§
Posted: 2015-08-11

Adult content

My experience with this site and userstyles.org has shown me it can be challenging to have a site where

1. People can post what they want
2. The site raises enough money through ads to pay for itself
3. The ads are not obnoxious

Until a few months ago, things were good in all three. However, the advertisers are very particular about being associated with adult content, and I had to drop number 2.

I've tried a few permutations with userstyles.org - not having ads on the pages with adult content (still not acceptable), not having images of or links to adult content (simply mentioning adult sites is not allowed). Eventually I settled on banning adult content in order to keep enough money flowing in to pay the bills.

I don't want to do this on Greasy Fork. So what I'm planning to do is allowing scripts with adult content or for adult content sites, but they must be flagged as such. Those that wish to see such content (or not) can set a setting in their profile. Users who are not logged in will not see adult content on greasyfork.org, but an alternate domain will be set up that will list these scripts.

Scripts affecting certain domains will automatically be flagged as having adult content. Authors will additionally be able to report their script as having adult content or report it as not having adult content (to be reviewed by mods).

I've implemented some portions of this plan today. All users can currently see all scripts. Let me know if you see any problems with the implementation of this or have any objections to the idea in general.

§
Posted: 2015-08-12

Is it not possible (and acceptable) that users that are not logged in are given an option "show adult content" (default off) ? This can be set under the language choice.
For users that log in it can be set in the profile.

§
Posted: 2015-08-13

What I think is that the users who can find this site are power users and can distinguish adult contents. And they have enough ability to let contents they saw inaccessible to their children. So I think a switch is more acceptable.

§
Posted: 2015-08-13
@ladroop: Is it not possible (and acceptable) that users that are not logged in are given an option "show adult content" (default off) ? This can be set under the language choice. For users that log in it can be set in the profile.

Use the alternative domain.

@lychichem: What I think is that the users who can find this site are power users and can distinguish adult contents. And they have enough ability to let contents they saw inaccessible to their children. So I think a switch is more acceptable.

Don't expect everyone is over 18.. Though most of us are.

§
Posted: 2015-08-14

Regarding a not-logged-in switch... Part of this is to be very careful when it comes to how an advertiser's bot can view the page. The advertiser bot would not create an account, flip the switch, then start browsing around. It's fairly likely it could find whatever not-logged-in switch I implemented.

As @JixunMoe says, you would have two options: flip the switch on your account, or visit the alternate domain.

§
Posted: 2015-08-19
§
Posted: 2015-08-19

what's it is ???

§
Posted: 2015-08-19
Users who are not logged in will not see adult content on greasyfork.org, but an alternate domain will be set up that will list these scripts.
§
Posted: 2015-08-20
Edited: 2015-08-20

That's not a little bit excessive ....?

It's the first time i see a site cute into 2 parts for that.

The name "sleazy" you choose is very "aggressive".
- In the Urban dictionary :
sleazy Shabby, dirty, and vulgar, often the word is associated with prostitutes
- With Google in french it mean :sordide, louche, minable, miteux, leger.

But yes , maybe it's a joke since :
greasy Trailer Park Boys definition:
Something that is morally reprehensible / to do with the marginal side of society. "That greasy massage parlor on the corner." [ urbandictionary.com ]


But 2 jokes only for just a site about userscript , it not to much ?

wOxxOmMod
§
Posted: 2015-08-20

I can't see anything wrong with the separation and the name.

§
Posted: 2015-08-20

Seems a bit mental to me. Why not just make people create an account and tick the box if they want to see the adult stuff.

wOxxOmMod
§
Posted: 2015-08-20

Guys, do you read before you post? The switch in account options is already implemented.

§
Posted: 2015-08-20

Yes I know and that works really well, what I'm saying is why do you need the sleazyfork alternative domain... Just tell people who are not logged in or who don't have an account if they want to see the adult content they'll need to log in/create an account and have the adult content box ticked.

§
Posted: 2015-08-21

Well, because not everyone wants to log in, and you wouldn't know it was there in the first place anyway if you had to log in first to see it.

§
Posted: 2015-08-21
Edited: 2015-08-21

How are you going to let people know about the alternative domain?

EDIT: Never mind... Not that it matters to me, my scripts are not adult content, it just seems like you are making a lot of extra work for yourself..

