Poll on the Direction of the Current Proposals

As of 17:50 (UK)
 
Of the tiny number of users who have responded:
 
49.6% oppose the change  
50.4% agree with the changes or find it has not gone far enough.

@Background Pony #3D95  
Unfortunately, “hate speech” is defined in different ways by different people. For some, you pretty much have to be saying ”gas the Jews” or ”sieg heil” for it to be hate speech, for others, repeating scientific studies on differences between the biological sexes or ‘micro-aggressions’ (which is basically anything they choose to be offended by) constitute hate speech. JK Rowling was accused of hate speech for saying that biological sex exists.
 
@Inucroft  
Or, as written more honestly, 7% agree with the change that’s been proposed, 50% don’t want any change, and 35% want more change, with 8% agreeing in principle with change but being unconvinced that it can be impartial. In other words, at best, 15% of people will be happy with the current proposal, and 85% will not be happy with it.

@Inucroft  
lumping “I’m worried about how hard it will be to enforce consistently.” into either of them is probably a bad idea, since they have reservations.

@Venport  
And yet he did it anyways to make it look like his preferred choice was ‘winning’ (as much as one CAN win with a twitter mob rigging things)

You have said stsyn helps. I do not trust any digital voting to be anonymous by default, but do you (via stsyn) get any information to distinguish pattern for those who prefer certain options? Like age of account or artist-\non artist?

voted for too far  
Twitter peeps will still be complaining and calling people “pro-nazi”, that or say it was rigged by fake accounts.

@Inucroft  
@Inucroft
 
Please try to keep your replies within one post when possible.

I was torn between “give me the old rules back” and “worries about consistency”. Chose the second one.

I’m glad to see old rules in the lead.

@Frosku  
If you even have to ask if something is Racist. There is a reason you are asking. You’re all clearly aware that the images are racially problematic or you wouldn’t be asking about them specifically. The line of what is or isn’t appecatable seems to already be clear to those asking. The only thing this Poll is asking is how far People should be allowed to step over it. Opintion, they shouldn’t…

@I Literally Dont Care What You Want  
Even with the proven Twitter brigading, it’s been clear from the start that only a tiny vocal minority had whipped themselves into a frenzy about an imaginary threat represented by horses of specific colors. Luckily their racism isn’t tolerated in MLP.

@I Literally Dont Care What You Want  
Yeah. While I’m just a bit disappointed so many people don’t wanna compromise and wanna go full exteltene on either the pro-censor and anti-censor side… I can’t be too sad knowing that those who value artistic freedom are looking to be more numerous, so far, ha.

@Background Pony #9806  
I’m not asking if something is racist. Depictions of racism and discrimination can either be sympathetic to the racist or sympathetic to the victim of racism. They can also use racial symbolism as a proxy for something else, like power or dominance. They can also juxtapose ideas together which cause internal discomfort for the viewer. There are pieces designed to make you angry, pieces designed to make you cry, pieces designed to make you smile, and pieces designed to make you think… and a lot of pieces just designed for you to wack off to. All of this is art.
 
I would be willing to bet that about 95% of people on both sides of the debate would agree on banning obvious propaganda for racist ideologies. What some of us are concerned about is the potential for censoring art which has artistic merit or is designed to be satirical.

looked at staff poll  
some of these are obvious jokes and I don’t think banning jokes you don’t like is a good idea  
ex: zigger, Jewish pokemon trainer is named Ash, Aryanne on a couch being surrounded by zebras (literally a meme reference)  
Then some is porn with a swastika, yet staff’ll defend foalcon.  
Now some of this is probably too far (the no jews allowed thing). But jokes are being lumped in

You are saying stsyn has taken interest in this poll. I do not trust any digital poll to be truly anonymopus, so is he willing to provide data like age distribution of acoounts or artists\non artists between options?

@NolanCrush  
I have a concern that whilst most of us probably agree that some of it is too far, we’d struggle to agree where to draw that line, and we’d have an even harder time agreeing to any policy wording which would protect that line.

@Frosku  
that’s definitely a concern I agree with

@Mildgyth  
appologies. I often don’t see the new posts till i’ve actually posted.  
I guess I’ll edit them into the prior post?
 
I still maintain that this poll likely won;t be an accurate of the users who never bother to see the forum.  
Then you have the exodus from the anti-censorship and anti-nazi users.
 
And as this issue has gone on mismanaged by the staff, the Free Speech absolutist (radical in most parts of the world) feel vindicated by Raptorshy’s pro-Nazi move.

@Frosku  

 
That’s a good point. I guess a good system way of handling it would be that whoever reviews it, can either reject a blatantly bogus report, delete if the image is a clear violation (DNP, totally non-pony, RL bestiality etc) or place the image in review queue if it’s questionable to any degree (even if said moderator votes ‘keep’). The image vanishes from public view until it gets either 3 ‘keep’ votes or 3 ‘remove’ votes from the moderators (essentially, 5 mods voting on it, except short-circuiting need for last votes if the first 3-4 votes already establish the final decision).
 
That would definitely help… but requires a significant piece of code to be written.

@RandomBlank  
Would also essentially triple (or more) the moderator workload.

There is now an absolute majority in favor of the old rules. No run-off vote needed.
 
I’d also like to point out that we were always told “it’s ok to like problematic things, nobody is trying to ban them”.  
It turns out that was just another lie. As always.

@Background Pony #8CE4  
I still maintain that this poll likely won;t be an accurate of the users who never bother to see the forum.  
Then you have the exodus from the anti-censorshipfrom the first commonsense change and anti-nazi users from the double backstabs they got.
 
So regardless of what poll they do, it will not represent the userbase.

@Background Pony #8CE4  
We’ve still polled less than half of the userbase at best, and less than 18% at worst.
 
EDIT:
 
I used (Both of the links are NSFW, as it may surprise noone porn gets more interaction than sfw)  
>>317670 to determine a close approximation of the potential maximum number of users active ever  
and  
>>1957899 to determine roughly how many active users there are as of now, as it is the most upvoted image in the last 2 years (Roughly, the time span was from 1/1/19 to now)
 
I’ve gotten a range of 19.84% to 10.68% for how much of the community this poll has captured as of 701 votes. (This assumes 100% of the votes are actually genuine)

For any other jokesters who go “WE HAVE TO DELETE ALL NAZI IMAGERY OR WE WILL BE DELETED; VOTE MY WAY NOE. GERMANY WILL DELETE US”  
Germany does allow for drawing/showing Nazi imagery for the purpose of art (and history). Yes, also in cartoons.  

 
Video going with the pic. Warning, fecal humor
 
Also the site is hosted in France anyways, and last i checked Charlie Hebdo hasnt had all their staff arrested for basically edge shitposting every week for free speech.

I’ve attached analysis by stsyn to the OP, it pretty much shows that brigades didn’t affect the outcome more than 3-4% in any given direction. For all slices of the voter base, about 50% are in favor of old rules, and between 30-35% are in favor of complete removal of content depicting Nazi imagery. The remaining 15-20% are, in principle, agreed with the proposed changes but a majority of that remaining group are unconvinced that it will be enforced equitably.