stellar moderation in general.
FA sits, IMO, at an intersection of factors that each contribute:
- Large enough that moderation queues or continuous monitoring of new content isn’t really feasible (unless a pretty robust system for distribution of content for review between a largish number of staff members were to be implemented)
- Enough people willing to risk penalties for abusing the system (in a gamble for exposure) to (continuously) seed the site with violations knowing that they are violating the rules
- Enough people thinking observing what gets uploaded is a sufficient substitute for actually reading the rules, who get the wrong impression from the above people’s uploads
- A report system that admittedly is a bit clunky (though tbh it still probably doesn’t take me longer to report a submission on FA than it takes me to report a tweet on Twitter, which has a system that looks good on paper)
- An attitude among users that reporting things doesn’t make a difference/matter, which gets encouraged by people repeating the talking point that reports supposedly take months to be seen and/or that staff plays favorites in processing reports
- An attitude among users that reporting things is one or more of the following: tattling, disloyal to the artist you’re reporting, an attack on/targeting the artist being reported, etc
- A perception that following the rules puts you at a disadvantage, since the people breaking the rules may ultimately be getting more exposure for it if they get away with it
- There’s a history of some artists (in some cases with sizable followings) reacting to actions being taken against them with publicly lashing out, right down to ascribing malice and/or bigotry to whoever reported the problem - it’s frankly understandable if this makes people reluctant to report their submissions for fear of retribution (the source of a complaint is never revealed to submission owners, but that doesn’t mean the prospect of the popular artist finding out and turning their clout on you can’t be intimidating)
- Seems to attract users with Very Specific Interests that I at least haven’t really seen equivalents to on many other platforms. Things like “all I want to draw is spherical cartoonishly fat characters in tutus” (not an actual example; I have a couple in mind but don’t want to risk singling socially vulnerable people out) I at least haven’t run across much elsewhere.
I do think, regardless, that it’s important to separate policy and user behavior. Wanting soft vore with no overt sexual or violent overtones to be rated Mature is a policy matter. It’s a valid opinion, and if you (gen) feel that way it’s a point you should absolutely be able to raise. It’s also something that site management can do something about directly.
When it comes to content that already is not permitted being posted, or content posted in ways that don’t conform to posted site policy, that’s a user behavior issue. Raising it is arguably more useful in a “damn it people stop doing this!” addressing the community type way. Site management and staff (the former being the subset of the latter that has the larger hand in shaping/writing policy) can primarily work indirectly to dissuade this behavior through imposing penalties on the offenders. Doesn’t mean the issue can’t or shouldn’t be discussed, but it needs to be with the acknowledgement (whether explicit or implicit) that what users do isn’t something that can be directly controlled.
I just want to make a point to say that if we (gen) start treating these two classes of issues as one and the same, we’re not going to be doing anyone any favors. There’s definitely ways in which FA is a hella dysfunctional system, and addressing those is... not going to be an easy fix in most cases.
No wonder this place has so few staff members, nobody wants to do a job they don't get paid for, and I doubt enough people actually care about "Furaffinity" the brand to just work for free on a website.
I’m going to be frank with you, here: I cared enough about the site and its community (not “the brand”) to volunteer for just short of five years. Would have been five exactly, but the time table of my resignation was changed (by myself) due to abuse I received from a portion of the community at the time, and the effect it had on me.
I met people who burned out on being staff. I met people who were removed from staff by site management. I met people whose life situation changed to where they couldn’t fit volunteering in anymore. I never once met anyone on moderation staff for whom pay entered into the equation (far as I’m aware, obviously; if it was they sure never told me) as to whether they wanted to do the job. They all did it because they cared.
I’m not going to claim I was a marvel of work ethic through every single day/week/month of those five years. But that was never related to pay - most of the time it was related to depression, anhedonia, and executive dysfunction. The one thing that came back multiple times to push me close to the line of throwing my hands up and walking away? People badmouthing staff over stupid shit. You are not the first person to suggest that moderation would be better if only staff were less “lazy.” It’s discouraging and hurtful to read that kind of thing right after you spent like 6-10 hours putting out fires. I’m not saying staff is above criticism, but any criticism should at least be, well, reasonable. It’s
not reasonable to drag staff for not being able to preempt people posting big D in General.
If you think there might not be enough staff, at least don’t contribute to it feeling like a thankless job (and thus potentially increasing turnover) by dismissing the work they do as not enough.
——
I think I might have more to say later, but I have literally 30 minutes to get ready and out the door at this point. I just can’t stand idly by and let staff be maligned over the userbase doing things they’ve been told not to.
