ipernity workshop: content rating and filtering system / Discussions

Hi there :)

First of all, I think Ipernity team needs to have a legal approach as they need to be 'french law compliants', and they are thinking about filtering in order not to censure anyone.

Moreove, I think every of us has a different approach to Ipernity. Some are "artists", and think photography is a work, some are only "players", loving to play with colors, technology, some are "geeks" using Ipernity to store pictures, etc, etc, etc...

I don't know exactly what I am. What I know is that I'm a frequent IP user, logged 20 hours a day, from home and from work. And often, my daughter ask me to show her some of my pics online, or pics from friends which are also on Ipernity. And often, when we plan a travel, we search together for pics from the city we plan to travel to.

And I don't think I'm the only user with children. We're not as much as young adults, but there will be more and more children online, that's a fact.

As far as I'm concerned, I don't have problem with pornography, I'm tall enough to block someone. As far as my daughter is concerned, I don't have problems with 'nudity', she's used to see naked bodies.

But some of us might be shocked by naked bodies, even in an artistic purpose.

That's the reason why I really think 3 degrees of filtering are necessary. In order for moderate people not to take any risk when online with children, and for conservative people to be sure not to be exposed to nudity.

I don't agree with conservative people, I'm french and here, topless is allowed on beaches, and nudity is not a crime... but I truly respect their will.

Hope this will help you :)

--
Coming from a group home page (?)

So.. what , the problem with your approach is that you take always the side of the "viewer". But this site is first a site where people come to post what they make, artistic or not, (but mostly artistic), and then go looking to what others do.
And for those people, filtering is imposed, not a choice. It is a censorship, a limit to their freedom, a sanction. A light limit is normal. More is shocking for them. For some, even a small censorship is shocking.
Why do we have to take account of people who do not want to see nudity, and not take account of the people who want freedom?
Why is it allways the same who must show restraint?

Because that's life reality.

Internet is not a no man's land with no rules anymore. Internet is ruled by law and business.

Understand me, I have no problem with artistic pics, and I would also publish nude, one day.

But what I know and what I understand is the following :
If I want to have the benefit of a great and large audience, not only of few artists, I have to be on a website with a large audience. Large audience means a lot of different sensibilities, a lot of different people coming from a lot of different countries with a lot of different cultures.
And that means I cannot do exactly what I want, just like in real life, because there are laws.

Moreover, don't forget internet is just like other media... Télévision, newspaper, radio, internet have to generate money because this is all a big business, and I'm part of it because internet is also my 'job'. Before entering the wonderful world of Internet advertising, I would never have imagine all that, but internet is a business. Not a non profit org., not a game, not a free place, internet is a media that generates billions of dollars, euros, yen,...

Ok, this seems to be a nice place, where Ipernity Team give us the opportunity to share our point of view, our pics, our lifes, and as I know them personally, I can tell you they are really kind people. But this is still a business, with a marketing action plan, a business plan, a development plan (which cannot go on without an accordance to the french laws), with a goal, at the end, generate money for those whou took the risk to invest time and money in the creation of Ipernity.

I'm sorry about that, but that is, today, internet reality.

I'm not saying artists have to stay on specific artistic website or have only their own website (like in real life artists has to find place allowing them to expose, because they can't do it wherever they want neither), I'm just saying that filtering would be a great way for everyone to continue to share, artist or non artist, youngs and older, without the barrier which exist in real life between art and people.


--
Coming from a group home page (?)

Life's reality? Sorry, I see life as diversity, not something where everything is always equal to other.

Your arguments about internet and society are right, but not the point here. Law exist, we don't need a filtering for that. See what the team have said: law is not enough defined and that is why they propose filtering. So they do'nt act because of the law!

It is business? Ok. But what kind of business? You define Ipernity the way it fits with what you want but not necessary with what it really is
A necessary rule about business is that it must define well his clientele. And what the homepage of Ipernity propose? To post your creation, to expose your work.
What is a big part of the clientele here? People who have been drive away from Yahoo sites like FlickR and Yahoo360° because of censorship or neglect of the opinion of the members. And you want to drive them away again. Wel , you don't want it , but it will do the same. And Ipernity will loose his clientele, because for what you propose there is FlickR. Ipernity must have something else to propose: a place with more respect for the member, and more freedom about sharing!

