site banner

Friday Fun Thread for October 2, 2026

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

1
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Second: Someone reading this warning will probably wonder whether this means that gooning material is fair game for the CW thread. It is not. This is a discussion forum for testing shady thinking, not for sharing gooning material. You can talk about the CW, but not wage CW; you can talk about the sociocultural development of gooning (ugh, if you must) but this is not the place to goon.

Third: We will be employing the Supreme Court's own standard in enforcing this rule.

As in, the one about "lack of redeeming value", or just the one about "I know it when I see it"?

Essentially, I'm asking whether you're declaring this to be the kiddy pool (I was kinda under the impression it wasn't, given the 18+ tag exists), or just forbidding random horny drops. ('Cause, y'know, people's sexual preferences do get questioned occasionally in CW-relevant contexts.)

As in, the one about "lack of redeeming value", or just the one about "I know it when I see it"?

In the moderator discussion on this, I leaned toward "I know it when I see it" but probably "lack of redeeming value" is not a bad question to bear in mind, either. Netstack actually got input from several mods on this and, as usual, there was not total agreement on how to handle things, but there was relatively broad accord.

Essentially, I'm asking whether you're declaring this to be the kiddy pool (I was kinda under the impression it wasn't, given the 18+ tag exists), or just forbidding random horny drops. ('Cause, y'know, people's sexual preferences do get questioned occasionally in CW-relevant contexts.)

I guess this depends on what you mean by "kiddy pool"--but I as far as I know we did not implement the 18+ tag, it's just part of the codebase we inherited. Rather, the examples you cite are fine, discussions about e.g. the appropriate age of consent fall squarely within the ambit of the foundation. Actually, in moderator discussion @netstack made another point that isn't in the modpost, that there is a something akin to the "use/reference" distinction here, maybe we can call it the "discussion/exhibition" distinction. We don't ban users for referencing racial slurs, but we will certainly ban users for using them, i.e. for calling one another names (though a lot of unnecessary "referencing" would quickly become obnoxious). Likewise it is permissible to discuss adult topics, certainly. Sex and sexuality are big culture war items! But (say) posting your AI-generated erotica seems more like exhibitionism. It's not the sort of engagement the foundation exists to facilitate.

And really, I wouldn't worry too much about it. As far as I can recall, ToaKraka is literally the only (non-spambot) user who has been a problem in this regard. There is one user (many accounts) who runs afoul of the single-issue posting rule on age-of-consent discussion but it's ToaKraka--who seems to for the most part be a good and even valuable poster--who has been testing boundaries in the Friday Fun thread for a while. People should understand that of course a thread on Culture War is going to sometimes contain discussions of sex and sexuality, including sexual violence, because those are extremely common CW issues. But the Friday Fun thread explicitly forbids those.

I was not actively involved in the discussion the last time this came up, and I think there was some confusion because people were arguing about whether e.g. topics of sexual violence belonged in a "fun" thread, even tangentially, and it became a whole de gustibus non est disputandum thing. But this is actually beside the point. What I want to avoid here is either the substance or appearance of banning topics because some people find them (for want of a better word here...) "triggering." We aren't explicitly kicking this out of the Fun Thread because it's creepy or disturbing or of questionable legality in some jurisdictions. We're kicking it out of the Fun Thread because it's CW.

(But also, yeah, even in the CW thread, a random horny drop would get removed. Perhaps surprisingly, so far I don't think it has ever been tried, modulo again the occasional spambot.)

As far as I can recall, ToaKraka is literally the only (non-spambot) user who has been a problem in this regard.

I've posted links before to horny chats as well. I try to keep them inline, clearly labeled, and the charged content behind the click, but if the rule is a blanket ban, it's something I'll need to avoid as well.

While horny prompts are the only or majority of things I've tried to prompt an AI to write (contrast ARK fanfiction), the specific nexus of politically charged topics, known censorship, and the situation where everyone knows the typical media is poor quality but not what qualities it needs to excel in, has made it a useful barometer.

Well, two of those are CW thread, so, meaningfully different in that regard (as well as being closer to discussion than to exhibition).

The Friday Fun one you specifically leave everything behind a link, which is itself accompanied by unambiguous content warnings... this looks more like discussion than exhibition, to me.

"Hard cases make bad law" should probably be kept carefully in mind, here. This is an edge case of limited precedential value, with a user who seems to be gradually escalating along an increasingly problematic axis.

I guess this depends on what you mean by "kiddy pool"

Well, as mentioned, I dropped the 18+ tag on one of those posts because, um, it would be considered fairly irresponsible to recommend VNs containing tentacle rape to little kids (sure, I'll go to the wall on sex mostly just going over kids' heads, but that's still graphic violence). By "the kiddy pool" I meant "all posts have to be appropriate for kids to see" - particularly when using standards of "appropriate" that are not mine but rather those of actual Anglospheric media-rating boards - and as mentioned I was strongly under the impression that theMotte was not meant to be that (for a variety of reasons including the 18+ tag existing, the general subject matter and rules not really being compatible with your normal 13-year-old's posting style, and my stereotypically-Australian frequency of vulgar language meeting with neither a word filter nor yelling).

"all posts have to be appropriate for kids to see" - particularly when using standards of "appropriate" that are not mine but rather those of actual Anglospheric media-rating boards

No, that's definitely not the standard here.

Honestly, the precise legal status of the Motte raises interesting questions, perhaps especially in connection with Australia, since as far as I know we don't have any age-gating, not even nominally. Is this a "social media" website? Fortunately, I am not in a position to be responsible for any of that, as I am just a moderator--and fortunately for us all, Zorba seems to me unusually brave for a website owner/operator. Almost certainly, we continue to exist in part by dint of just not being a very big website. But it wouldn't surprise me to learn that we are already banned in some geographic locations, or if not, that we would be banned, if only anyone there were to notice us.

Almost certainly, we continue to exist in part by dint of just not being a very big website.

Familiar story; the yandere fandom has had a lot of sites cancelled, neutered or outright cyberattacked when they got noticed, including the one I modded for a few years.

Either way this appears to be a declaration of RIP TheMotte.

Either way this appears to be a declaration of RIP TheMotte.

Welcome to the Motte, an actively dying community since 2019!

No, not dying. Merely evolving into something new, which inevitably involves changes some people view as a loss. It is impossible to please everyone.

It is impossible to please everyone.

True, but I don't think anything is changing in this instance. We're just clarifying a question of permissible practice on a somewhat novel edge case.

I think you misunderstood both my comments here. The change I was referring to was the cumulative change since 2019, of which this particular clarification is just a minor part. The "RIP TheMotte" was a tongue-in-cheek way of pointing out this "clarification" resolves an ambiguity in a direction that makes the forum less personally appealing. Not because it is a major change, but because it is indicative of the direction the wind is blowing. Which to be clear I'm not complaining about--as I said, you can't please everyone.

IIRC this situation involves a multi month long pattern of content posting involving sexual assault and child abuse...in the fun thread.

I don't think thats an unfair mod clarification. It's not like ick stuff is being banned from the CW thread.