Do "toddler" and "diaper" need to be blocked by the safe mode?

Currently, according to the github, the tags blocked by the safe mode includes:

toddlercon|toddler|diaper|tentacle|rape|bestiality|beastiality|lolita|loli|nude|shota|pussy|penis

Among those, I think toddler and diaper shouldn't be blocked, because once in a while there will be false positives like post #3298998. Any really questionable posts should probably fall under toddlercon (and mostly be rated non-safe anyway). Incidentally, "tentacle" and "lolita" don't work at all because they are aliased to tentacles and lolita_fashion respectively. The rest on the list all imply nudity or sex by wiki definition so I'm OK with them being blocked.

While I agree with Lolita because of the alias, I think the diaper one is meant to stop those images with an adult diaper fetish.

Is an adult diaper fetish even that bad a thing if the rest of the post is safe? If some people feels strongly about it they can just blacklist the tag themselves (which also has the advantage of being easier to ignore temporarily if need to be).

aaaaaaaaab said:

Is an adult diaper fetish even that bad a thing if the rest of the post is safe? If some people feels strongly about it they can just blacklist the tag themselves (which also has the advantage of being easier to ignore temporarily if need to be).

Those are definitely not the kinds of images I would feel comfortable seeing in Safe Mode. They are inherently sexual, even if no sex acts or nudity is otherwise present in the image. (I feel the same about foot-fetishy images tbh, but I understand why it's impossible to filter those) Furthermore, it's not something that a lot of people would even think to blacklist before encountering, so imo they should definitely be hidden by default when searching on Safe.

That said, though, the adult baby tag exists to differentiate images with that fetish from those that contain, y'know, just normal babies wearing normal baby things. Probably that should be the tag on the list, rather than diaper.

Toddler can probably be removed since applicable sexual posts SHOULD be filtered anyway by way of the other relevant tags. Last I checked this tag wasn't being used exclusively for sexual images.

Kayako said:

That said, though, the adult baby tag exists to differentiate images with that fetish from those that contain, y'know, just normal babies wearing normal baby things. Probably that should be the tag on the list, rather than diaper.

There's still a ton of fetish material in diaper -adult_baby, however. Adult baby could probably stand to be better populated but I'd leave the diaper filter in place regardless to be on the safe side.

Also, does safe mode really not block BDSM? That's pretty surprising.

Kayako said:

Those are definitely not the kinds of images I would feel comfortable seeing in Safe Mode. They are inherently sexual, even if no sex acts or nudity is otherwise present in the image. (I feel the same about foot-fetishy images tbh, but I understand why it's impossible to filter those) Furthermore, it's not something that a lot of people would even think to blacklist before encountering, so imo they should definitely be hidden by default when searching on Safe.

That said, though, the adult baby tag exists to differentiate images with that fetish from those that contain, y'know, just normal babies wearing normal baby things. Probably that should be the tag on the list, rather than diaper.

Toddler can probably be removed since applicable sexual posts SHOULD be filtered anyway by way of the other relevant tags. Last I checked this tag wasn't being used exclusively for sexual images.

I see your point, although I think different people would draw the line differently. What do you think about tentacles? It's currently unblocked, and I wouldn't mind keeping it that way because blocking any image with a squid is absurd to be, but I'm always on the side of less blocking. It is a little surprising to me that tentacle hair doesn't implicate tentacles, which seems like it should be the case according to the wiki definitions.

iridescent_slime said:

There's still a ton of fetish material in diaper -adult_baby, however. Adult baby could probably stand to be better populated but I'd leave the diaper filter in place regardless to be on the safe side.

Also, does safe mode really not block BDSM? That's pretty surprising.

I don't think blocking too many innocent images is "on the safe side", because it means that I would need to disable safe mode too often to read some mangas, etc.

I agree that if safe mode is supposed to block fetishy images then bdsm should be blocked.

aaaaaaaaab said:

I see your point, although I think different people would draw the line differently. What do you think about tentacles? It's currently unblocked, and I wouldn't mind keeping it that way because blocking any image with a squid is absurd to be, but I'm always on the side of less blocking. It is a little surprising to me that tentacle hair doesn't implicate tentacles, which seems like it should be the case according to the wiki definitions.

tentacles is fine; like you said, there are plenty of instances of tentacle hair or creatures with pseudopods that aren't using them in a lewd fashion. Safe Mode should block tags that are /inherently/ sexual, like tags for fetishes, and tags that imply nudity. Everything else should come down to posts being tagged and rated properly, which is the responsibility of the uploader and the tag gardeners.

If, for example, there are enough diaper images with fetish content that aren't being tagged properly, that's something that needs to be addressed community-side, rather than adding an innocuous tag to the banned list. The fact that we've needed both diaper and toddler on the ban list in spite of having plenty of other tags available to filter out abdl and loli content tells me that improper tagging of these subjects hasn't been properly punished.

aaaaaaaaab said:

I agree that if safe mode is supposed to block fetishy images then bdsm should be blocked.

bdsm should definitely be blocked; again, inherently sexual. iirc there was a whole argument about this some years back, and it was agreed that bdsm is different from, say, a character just tied up - which is where the tied up and bound tags came from. (not sure if both of those are still in use)