"Filtering a way to share" is a nonsense. It a way to share less! But as I said, there must be, may be, some censorship. But the minimal, please!

In fact, this discussion is a way to define what kind of site Ipernity will be. And you begin the discussion saying "it is a site like all the other media!". Well, sorry, but internet is diversity, with a lot of different sites. And we have a chance here to have a site well managed -so, ok, a business-, but with more freedom of sharing! Freedom of sharing is a important part of the product Ipernity offers.

Like reality, or internet, business is not always everywhere the same. It has diversity.

Also, the responsability of an indivual like you and me include to fight for freedom, not accept everything saying " it is reality". Reality is movement. And WE make it move. The question is: in what direction.?
I think that to defend our freedom is a more responsible way to take care of the future of our children that to be sure they don't see accidentally a tit!

You know what ? you're right.
My reality is having the best for my family and for myself, and I adapt myself to laws and rules without fight for anything except my well being, because I'm a sheep, egoist and stupid.
I'm not fighting FOR filtering, I always did without and I'll continue. I'm not fighting AGAINST artist.
Filtering is legally necessary for pornography. That's the point. And nothing exists today about pornography on Ipernity. Starting from that simple point, Ipernity team tried to propose more than a "black and white" censorship based on what is illegal or not.
Now, I will stop reading people arguing about liberty they have to fight for. I will continue doing my best every day to make my little girl and my family happy. Because this is my reality. And if your reality is to fight, every single day, for your freedom, keep going, the world need people like you.
I'm just off.
--
Coming from a group home page (?)

Sur internet il y a le pire, comme le racisme au sens très large, mais j'ai envie de rajouter quand même, malgré la parenté avec ce fléau de l'humanité,la propagande neo -nazie; il y a aussi les images pédophiles ou de pornographie hard...
Sur ipernity des règles sont posées: respect de l'autre dans ce qui est montré mais aussi dit et pour parler plus précisément du sujet discuté ici, des photos qui plaisent à certains et pas à d'autres, souvent des parents mais pas seulement ...
Je n'ai plus dix ans, loin de là et je connais la vie - un peu - et voir dans une série de photos de paysages, de gens, d'objets une femme nue ou un sexe en érection cela ne me donne pas de boutons....
Par contre, tomber par hasard sur vingt photos d'affilée sur des cuisses ouvertes, des sexes d'hommes mélangés, des montages de filles avec des pénis agressifs et contents d'eux-même comme leur pauvre propriétaire, cela me dégoûte moi adulte car je ne suis pas venue voir cela sur ipernity ..
Dans ce cas le désir de liberté de celui qui poste ces photos ne respecte en rien le mien de voir des photos publiques mais pas pornographiques ..... il y a des sites pour cela ....
On peut me répondre que je ne suis pas obligée d'aller sur ce site .....
Oui mais quand un nouveau d'ipernity vient notre page et fait des commentaires sur nos photos, la courtoisie est de le remercier et d'aller voir les siennes ... et de tomber sur ......... même sans les ouvrir, on est obligé de regarder au moins quelques instants ;;;

Bref, que faire après? Ecrire à ipernity pour le signaler ...la personne est suspendue pour 48 h avec mise en garde puis revient avec ....ces mêmes photos ...cela sert à quoi donc ??

First we have to be clear about what we are talking about. Filtering and censoring are two separate things. Censoring is someone telling you what you should see, read, etc...and blocking what you should not. What is being proposed here is a mechanism to comply with French law by limiting access to non members while giving members the opportunity to be selective about what they wish to see or not.
As members you can select what you want to see and you are able to change the settings when navigating a group or somebody else's pictures. This is not censoring because people have a choice. Am I misunderstanding in the rules as they are written below? If so can someone please explain to me what am I missing?

This is what Team ipernity proposes:

Rules

- Filtering mode for anonymous visitors is: strict - No change

- Default filtering mode for members is: strict - Possibility of changes.

- Members between 13 and 17 can choose between strict or moderate filtering.

