@Background Pony #970C
Please note the phrase "Do not post comments complaining about the theme of the image."
And, in all honesty, a lot of the stuff you posted that we deleted would not have been ok anywhere on the site, except perhaps in the Politics containment zone
Again, the rule specifically
bases this on the ability to filter. "To help you avoid seeing images you may not wish to see, we have a tag filtering system, which allows for hiding of images that contain specific tags." The text of the rule is fundamentally tied to site functionality that, as near I can tell, does not properly apply to the scenario.
If politics is so routinely a source of viciousness that it requires a containment thread named after pony hell
, then why does the Politics tag have all of ACAB, BLM, and Proud Boys implying it, and literally not a single thing to do with LGBT when the politics of it are where these issues constantly come up? Why are open political messages in pictures even allowed in the first place if there's that level of lockup on talking about it and that shallow a tagging pool for the issues people have with it?
And why is this not mentioned or even vaguely implied anywhere in the rules if there is in fact a containment thread for politics and comments on political images directly relevant to the topic discussed
are not suitable? How is an image of a latex-wearing aggressively butch Rainbow Dash
with "I'm not a freak, you just haven't found your kink yet" and multiple examples of Pride iconography wholly unrelated to the subject of how to have LGBT people seem normal?
Is it really that it is utterly and comprehensively
against the rules to criticize the theme of an image, in any
way, or that there is a total forbiddance of political discussion outside a select few forum threads? If so, the rules need to actually be clear that such is the rule, rather than tying the forbiddance of criticizing theme to the filter function or having wholly unmentioned forbidden topics. By having "do not post comments complaining about the theme of the image" after
specifying to filter them, the rule implies the relation in question. When filters don't work, it's not really a stretch to say that a follow-up statement
does not apply, because what it is following doesn't.
Of particular note is the not-relevant-in-this-case matter of taking issue with rarely seen combinations of tags rather than any of them individually, as the filter system has no support for such and in my experience there's an extremely low rate of use for niche combination tags, to the point where their existence is rarely considered. Though I suppose being able to filter images with both
"Pride" and "Politics" but not those with just one or the other would capture the whole of the issues I have in this matter and leave out the simple "ponies holding and/or in front of various colored stripes".
If you think the site needs a new tag to handle the set of images that you're talking about, here is the tagging forum where you can propose a new tag.
But you could also just filter the "Pride" tag and avoid all of the images that you've been complaining on lately, or click that "Hide" button if you don't like the theme of an image, so maybe a special new tag isn't really needed.
As had been explained at rather sizable length in the comments on the all of two images
in question, it's about the implication of violent response to opposition and mentioning a dislike of just throwing a pride flag background because of that having no real point, not about Pride intrinsically
And what exactly do you think the response to me wanting a "calling for violence" tag or some such for the specific purpose of slapping it on a rather narrow subset of Pride images would be? Do you really
think I'd get productive conversation on the matter with any level of honesty as to why I want such a tag? Particularly given that there appears to be such an intensity of vitrol around politics as to require a dedicated containment thread?
Looking over the Pride tag, I can find three downvotes I've left on the latest surge of images (because there is for some reason not a filter for downvotes you've left), with two being for the messaging and the third being for truly awful color balancing (the latter of which has had the downvote removed because it appears to have been fixed). It is not a large block of downvotes, there are actually a few upvotes because I can in fact appreciate examples of the simple "pony with flag" Pride images even if I don't like the lack
of idea behind them.
Mind you, I'm not just blankly shouting about frustration with opaqueness in site policy, I am actually beginning to populate my filter.
…Nearest stopgap to get things filtered I can think of without risking my ass by openly criticizing literally any subset of the LBGT community no matter how miniscule or actively hostile to the ordinary is filtering Politics and tossing that
tag on the ones that get into slogans instead of just throwing up flags.