Naktiv Admins

It’s a curious thing about freedom, and policing and moderation, it seems the balance is very difficult to get right. Too strict a patriachical hand and cries of “censorship” are heard. Too lax a hand and cries of “perverts” are heard.  This is of course a huge topic, especially for naturists, touching as it does on freedom of personal expression, my opinion as opposed to your opinion, social morality, online conduct and so forth.

Take for instance the Naktiv site, built originally to provide a safe place for people to post and share their naturist and non-sexual naked content because Faceache was and still is such a haven of puritan censorship. We used to have a team of moderators to “watch the content”, and the amount of arguments between the moderators as to what was deemed “suitable content” for the Naktiv site was extraordinary. You’d think it’d be easy, everyone would agree, and we’d be able to ban the porno accounts and keep the naturist content. No, no, no, political correctness comes into every decision. Is the moderator being anti-gay, anti-male, anti-female, anti-trans…? Is the membership anti-trans, anti-… well, you get the idea. Never was a mill pond more disturbed than by the raging fervour of the righteous moderator.

The latest furor over Tumblr banning all nudity, and following the likes of Faceache, Flickr et al, is another in a long line of major social media networks which remove naturists and the free-to-be-naked contingent from mainstream media. MeWe which is everyone’s current favourite will probably follow suit in it’s own sweet time, when it’s big enough to be noticed by the puritan corporate fist.

At the Naktiv site, we have moved on to a more egalitarian moderation model. Every site member has the facility to report every other member and their content for being “unsuitable”, if necessary. Wait, unsuitable for whom/what/why? Well, the Naktiv site has a Mission Statement and a set of Rules, which of course everyone has read, and agreed to, when they signed up, it’s part of the process. If your posted content runs foul of the latter, then you run the risk of the content being flagged (reported), perhaps removed and perhaps having your account suspended. Mostly this strikes fear into spread-legs waggling-cock brigade, and it’s not really very complicated. Still, you’d be surprised at how many outraged responses the site receives from people who have been called out for posting inappropriate content (which is clearly defined in the fairly short page of Rules). Which approach is the better, do you think, what is the solution for online social media networks like Naktiv who explicitly include naturists in their remit? How should we deal with offenders? Should it be a free-for-all, anyone can post anything, or should there be some kind of filtering in-place, tailored to the community?

The question remains: who do you think, if anyone, should control online content and how?

Repeatedly, we have to cull images and members (no pun intended) here.

We’ve had a spate of dodgy posts recently against which we’ve been forced to take action, this is a recurring problem. Usually the worst offenders are the ones posting “me and my penis” images, firstly as if nobody else has ever seen one before, and secondly as if we all want to see theirs. The kinds of image referred to here commonly take the form of “me and my penis in my bedroom” and “me and my penis on my bed” and “me and my penis in the bathroom/shower/toilet” and “me and my penis between my spread wide open legs with the camera at my feet” and “me and my penis…” well, you probably get the idea.

When these images are removed, very often we receive complaints of the form “why did you remove my harmless nude photo – are you a fascist?”, well, when you’ve posted 20 or 30 selfies of “me and my penis and…” it gets a bit boring, so we will respond by removing the majority fairly fast, and the others where deemed necessary. As you’d expect, when one image is reported we naturally tend to check the rest from that user too. And no, we won’t be explaining each and every removal in tiresome detail.

The excitement of posting an inane penis selfie online is tempered directly by the boredom with which it is received by other site users. It’s not a problem of nudity, it’s a problem of the obsession with “me and my penis…”, and it’s really not that complicated. These forms of images, and associated accounts, which consistently abuse the facilities of this website, will be removed, if not immediately then shortly after they’re reported. We’re not Faceache, sometimes it takes us a little time, but rest assured all reports are taken seriously. Use a little common sense, rather than letting your penis do the thinking, and we’ll all get along a lot better.

We have a short and handy page of RULES, please read it.

Cheers

Your friendly neighbourhood admin and moderators team.

The Naktiv site will be undergoing a major overhaul/upgrade at the start of December 2017.

Alongside a complex data backup and migration phase, we hope to be bringing several new and useful features to our social media networking site, (where being Naked Online is OK). Please don't expect a magic box on the first day, there will be a reduced functionality for the first short period. Once the data migration is complete, and the basic infrastructure back in place, new facilities will be added steadily. The basic process looks like this:

1. Data and software migration (mid-December)
2. Basic functionality in place – you will need to reset/request new password on first login!
3. Check media permissions and usability <- stable/bugfix period
4. Ongoing enhancements 2018+

Please note that while the transition is planned to go smoothly, anything might happen on the day, so your understanding and patience is appreciated. There will no doubt be some dissatisfied souls, as change can be difficult. However, we expect the improvements to be well worth the effort and the disturbance, and once we're over the challenge of the initial hurdle, bugfixes and oops-corrections and the like, we hope to be able to bring additional and much needed functionality steadily to the site.

Looking forward to it!