- Members over 18 can set filtering to strict, moderate or deactivated.

- Filtering mode can be temporary downgraded by members when browsing in one specific space or one specific group.

- No particular rules for specific countries.

- Unappropriate content is not shown in Search and Explore section, and is shown as a scrambled thumbnail in other pages.

What you are missing is that people who post will have no choice!
You're also see all on the viewer's side.
And your definition of censoring is wrong: censoring is not telling what you must see, but what you must show.
We speak about a painting, or a show or a article in a newspaper "censored"! Never heard of a public "censored"!

Filtering is censorship! A moderate one, but one.

Let put it another way: if an article of a newspaper is censored, this does not mean that the journalist cannot speak about what was on the article with his family, with people he knows, and so on, with people who phone him . Well, it is still censorship because this article is forbidden to freely ciculate.
With filtering, you forbid any "orange" or "red" content to circulate freely! It is censorship.

Another thing: Flag a work of an artist as "red" or "orange" is a lack of respect for him, because art is a gift to civilisation, a part of culture, and has not to be censored
Once again, you ask respect to artists, but not show much respect for them

You are so right. What we have often is hidden censorism, look at films, very often thy are stripped in parts to enable "free circulation", because otherwise they would not be in the copy line for cinemas. As a result we have hidden censorism. In fact you can post what you want on your own server on your own risk, that is all in all the result.
But at the moment I will bear those plans, because it seems that this filter can be switched off for members, that is all I want and a difference to the first platform I fleed...

First of all you--not you personally but in general--is the one who is supposed to flag your work and set your browsing preferences. That is the responsibility of being a member of a society. Telling somebody the content of your work is not censorship. The flag tells the viewer that they can see the work if they want and this is the content. I don't see anything wrong with that. When you buy something I suppose you would want to know what you are buying. Yes I see this from the point of view of the viewer and art without a viewer is nothing. The artist has to have respect for the viewer too.
Again it seems that there is a misunderstanding of what the filtering is. It does not mean, from what I understand, that people will not be able to see things. They will have to decide based on what the flag is. If they decide to see it then they will be able to. it requires additional clicks but they will be able to.
We can argue ad nauseum about what constitutes art and what does not. Art appreciation is not universal and what some consider art others may see as something different. As artists we have to respect that and not force everybody to see something they don't want to. When I open a page or a picture I don't want somebody's genitals are staring at me--not that this could not be a work of art (Jan Saudek comes to mind)--especially in a setting where there are other people who might not understand the context or the work and don't see it in the same light--work for example, or you're visiting around when your children are present. I understand your point and I do agree with what you say to some extent but I also believe that we all have responsibilities and have to have respect for others not just for ourselves. Individualism is important and can be exercised to the fullest when we live on a deserted island.
Let me ask this question, would you decide to go to the grocery store naked? If not why not? Suppose for an instant that you will not be arrested for doing that. Would you still do it? If not why not? Things are not black and white and we cannot only see things from our own perspective, we must consider others with whom we interact. That is what makes a society and a civilization. It is the collective not the individual.

About filltering, you're wrong once again, sorry.
Ok, you flag your own work, but if you don't respect the guidelines,the moderation will impose it. And that is normal, because without that, filtering has no meaning. So there is no "choice" ! Why are you afraid to admit that?
Once again, you said the artist must have respect but nowhere you speak about the respect the viewer must show about a work!
If I follow your opinion, we must closed all museum and forbidden them to all children!!
If artists have to obey to the habits of the viewer, there would never be any art!

For the rest of the arguments, I more or less agree with you, but it could as well support my proposal (see rating categories and names) with a minimal censorship and a rating, separated from filtering that will satisfy the people you think must be advertized. Rating, that is "telling somebody". Filtering is censorship. And I am not against censorship. But the minimum necessary.

The example of the grocery is not appropriate! We are not in a grocery, but on a site first defined for adults who post their work!
A civilisation is collective, not individual? Ok, but you seem to choose individually the collective you want, to support your individual opinion!
There are here on Ipernity a lot of individuals who doesn't want any censorship! You're exclude them from this community? That is the way you see a society? Exclude people that doesn't agree with you? I know you don't, but if we follow your opinion, these people will be excluded!

arf
...

