The Daily Fail

Hobius.com is a recently opened social network-thingy, although it’s almost entirely inhabited by Russians despite being in English, and I get an impression that most of its users are its founder and followers of his blog. (Well, when a user makes advertisements like this and thinks it’s a smart PR move, I’m frankly not surprised.)

Yesterday, its founder’s blog linked to a page there. I followed the link and saw an explicit picture from a category named “girls”. I looked there and saw just about what I expected: NSFW photos in varying degrees of nudity with objectifying comments.

I asked the founder to add content tags, so that 18+ content would only be enabled with the user’s explicit consent.

His response? “You have issues on the grounds of sexual lesbian perversions (including feminism)”.

Frag Count +1

So, there’s this Russian wiki about the wikisphere, and it has a vote for featured picture to be put on the front page. One guy posted a fetishized picture (NSFW), titling it “the abstract-collective image of the Russian Wikipedia female administrator”.

The conversation went like this:

Uploader: For. What kind of sane person would be against?
Me: Against. Too oversexualized for the main page.
Uploader: What kind of criteria is that? A picture of a woman on the front page, and not just on the front page, must not be vulgar and provocative. As long as these criteria are met, it cannot be “too oversexualized”. The more, the better. The only people this picture can scare away are homos.
Me: It is vulgar, and offensive at that. No comment on your definition of “a sane person”.
Uploader: Excuse me, are you a woman by any chance? To be honest, I didn’t think about whether the image would be liked by the fair sex.

I only wish I could reply “not helping your cause”, but soon he was permabanned by an administrator for an unrelated reason, that is, waging a revert war on a different page. Good night, sweet prince.