Good luck!

wOxxOmMod
§
Posted: 2015-08-21
Edited: 2015-08-21

The same way anything can be found on the internet: search :-) The majority of people don't come to greasyfork or other userscript-dedicated sites, they just search for the desired behavior like "make something on somesite" and if there's a userscript for that it'll be in the search results.

§
Posted: 2015-08-24

Anonymous users will now no longer see links to adult content scripts in script listings.

§
Posted: 2015-09-02

It's weird that there is a mirror of this thread, perhaps this whole forum, on https://sleazyfork.org/en/forum/discussion/5456/adult-content

§
Posted: 2015-09-02
Edited: 2015-09-02

Adults content, maybe not..
But they are few.
And i continue to think that is not the purpose of this site to hardly filter them:
A line of code can have "adult" content ?
:-)

But if you want filter, I am not interesting about all these Games, Faceboock etc... styles :
Can you give the possibility to filter them ?

And about old request :
Adding a tag system to greasyfork , it's in your "to-do" list ?

And an favorites set for Userstyles too ?

I see many interesting styles and it's hardly to re-find them when i want ....

§
Posted: 2015-09-02
Edited: 2015-09-02
@decembre "favorites set" is already done and working (if I got you right), example: [A random script set](/scripts?set=1654)

Just forget me, I read it completely wrong..

§
Posted: 2015-09-02

Well, you read it how I read it - script sets can (and do) serve as favorites lists, and can be used to browse without seeing certain kinds of styles.

§
Posted: 2015-09-03
Edited: 2015-09-06

Sorry but i know about set: i use them.
I find they are a little bit difficult to make one which exclude facebook etc..
and the most important , we can't search inside this set only.

I think it should be more practical to have a filter directly in the script search.
So we obtain , directly , our results without unexpected match.

I remember a very useful userscript for the defunct Userscript.org:
It enable a direct filter "for popular browser games and social networks as well as scripts that use "foreign" characters in description" :

- userscripts.org Bullshit Filter By kuehlschrank [ USO Mirror ]
- Make 'userscripts.org Bullshit Filter' userscript work for GreasyFork too [ GeasyFork Forum ]

§
Posted: 2015-09-04

It's overwhelming simple to make one that excludes Facebook. This is exactly the kind of thing this was designed for. Go to the screen, say include all sites, exclude facebook.com, there you go.

You are correct that you can't search only within your script set yet.

§
Posted: 2015-09-04

;-)

§
Posted: 2015-09-06
The name "sleazy" you choose is very "aggressive".

LOL. That's what I thought. Very funny but bad at the same time. XD

Why not GreasyMonkey.

@JasonBarnabe

What about sites like Pixiv and DeviantArt, would they be considered adult sites?

§
Posted: 2015-09-06
Edited: 2015-09-06
The name "sleazy" you choose is very "aggressive".

LOL. That's what I thought. Very funny but bad at the same time. XD

Why not GreasyMonkey.

@JasonBarnabe

What about sites like Pixiv and DeviantArt, would they be considered adult sites?

For Pixiv, you have to register an account and specifically enable adult contents, so I'd consider this site as safe.

I'm not sure about DeviantArt though, but I have been digging around on the internet, it told me that I have to have my profile with age 18+ (an account is required).

§
Posted: 2015-09-06

I think DeviantArt is probably fine, as long as you're not directly linking to or posting screenshots of adult content.

§
Posted: 2015-09-07

What about sites like Pixiv and DeviantArt, would they be considered adult sites?

can't we just check what sites are considered adult by google? like in google site analytics or something

§
Posted: 2015-09-07

I wish.

§
Posted: 2015-09-08

You are right. You need to register.

§
Posted: 2015-09-10
Edited: 2015-09-10

It should be noted that greasyfork links no longer redirect to sleazyfork if user is not logged in. It now only says script doesn't exist. Maybe instead it should give a warning and a redirect link to click on?

§
Posted: 2015-09-10

This is necessary for the proper separation of the sites.

§
Posted: 2015-09-10

This is not an acceptable solution. When people visit my scripts, they don't see "you need to log in" or "this script is on another website," they are told the script does not exist.

And why exclude non-adult content from that "adult" website? Pixiv doesn't show porn without an account, but I assure you it does have porn, and a "sleazy" (ugh!) website should list scripts for it. What an absurd name, too - gross and judgemental.

