Nexusmods Changing Policies on Adult Content

[Grey Cloud]

3 hours ago, Gukahn said:

Guys, I understand wanting A new Nexus but  LL was never supposed to be nor should it. Remember mainstream means: 99% of your favorite LL mods would get banned over on nexus not because they care, but because as a mainstream legitimate business it can't afford to have them 🤔  Also.. Laws. I dunno where LL's server is based but depending on that, Ashal will have to obligate to the same law as Nexus has so even if it were somehow possible it would be pointless. 

So stop daydreaming.(It's not even the first time new laws get people into panic mode.. Just wait what happens and archive the mods you want to have in Just case scenario like always.) 

This post is far too sensible for this thread. 😀

[Wandering_Mania]

On 7/1/2025 at 10:42 AM, Grey Cloud said:

Perhaps that is the point. If people aren't prepared to provide ID then the porn site loses customers - revenue falls - some companies go bump - porn industry shrinks - the world's a better place.

"Better"? That's kind of a 'relative term'. What's 'better' to one person, is 'worse' to another.

As far as I see it, it's just yet not another way to try and push control over what the population is able to access.

1. The Governments don't want people to access something that they can not take a large part of the money from in the form of 'lobbying/bribes'. Mostly because the porn industry doesn't want to give them their money.
2. The Governments punish said industry with overbearing restrictions in the form of 'ID required, even over the net', which drives people away.
3.  The porn industry makes less money, and possibly shuts down.
4. And lastly the government has won a "war" that no one could see was even happening.

But I can see what others can not. And now I've told all y'all here. So you know as well.

[Grey Cloud]

Ah. Another conspiracy theory (or is it two theories?) presented without any supporting evidence.

 

19 minutes ago, Wandering_Mania said:

As far as I see it, it's just yet not another way to try and push control over what the population is able to access.

1. The Governments don't want people to access something that they can not take a large part of the money from in the form of 'lobbying/bribes'. Mostly because the porn industry doesn't want to give them their money.

And what do governments want the people to access?

[Count Chocula]

1 hour ago, Dark Spectre said:

Some people can't take a hint.  Just move on, like I did.

Well, we all know the internet has no shortage of people who like to disagree simply for the sake of disagreeing.

 

And despite my pooh-poohing the notion earlier, I guess this kind of thing is going to come to whatever jurisdiction Loverslabs is subject to. So I wonder this. How is a small-scale site like Loverslabs going to deal with it? Are they going to hope to just slip under the radar, as the quoted pornbiz blog implied small porn sites can do? I have no doubt age verification beyond clicking a button isn't free, whether a site does it themselves or off-loads it to a third party.

[Cookiemonsta234]

7 hours ago, john0sim said:

This is what the Adult tag is being split into:

• Pornographic
• Extreme Violence
• Harmful substances
• Suicide
• Self-harm
• Depression
• Body stigma
• Eating disorders
• Swearing or Profanity
• Sexualised 

Some of these are extremely subjective and they haven't gone into any detail about at what point content could fall into them.

 

How did depression make the list???

 

Edited July 3, 2025 by Cookiemonsta234

[Count Chocula]

1 minute ago, Cookiemonsta234 said:

How did depression make the list???

Seriously?

[Dark Spectre]

5 minutes ago, Count Chocula said:

Well, we all know the internet has no shortage of people who like to disagree simply for the sake of disagreeing.

 

And despite my pooh-poohing the notion earlier, I guess this kind of thing is going to come to whatever jurisdiction Loverslabs is subject to. So I wonder this. How is a small-scale site like Loverslabs going to deal with it? Are they going to hope to just slip under the radar, as the quoted pornbiz blog implied small porn sites can do? I have no doubt age verification beyond clicking a button isn't free, whether a site does it themselves or off-loads it to a third party.

Hopefully, LL can just avoid the whole thing altogether and remain as is.  Besides, this place can never replace the Nexus, despite how some want it to.

[HentaiGnome]

21 minutes ago, Count Chocula said:

Well, we all know the internet has no shortage of people who like to disagree simply for the sake of disagreeing.

 

And despite my pooh-poohing the notion earlier, I guess this kind of thing is going to come to whatever jurisdiction Loverslabs is subject to. So I wonder this. How is a small-scale site like Loverslabs going to deal with it? Are they going to hope to just slip under the radar, as the quoted pornbiz blog implied small porn sites can do? I have no doubt age verification beyond clicking a button isn't free, whether a site does it themselves or off-loads it to a third party.

 

Imo these are the likely scenarios:

 

a) LL team does nothing. Whether it's because they're confident enough that they can risk going under the radar, or because they're based in a location where the laws don't apply, or because they simply don't care. 

 

b) Age Verification is implemented in some form. Hopefully, if this is the case, they can go the Eporner or xHamster route where real ID is "allegedly" not required. I say that in quotes because I don't have accounts with either one so I have no way of proving this to be true.

