Prude alert: Sexually explicit wm themes in emerge

scalded · n00b Joined: 13 May 2004 Posts: 68 Location: US

I don't understand why you people brought up censorship. Censorship is basically holding everyone to guidelines as to what they can say and enjoy. Adding "offensive" flags to packages is giving people a choice, otherwise it's forcing them to have stuff they don't want, which is like bizarro-censorship. Just add offensive to your make.conf USE if you want to get naked chick wm themes.
_________________
"...In the year 2005, mankind will face times of great suffering and oppression..." - Vote Arnold 2006, if you want to live.

asimon · Posted: Sat Jun 19, 2004 4:59 pm Post subject:

BTW, in bugzilla there is already a request to add the offensive USE flag to xscreensaver package but this was never done.

Mos · Posted: Sat Jun 19, 2004 9:10 pm Post subject:

Hey guys,

censoring content is something you should really think deeply about before acting. Most of us live in countries that have been fighting censorship for ages and we finally succeeded. Please don't put us back to Middel Ages - when censoring nudity, we should also censor a whole lot of others things.

My personal opinion (which is widely spread in at least my country) is that nudity is nothing to be afraid of. People haven't been born with clothes. Nudity is beautiful, and believe me: kids don't get evil diseases looking at it :wink:

.

But I know this opinion is not shared among the globe, there are countries in which nudity is totally taboo. So a "offensive" flag can be appropriate, but please, don't censor.

just my two coins...

nrl · Guru Joined: 27 Mar 2003 Posts: 446 Location: Glasgow, UK

It's not censorship; it's more akin to ratings on films so that people have an idea of what the content will be like before they watch it. I think it is perfectly reasonable for a user to expect to be able to install a "work safe" distribution without having to manually delete stuff.

Anyway the "offensive" USE flag has been about for ages and the documentation claims that if it isn't set the user won't get "potentially offensive material" so I think packages should be brought into line with that claim.

Pigeon · Guru Joined: 21 Jun 2002 Posts: 307

Sqeaky · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 31 Dec 2003 Posts: 149

I agree that completly removing the nudity/art completly is not a good solution but making the package obey the offensive flag would be good.

There are some people who feel nudity is wrong, we should give them the choice. If others want it then they can have the themes. Remember Linux, especially gentoo, is all about choice.

stonent · Veteran Joined: 07 Aug 2003 Posts: 1139 Location: Texas

Hmm. So when do we get an ebuild for Gnaughty?
:lol:

_________________
Inspiron 4100 & Sun UltraAXe
Portage on Solaris|Dell Laptop Hacks
The way you feel about organized religion is the same way I feel about organized socialism.

Squinky86 · Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2004 2:32 pm Post subject:

This issue was first brought up here: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23635

The main items for discussion are:

What is appropriate for an office-like setting? This will enable Gentoo to be further embraced by corporations.
Can we all agree that one method is acceptable without offending anyone?
Can we make everyone happy by applying certain settings?
What warrants offensive?

Answers:

This is certainly inappropriate. As a male, I would certainly get sidetracked from my work quite often . This is certainly not etiquite the gentoo community nor its developers would like to portray.
Yes, no one is offended with the regular windowmaker themes and (most of) the fortunes (though there are a couple that I think should still be removed, they're not bad enough to warrant bug reports or me yelling at anyone).
Yes! The "offensive" USE flag has been in portage for a fairly long time. It was first used by fortune-mod, and later by gaim-smileys, and now it is used by choad and sword-modules.
This is where some lines need to be drawn. Clearly from discussions, nudity, explicit sexual remarks, and excessive profanity have been considered possibly offensive by users:

ralph wrote:

Seriously, if these kind of things could get you fired in the US this is a problem and should be resolved.

minimizebeefgoo wrote:

Some people have kids.

This is not about censorship, it's about applying settings to packages that everyone can agree upon. I am strongly against pornography, personally, but I am in no way responsible for if you chose to download and install it. I will not, however, be responsible for putting such packages into portage (by default, without an "offensive" flag) and offending more than a handful of users. The issue at hand is not censorship, as the user still has the ability to download and install possibly offensive add-ons manually, it's making Gentoo an acceptable and fully-featured operating system for all users, whether it be in a corporate or home sense.
_________________
Me

Nahor · n00b Joined: 05 Jun 2003 Posts: 51

playfool · Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2004 9:10 pm Post subject:

censorship just sucks, let's stop the religious right from setting the other of the day for once should we?

scalded · n00b Joined: 13 May 2004 Posts: 68 Location: US

placeholder · Advocate Joined: 07 Feb 2004 Posts: 2500

I'm from the US and hate censorship. Of course, I'm apple that fell very far from the American tree so I can see how dumb things are around me. To all people strongly against pornography, I say that you should screw off and let people do what they want since I'm sure you don't want your freedoms taken away either. If everyone constantly worries about little things, they'll get nuked and not know why because they left their head under a rock worrying about what people jerk off too. :roll:

Anyway, that's besides the point I suppose. Maybe there should be things sectioned off since not all females want to see stuff like that. :wink:

DataPath · n00b Joined: 20 Sep 2003 Posts: 31

I think f you asked most people who are themselves against pornography, you'll probably find that most of them don't care if OTHERs look at it, they just choose not to look at it themselves.

