0

I had this idea based on this discussion on TGO.

The problem we've there is that we might get a little gross content in hunting questions (suffering animals, butchering etc.). So I thought about how we might could handle that problem with a software feature, especially because other communities may also stumble across similar problems (health with accidents, biology, motor vehicle accidents, pets etc.). I proudly present:

The explicit mark-down

A truly working feature could be a mark-down called explicit. It does basically the same as the spoiler code but hides the content completely for anonymous users. Before the "spoiler panel" a small warning may appear ("Caution, the content in this panel may be inappropriate for certain users." etc.). Additionally, it doesn't appear on "mouse-hover" but on a click (?). Also, if a single piece of explicit mark-down is used, the question automatically gets tagged with . In that way users are able to ignore gross questions without loosing the possibility to see specific topics. Like for example they are able to see hunting-questions without having to read through gross hunting-questions (ignoring but not ).

Example

We've this markdown:

<explicit> foo bar </explicit>
  • A logged in user sees (with the slight difference that he needs to click etc. instead of hover):

This section contains explicit content which may seem to be inappropriated for certain users:

foo bar

  • An anonymous user sees:

This section contains explicit content which may seem to be inappropriated for certain users:

Hidden explicit content - please log in to see the complete question.

And as already said, the asked question automatically gets .

  • 3
    What does preventing non-logged-in users from seeing this content benefit? Why is this necessary? – Catija Aug 18 '16 at 15:09
17

If we do need to hide a possibly gruesome image, we can either use the Spoiler tag, or if we really don't want it on the site, just have it as a link, and annotate with "this links to particularly gory pic - don't click unless you want to see it."

I understand that some people may not like pictures of an animal being cut open, but the above methods mean the pic (and or descriptive text) can be hidden.

This is already used to great effect on a few Stack Exchange sites (Movies, SciFi etc) where it can be used to cover up anything that should remain hidden until the reader decides to uncover it.

We really don't need anything else here - it would be replicating functionality, and for what reason? A very small number of posts.

4

To re-iterate my answer from TGO Meta. Something like this can already by done with existing functionality. If person X doesn't like the content of tag Y (for example ) the can simply hide it:


I don't think an tag is needed. Anyone who doesn't want to see (or any other tag) can edit their favourites to ignore topics.

So in the top right corner, click edit:

enter image description here

Find the tag you want to ignore:

enter image description here

Click add:

enter image description here

These topics are now greyed out in the feed:

enter image description here

You can even specify to "Hide questions of ignored tags":
enter image description here

enter image description here

Then they don't appear at all!

  • 1
    But this is not sufficient for anonymous users and people interested in a specific topic but without the gross parts of it. Especially if you consider questions like the cattle grid. It was a very successful question but I guess nobody expected to see dead cows with serious injuries all over the place :) (and from the comments we can say that they partially didn't want to see pictures like that). That, however, doesn't mean that all the viewers were not interested in the main topic: "What is a cattle grid?" or even the tag "hiking". – OddDev Aug 18 '16 at 8:35
  • 2
    An "explicit" tag would actually work well combined with this "hide questions" feature... although it would indeed require the user to be logged in. It would be a meta-tag however. – S.L. Barth Aug 18 '16 at 9:31

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .