Skip to main content

Mature content filter parameter

Feedback

Please restore the option to blur mature content that used to exist in the settings.

Why was it removed ?

We can still blur images one by one, but not globally at the app level anymore, which makes little sense.

This option was very useful not only for users who don’t want to see this kind of content at all, but also for users who occasionally generate NSFW pictures and want to hide them in some context (public transports for example).

Posted by Agathe ·
Status: Need Customer Service6 comments

Log in to comment and vote

Comments6

  • JJJJulio

    Team•

    Mar 24

    Thank you for your feedback. Due to store policy, some works can only be viewed in a web browser. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you.

    • Agathe

      •

      Mar 25

      Your answer is off-topic.

      My message had nothing to do with the app or with censorship.

      I simply asked for the restoration of the ability to hide content through a global setting.

      This option existed before—why was it removed?

  • arca45

    •

    Mar 18

    I wholeheartedly support the proposal to reinstate the original restrictive interpretation, just as it was before. This approach prevented inappropriate or overly explicit content from appearing easily (although it will occasionally slip through due to system errors, as happened a few days ago), thereby avoiding the situations you mentioned, as well as preventing issues with parents and people who are sensitive to that type of content. It would also help in the opposite case—that is, for those of us who have restricted viewing enabled to show adult content—so that all those highly erotic images and full-frontal nudes could be viewed without any restrictions, since currently those images can be seen in the suggestions, but when you actually want to view them properly, they remain restricted. With that initial restricted view, there is no longer any reason to restrict those images, since it served as a filter for the more intense and adult erotic content.

    So, with that initial restricted view, there was a precautionary lock in place for both the first case and the second scenario proposed.

  • Logo de manhã

    •

    Mar 17

    I don't agree, but I don't completely disagree either. The thing is, censorship is what ruined this place; a lot of good characters and content were thrown away, and not all of them were actually sexual. But I prefer that both sexual and non-sexual content remain free. There's no need to censor anything; just add the option to filter content, but without taking down works and characters, just hiding them from prudish people.

    • Agathe

      •

      Mar 17

      In my view, this option has nothing to do with censorship. It is simply about giving users the ability to hide what they want—nothing more.

      One could even argue that it is an alternative to censorship : if each user can act as their own censor, the platform no longer needs to play that role.