Just let people have their views without going all crazy about it. Seriously. That includes people who choose not to drink, choose not to vote, choose not to... whatever.

Me, I'm all about choice, so giving people the explicit (pun intended) choice of what to include in an install (if enough people care about it - we don't need a zillion use flags, but this one wouldn't even add a new use flag) is a Good Thing. Forcing people one way or another is a Bad Thing.

npmccallum · Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2004 3:29 am Post subject:

viperlin · Veteran Joined: 15 Apr 2003 Posts: 1319 Location: UK

it's easily solved with an offensive use flag :-)

Stormy Eyes · Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2004 2:47 pm Post subject:

I agree with Viperlin. Use the offensive flag for all materials that might be NSFW, and let the users decide.

viperlin · Veteran Joined: 15 Apr 2003 Posts: 1319 Location: UK

Sandlord · n00b Joined: 07 Jun 2002 Posts: 69

[quote="npmccallum"]

jj11888 · n00b Joined: 28 Apr 2004 Posts: 36

MAJOR problem:

It is legal for a minor in the US to download and install the offensive fortunes. However, if a minor installs window maker with 'offensive', then he/she is volating the law

For that reason I think we should have differant 'adult' and 'offensive' USE flags, as people can still get any offensive gaim smilies or fortunes without having portage break the law for them when they go to install window maker

flickerfly · l33t Joined: 08 Nov 2002 Posts: 677 Location: Lanham, MD

How is giving users a choice between receving and not receiving offensive content considered censorship (using the offensive USE flag)? You make your choice and I'll make mine. If the offensive flag isn't in place, then I can't make my choice and your choice is pushed on me. That isn't what Gentoo is about. It is about flexibility.

In the future if a package can't be seperated from it's offensive content then it should be marked offensive as a whole and if I choose to override it because I need parts of it, that choice should also be mine. You all know it would be a cinch to get around which is why I wouldn't give portage access to my kids.

I'll not accept such a "moral compass" being pushed upon me and my family, but I'm not going to push mine on you, despite that fact that I'm fully convinced of the gross dehumanizing of women that it entails.

Basically, if the choice is taken away from one side or another, does it morally matter to Gentoo which side loses out? I suggest that removing the option from either side is censorship, but not allowing the option of a choice is simply an option.
_________________
An Evil Genious' Guide to Sheeple and How To Avoid Becoming One | 0x4C9EF4A

flickerfly · l33t Joined: 08 Nov 2002 Posts: 677 Location: Lanham, MD

motub · Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2004 3:22 pm Post subject:

Oh for pete's sake, people.

It's obvious that, that no matter what your view on nudes on your desktop wallpaper, we're all quite clear on the fact that:

1) some find it offensive
2) in some situations it is illegal
3) it is not appropriate for every situation.

That's all we need to know, as clearly the developers of Gentoo can not know which, if any, of these conditions applies to each individual user who might install this package.

But since we all do know that we each have the right to make an informed choice about the software we decide to install, this package/ebuild is a clear problem, because you could not make an informed choice -- the package itself contained potentially offensive material, and the ebuild did not use the accepted mechanism to filter such material if you chose to use that filter.

However, on reading the Bugzilla entry for this issue it appears that this problem occurred in the first place because this is not an "official" package/ebuild (which presumably would have used the "offensive" flag), but a "a user generated ebuild of just random themes ", and the user who generated it didn't think much about the fact that others might have been in radically different situations from (his) own.

The "offensive" themes were simply removed, which was admittedly not necessarily the most elegant solution philosophically speaking, but was certainly faster and more expedient than 1) hashing over unrelated "morality" issues for any length of time; or 2) using "official" developer time to fix an "unofficial" ebuild, and search the package for what has to be removed for the -offensive flag to work, etc.

Give me a break. If Gentoo is about choice, then the original ebuild did not give you the right to choose, and if you want to choose now, then go search the damn wps with the naked chicks on DeviantArt (for digital chicks) or pretty much anywhere else (for actresses and models in sexy or revealing poses) and slap them on your desktop if you want them. It's not like they're so terribly hard to find.
_________________
Holly
--Why not adopt an unanswered post?--