 

c) They simply block users region by region based on their laws. For example, a number of "red" states in the US cannot access Pornhub anymore without some kind of VPN or bypassing method. They claim that you can access their site as long as you verify your age, but even then there does not seem to be a working link available to proceed with that process. Needless to say, this method will drastically reduce the site's population and traffic.

[Cookiemonsta234]

On second thought yea I get it

Edited July 3, 2025 by Cookiemonsta234

[Count Chocula]

1 hour ago, Dark Spectre said:

Hopefully, LL can just avoid the whole thing altogether and remain as is.  Besides, this place can never replace the Nexus, despite how some want it to.

I don't see how they can, if age verification requirements are coming to a jurisdiction near you.

[Count Chocula]

1 hour ago, HentaiGnome said:

Imo these are the likely scenarios:

 

b) Age Verification is implemented in some form. Hopefully, if this is the case, they can go the Eporner or xHamster route where real ID is "allegedly" not required. I say that in quotes because I don't have accounts with either one so I have no way of proving this to be true.

I wonder how those sites "allege" ID is not required. Maybe they are located in a jurisdiction that allows them to thumb their nose and EU/UK/US laws?

[Wandering_Mania]

4 hours ago, Grey Cloud said:

And what do governments want the people to access?

Governments, are made of people. And those people want power. Anyone who possibly threatens that power, with wealth, weapons, or anything really; Those people in the governments, try to stop at all costs. Weather it be via extortion*, threats of 'heavy handed regulation'**, or outright raids***.

This "conspiracy theory" as you so call it, if it can indeed so be called that; Has shown itself true over and over again in the past 40 - 50 years.

 

*This UK/EU law. Enacted in a time with a shrinking population of children on the planet, and a rapidly declining birthrate globally.

**Like the 'Loot Box fiasco' with EA. Granted EA made fools of themselves trying the 'Outdate the outrage' tactic by renaming them 'Surprise Mechanics'.

***See the story about 'Waco TX' for an example of that one.

 

It's simple pattern recognition, and easily recognizable. If you know a bit about, and can remember history.

So it's not really that far of a grasp. Power. It's always about power. And in today's world; Money IS power.

[Punkin']

It's also that if they're gonna turn a profit on advertising they want to look all squeaky clean.  Some payment processors have rather bizarre rules, so it might be tied to that.  Or just a general "corporate" move, which seems par for the course.

 

Unfortunately, though there's a time and place for sanitized, family-friendly content, in general, modding isn't it, and this heavy-handedness of requesting personal identification in a time of deep distrust of institutions and when data breaches are so widespread is even under the most favorable view a hilariously tone-deaf and bad move.  Best case.

 

Crying "but the children!" or "national security!" is usually how they get these things shoved through, and should be recognized as the bad-faith argument it is by anyone but a troll or non-genuine actor.

[---nikoli]

I personally have no issues with it. I don't care what others opinions are of my internet perusals until they attempt to ban it entirely. 

 

Although I do find it hilarious, almost universally across the globe, they condemn the naked body, slapping an R or X rating on it but only slap a G or a PG-13 on violence, where you can routinely see the graphic slaughter, murder and/or evisceration of people, movies and video games alike.

Edited July 4, 2025 by ---nikoli

[Count Chocula]

1 hour ago, ---nikoli said:

I personally have no issues with it. I don't care what others opinions are of my internet perusals until they attempt to ban it entirely. 

It's not about someone looking at a list of all the naughty things you look at on or download from the internet. It's about it becoming easier for nefarious actors to potentially get their grubby paws on your personal data. It's not true you have no issues with that.

 

A cynic ascribes self-serving motives to others. Your attitude does not seem like that of a cynic, despite your avatar label being "Cynic."

[Miauzi]

Vor 2 Stunden sagte ---nikoli:

Ich persönlich habe damit kein Problem. Die Meinung anderer zu meinen Internet-Eindrücken ist mir egal, bis sie versuchen, sie gänzlich zu verbieten. 

 

Obwohl ich es zum Totlachen finde, verurteilen sie fast überall auf der Welt den nackten Körper und geben ihm die Altersfreigabe R oder X, aber nur Gewalt, bei der man regelmäßig grafische Darstellungen von Abschlachtungen, Morden und/oder der Ausweidung von Menschen sieht, sei es in Filmen oder Videospielen, mit G oder PG-13.

 

Suppressing sexuality creates frustration – this frustration needs an outlet... "Blood and Violence" has always been a good way to do this.

 

Just look back at the European Middle Ages... public baths were banned (because both sexes lay naked in the bathtub together) - instead, there were the most gruesome and bloodiest rituals of public executions -> "crushing on the wheel" and "disemboweling"... and these executions were pure "folk festivals" - the children were placed on the shoulders of the adults so they could see better.

 

Why do we need a lowering of the age of violence?

Why can you join the military at 16, but only at 21 can you celebrate your "kills" with a beer in a pub with your comrades?

[Pamatronic]

Oh dear... the tin foil hat brigade really is going all out this time, huh?
Shout-out to @Grey Cloud for trying to preserve some Sanity in this Loonieland.

