Sue Gardner wrote:
Sorry to top-post.
Google and Flickr actually handle this quite differently though, I think, Andreas. Going from memory -- I think that Google defaults to a "moderate" setting, but allows users to easily switch to an unfiltered setting. As long as they allow cookies, users don't need to be registered, and there's no other impediment to switching that I'm aware of.
Flickr also defaults to moderate, but in order to get unfiltered results you need to be registered, and I think you might also have to make some kind of statement about how old you are. So, you can't see unfiltered results on Flickr without jumping through some hoops. And, users in a small number of countries (going from memory I think they include Singapore, India, Korea and Germany) do not have the option to see unfiltered results.
Flickr defaults to SAFE. Registered users can switch on moderate. Over 18s can switch on restricted.
Plus, I believe that certain types of content are disallowed entirely throughout Flickr, although I don't know what they are or how that is policed.
They don't allow photos of shit eating or piss drinking, nor do they allow child porn, or photos of people being fucked up the arse or cunt by dogs and other animals nor of guys fucking animals either.
They do they allow revenge postings, or tributes where someone takes a photo of someone ejaculates over it photographs and posts the resulting mess. Extreme bondage and S&M, fisting, the insertion of bottles and other non sex toys into anuses or vaginas, all those are out.
Also they do not tolerate upskirt and down blouse photos, nor predatory photos of people walking in the street - tight crops of butts, breasts, groins etc.
So the devil is very much in the details :-)
Indeed it is. But you could allow all of the above so long as it was properly filtered. Then I can choose whether or not I see someone eating shit whilst browsing the site.