There's no one place people can go to find all my scripts without signing up. There's no one place people can go to find out all my scripts exist without signing up. Can you not even list the unlinked names of scripts that aren't public anymore? Can you not even mention the number of scripts hidden from users? How squeaky-clean do we have to be if we can't acknowledge when content is being censored?

If your primary concern is spiders... just don't use links. ArchiveOfOurOwn.org hides explicit content behind a button. Archive.org thus does not preserve that content, even though they'd very much like to. I and many others would gladly help you keep these scripts visible to well-informed humans without tipping off the purse-clutching advertisers.

§
Posted: 2015-09-11

What I've done is what I think is necessary based on my past dealings with advertisers. Even the mere mention (not even link) of a porn site can set them off. It's stupid, but this is the least bad solution I can think of.

§
Posted: 2015-09-11

You are correct that the message you would see is confusing. I'll update that to give people a bit more of a clue what's up.

§
Posted: 2015-09-11

The new message is slightly more informative, but remains inaccurate. These scripts are still available here (or else account settings wouldn't matter). Bluntly telling people that it's censored and they need an account to view it would be more useful to users. "No longer publicly available" or "no longer anonymously available" would do in a pinch.

This still does not explain why the other site hides non-adult scripts. Surely you could link from there to here.

If my public page here doesn't so much as number the scripts which are hidden, my incentives are to mark all scripts "adult" and point anonymous users to the other site exclusively. I don't know how to say "neither of us want that" without sounding confrontational, but I need to convey that this situation is suboptimal. Script-writers promoting SleazyFork would deny you the advertising revenue you set up that site to protect. Even a cliche Captcha on the not-logged-in adult flag (to stop bots from noticing certain scripts) would be preferable.

§
Posted: 2015-09-11

I've tweaked it to include "anonymously" for users who are not logged in.

Sleazy does not have non-sleazy scripts to avoid duplication of content. I could for example link from there to here in lists, I suppose, if that wasn't confusing as to why you suddenly switched domains. Maybe on the user page ("this user also has X scripts on Greasy Fork")?

I think you're overestimating the number of users who would be looking specifically for scripts by you. I think the overwhelming majority would be searching by site or keyword, and having the scripts remain on Greasy would be best for your to reach the most people.

§
Posted: 2015-09-11

Thank you.

Maybe on the user page ("this user also has X scripts on Greasy Fork")?

That's basically what I'm asking for. Well, that and the reverse, even if you can't explicitly say "on Sleazy Fork."

I'm not clear why switching domains would be a big deal if it's switching from the skeezy mirror site to the reputable one which makes you money. Would most people even notice? The site designs are basically identical. (The forums there even use the "Greasy Fork" header.)

I think you're overestimating the number of users who would be looking specifically for scripts by you.

I point people to my user page because all my scripts promote basically the same purpose. It's a useful and convenient page design. I also check the user pages of authors whose scripts I install, because their interests are obviously useful to me. You would have the traffic data to say this is unusual, but based on the thousand-odd people who care about the scripts that I wrote for myself and share here for others' convenience, I can't be unique.

When users search for a site that's automatically "adult," will they be told so, or simply shown zero results?

§
Posted: 2015-09-14

Duplicate content/mirror site is not good for the SEO, from what I know..?

§
Posted: 2015-09-15

That's one reason.

I've added links from Sleazy to Greasy if there are scripts available there.

§
Posted: 2015-12-18

It should be enough to just have a checkbox linked to a form that you need to submit in order to confirm that you are 18+. No bot should ever submit an HTML form.

Also, if the problem is that there are links to adult sites, just stop linking to the includes. Though, I guess that it's not ok to have the links in text format either. :(

Most of the pages that my script is used on are not adult sites, and it would be a tedious process to sort them all out.

§
Posted: 2016-07-29

One year out, the impact of this division is unmistakable: https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/4713-eza-s-image-glutton/stats

This is an obstacle to users. The language of "no longer available" is misleading, and there's still no official mention of the mirror site. The mirror site itself remains subpar because it doesn't name the scripts on the main site. Unless someone is already informed about this schism, the site does nothing to help them find these scripts, and the content will be a complete surprise if they choose to sign up - even if they were directly linked to a script's page.

Please - please - just hide ad-free "adult" pages behind a button. The current solution does not work. I know it's not guiding people to what they're looking for, and I'd bet it's not increasing traffic.

Post reply

Sign in to post a reply.