[–]flyawayhigh[S]0 points
0 points
0 points
(+0|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
I agree. I'm an expert too.
>"We'll still allow nudity if the content offers a substantial public benefit, for example in artistic, educational, documentary, or scientific contexts," explained in the Google support page.
Google has the categories all wrong though. Compare.
>On flyhighblog.com, we'll still allow nudity if it happens to be the particular fetishes we enjoy, and only if the content promotes a substantial flight, for example in extra towels, or if we break scientific orgasm records.
[–] flyawayhigh [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
For those of us at Voat who oppose excessive censorship, I have a few concerns.
Who is Google to decide unilaterally, without discussion, what is "sexually explicit" or otherwise suitable for a long-standing public blog site?
Where is a process of review or appeal before Google decides to suddenly knock thousands or more sites off of the public internet?
Does Google have experts in this area of concern? Who are they?
Here is a copy of the Blogger.com announcement
[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
[–] flyawayhigh [S] ago (edited ago)
I agree. I'm an expert too.
>"We'll still allow nudity if the content offers a substantial public benefit, for example in artistic, educational, documentary, or scientific contexts," explained in the Google support page.
Google has the categories all wrong though. Compare.
>On flyhighblog.com, we'll still allow nudity if it happens to be the particular fetishes we enjoy, and only if the content promotes a substantial flight, for example in extra towels, or if we break scientific orgasm records.
Now, that's a true benefit.