But please go on everybody. its really entertaining 👍

[Grey Cloud]

6 hours ago, Wandering_Mania said:

Governments, are made of people.

Well no shit Sherlock. The rest of that paragraph is just a badly written collection of gibberish. 

 

6 hours ago, Wandering_Mania said:

This "conspiracy theory" as you so call it, if it can indeed so be called that; Has shown itself true over and over again in the past 40 - 50 years.

So again I ask for examples. 

 

6 hours ago, Wandering_Mania said:

*This UK/EU law. Enacted in a time with a shrinking population of children on the planet, and a rapidly declining birthrate globally.

**Like the 'Loot Box fiasco' with EA. Granted EA made fools of themselves trying the 'Outdate the outrage' tactic by renaming them 'Surprise Mechanics'.

***See the story about 'Waco TX' for an example of that one.

WTF

 

6 hours ago, Wandering_Mania said:

It's simple pattern recognition, and easily recognizable. If you know a bit about, and can remember history.

I know a lot of history. Once more I ask for examples.

 

You posted a load of poorly written nonsense that has nothing to do with the question I asked, i.e. the question you quoted at the top of your post.

[Count Chocula]

1 hour ago, Pamatronic said:

Oh dear... the tin foil hat brigade really is going all out this time, huh?
Shout-out to @Grey Cloud for trying to preserve some Sanity in this Loonieland.

But please go on everybody. its really entertaining 👍

Not as entertaining as your vague allusions are vague.

[Gukahn]

13 hours ago, Grey Cloud said:

This post is far too sensible for this thread. 😀

Seems that way. o_o

 

[Wandering_Mania]

5 hours ago, Grey Cloud said:

So again I ask for examples.

You ask for examples, then say "WTF" at the examples. Okay...

Seems to me like you don't really want examples, you want proof that you can use to prove that I'm wrong; When I'm clearly not.

And then you go so far as to criticize the way I try to explain it.

 

It's not my fault if you choose to stay blinded to the truth; And refuse to see what has been laid out bare. Good day Sir.

[Grey Cloud]

1 hour ago, Wandering_Mania said:

You ask for examples, then say "WTF" at the examples. Okay...

Seems to me like you don't really want examples, you want proof that you can use to prove that I'm wrong; When I'm clearly not.

And then you go so far as to criticize the way I try to explain it.

 

It's not my fault if you choose to stay blinded to the truth; And refuse to see what has been laid out bare. Good day Sir.

You posted:

"As far as I see it, it's just yet not another way to try and push control over what the population is able to access.

1. The Governments don't want people to access something that they can not take a large part of the money from in the form of 'lobbying/bribes'. Mostly because the porn industry doesn't want to give them their money."

 

In response to that I asked:

"And what do governments want the people to access?"

To which you responded with gibberish which didn't go anywhere near addressing my question.

 

In my response to that post I asked for examples of:

"This "conspiracy theory" as you so call it, if it can indeed so be called that; Has shown itself true over and over again in the past 40 - 50 years."

and

"It's simple pattern recognition, and easily recognizable. If you know a bit about, and can remember history."

 

My WTF was my response to:

"*This UK/EU law. Enacted in a time with a shrinking population of children on the planet, and a rapidly declining birthrate globally.

**Like the 'Loot Box fiasco' with EA. Granted EA made fools of themselves trying the 'Outdate the outrage' tactic by renaming them 'Surprise Mechanics'.

***See the story about 'Waco TX' for an example of that one."

 

You are now claiming that this was your examples.

The UK/EU law. What has a shrinking population have to do with anything? 

The loot box fiasco. I have absolutely no idea what this has to do with anything.

Waco TX. Are you referring to the Branch Davidians cult massacre or whatever it was? Again any connection with what is being stated in this thread is beyond me.

 

Edited July 4, 2025 by Grey Cloud

[SXertui01]

If you're a modder, stop posting on Nexus. They'll destroy everything soon.

[Wandering_Mania]

Grey Cloud,

You wanted examples, and glossed over them; That a you problem, learn to read better.

You didn't like the examples when I pointed them out to you; That's a you problem.

You criticized how I attempted to explain it; Then you can't even multi-quote properly. The pendulum can swing both ways.

 

I'm done with this convo. You don't want to have a rational conversation. You only use bad faith statements.

Good Day Sir. I said GOOD DAY!

[Grey Cloud]

18 minutes ago, Wandering_Mania said:

You didn't like the examples when I pointed them out to you;

What are they supposed to be examples of? You failed to give any example of anything which supported any of your assertions or any logical answer to any of my questions. UK/EU law vis-à-vis shrinking populations; EA and loot boxes; and Waco TX was the best you could come up with.

 

19 minutes ago, Wandering_Mania said:

You criticized how I attempted to explain it; Then you can't even multi-quote properly.

That is a non sequitur. Not sure why multi-quoting is relevant or needed but just because I didn't multi-quote doesn't mean I can't.

 

45 minutes ago, Wandering_Mania said:

You only use bad faith statements

Examples?