Pas obligé de le dire comme ca non plus "t'es ridicule" c'est blessant :)
meme si c'est tres clair !!
j'suis sur que si on laisse l'autre expliquer son point de vue sans le traiter de con, ca permettra de faire évoluer les choses plus mieux (et pas plus vite :D j'ai appris ma leçon)

"vous etes geniaux la vie est belle piou piou gazouille gazouille"
rappelle toi !!!!!

"""CASSE COUILLE !!"""

Sur ce je disparais apres une intervention palpitante et carrement appropriée !!

°°°***POUF***°°°

T'as pas tort, allez, vais corriger (un peu), bien que c'est trop tard. Ceci dit, je visais l'argument, pas la personne. Et parce qu'un rien énervé, entre autres par ce genre d'arguments dans ce contexte, qui me donne l'impression que l'on me prend pour un con, justement. Alors que non! Mais énervé oui.

Merci de ton intervention palpitante et appropriée, magic bigoode!

Thank you all for good points made.

I do not disagree that porn and other illegal / highly offensive content should be restricted. I also acknowledge that this is a business and that there's different kind of users of this site. And that French law must be obeyed.

We all recognize there's difference between art nudes and porn. Alas, as I see it, art and porn will be classified in the same filtering category. That I think is wrong, in principle.

I just think sharing art should be just as equal as sharing pictures of .... sunsets.

Next question: As shown in the discussion blog post there is at the end the remark:

"Les contenus inappropriés ne sont pas montrés dans la Recherche et l'Exploration, et sont affichés de façon "brouillée" dans les autres pages. "

Chére Team Ipernity.
First: You use always in this post "red content", "green content" and so on.
Is "inappropriate content" "red content"???

If "inappropriate content" means "red" content than let me say my complete, serious disagree.
I know that you might have some coding work with all your caches and so on, but:
IF I AM LOGGED IN, AND MY FILTER IS OFF:
I do not want to have any difference!

Especially I NEVER want to see any snow storm hideout thumbnail, e.g. in my entry page "new posts of my contacts". I do not want to get a empty explore page, when searching any tag or keyword.

If you exclude "red content" this for anonymous access, no problem. If you hide it from paying, adult members with deactivated filter ist almost the same as where I fleed from!

""Especially I NEVER want to see any snow storm hideout thumbnail"""
be patient !!!
It's almost springs !!
:D

ok bad wordgame, but ... it's true !

Sure Ipernity have sooooo many points to deal with, in this very important new """project""" here.
so i just wanted to say that, i'm sure they know this and it's maybe """only""" thousands of lines of code to change to allow you, after "filters OFF" to see EVERYTHING


Let's continue all to construct something and not be """scared"""" by bad possible futures !
we're not doing that in life, so don't do it here :)

another very very important sentence by Bigoode

i disapear as a magician now

***°°°POUF°°°***

***°°°POUF BACK °°°***


AOW !!!

and SHINE ON !!!!!

IN IPERNITY WE TRUST !

***°°°POUF°°°***

POUF too.
It is not about to be pessimistic. But I want a Team Ipernity answer what means "Les contenus inappropriés" vs. "red content". There is here the possibilty to discuss, so I want to discuss.

I hate snowstorm hideout pictures.

PUFF POUFF!

An unappropriate content doesn't meet filter criteria. It means for instance "red" and "orange" contents are unappropriate according to "strict" filter.

Thank you for this clearification. It rests for me the open question, if you plan now to exclude all non-green content from explore and search, showing scrambled thumbs even if you are logged in with a profile where the filter is set to deactivated...

No. Explore and Search section will show contents which match the filtering mode. If filter is deactivated, Explore and Search will show all types of contents.

Anyway, consider our proposal as a first thinking. We are now listening to everyone's opinion and ideas.

We haven't taken any decision and are listening to everyone's point of view. We'll answer in a couple of days with a new proposal which will be discussed again. Thanks to all for participating!

We've just published a new proposal. The discussion continues here: www.ipernity.com/group/36490/discuss/13963