The contents of this blog have been moved from the original site-policy <a href="http://www.naktiv.net/blog/824/on-and-off-site-related-behaviour/">blog</a>, because people were confusing the actual issue with the hot-topic example. Here is the original blog content:

The moderators sometimes receive reports concerning members off-site activities, and it's probably useful to clarify site policy on this point. We are not the FBI and have neither the interest, nor the resources to police people's behaviour off-site. Policy has always been that we are concerned with member behaviour on THIS site, and not on any other.

Let's take a specific case in hand. Brian Taylor was not just accused, but also convicted in court, of downloading paedophile images. Here is one of the many <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2760633/Naturist-claimed-nudity-does-not-equal-pornography-admits-downloading-120-000-child-abuse-images.html">national news reports</a> For naturism and nudism folk, this is quite an eye-opener. Not only was did he plead guilty to the charged offence, he was also the official Public Relations officer for British Naturism! One's jaw quite simply drops.

The question is not whether this person, who has recently joined, is guilty or not, but whether he should remain a member of this site, knowing what we know. The administration has received several reports from concerned members regarding this individual, and is under a deal of pressure to remove him. A mild form of emotional duress is being used in the form of: "do you want the site to be a place where this kind of person is welcome?", and "if he stays, I'm off", and so forth. We have the same reaction from site users when they see someone on a soft-porn site elsewhere. Apparently it's ok to pose naked in front of your toilet and snap a headless-selfie, but it's not acceptable to be openly paid to "model" when you're young and pretty. Again, the comments are: "we don't want this kind of person here", and so forth. Don't be too hasty with the knee-jerk, there are ramifications here.

Let's think about this for a moment, Back to Brian. He's here under his own name, and is standing unashamed with these hefty charges hanging around his neck, what does that tell us about him? Is he a man who gets a kick out of watching child porn? Is he a "real" paedophile? Is he a priest or a politician? Amongst the latter there is a terror of being discovered; the public shame of the anti-gay lobbyist being found to be sending soliciting emails to younger male members of his staff; the embarrassment of the priest not only being discovered with the choir boys, but being shunted from parish to parish as he is rediscovered in each parish. There seems no shame in the act itself, only in the fact of being exposed. You might notice that the most judgemental types, the ones you do not suspect, are the ones who seem to constantly being caught with their fingers in dark places.

These judgemental types are the ones who will sack a school teacher because she once appeared in a porno movie when she was younger. Never mind the students who downloaded the porn in the first place and exposed her, never mind the idea that people can change their lifestyle, and should be encouraged to change rather than kicked back down the stairs. Keep in mind also that looking at images is NOT the same as engaging in those acts, just think of all the theft and rape and murder TV series, and the actors involved who are "acting", and NOT doing. Hold that thought in your mind, and now think of all the people who just WATCH these films.

Or perhaps because this man likes to look at these images, and we can easily imagine him doing such and such, then we just tar him all over with the same general brush, make the story bigger than it already is, and call him an actual paedophile and be done with it. Maybe it's simpler to drag him from his house and just hang him from a lamp post on the street corner, while we're at it. If he was black and if we were in the southern US a couple of decades ago, that would be the answer, for sure.

So, back to Brian, and remember that he is just being used as the example here. Let's say he decides the public pressure is too much, and he leaves of his own accord, or he is banned from this site by a moderator, and our consciences are saved, and we can sleep easy once more. Let's say a new site member joins under the name "Patrick Smith". Now then, how are we to know that this new user is not the old user under a different name? Now Patrick Smith can go around befriending unsuspecting people all day long, he can request "innocent" family photos from other unsuspecting and gullible site users. He can promote the idea that family nudism is the "right way", and propose that this is the direction the site should be taking, perhaps influencing the membership in this nefarious direction. How would we know?

Is it not better to KNOW who this man is, and to know what he has done, and to be able to keep an eye on his behaviour here? Keep in mind that there are several moderators, and many members of BN, who all know Brian quite well, in one capacity or another. They know who he is and will be quick to ban him on the first wrong move, and he knows that too. The question is whether we are more comfortable with our heads in the sand, pretending that everything is ok, or whether we would rather have the information, open and available to all. One expects he will be blocked and ignored by many members, but just bear in mind that this is possible ONLY because you know who he is.

To recap, site policy is concerned with behaviour on THIS site, and this site only.

This touchy topic is open to discussion.

The moderators sometimes receive reports concerning members off-site activities, and it's probably useful to clarify site policy on this point. We are not the FBI and have neither the interest, nor the resources to police people's behaviour off-site. Policy has always been that we are concerned with member behaviour on THIS site, and not on any other.

The original contents of this blog have been moved because the site policy issue was being confused with the hot-topic <a href="http://www.naktiv.net/blog/826/brian-taylor/">example</a>

To recap, site policy is concerned with behaviour on THIS site, and this site only.

..

There are, from time time, fairly understandable mutterings from people that some task "x" has not been done quickly enough, or an expression of frustration that they are not personally serviced in some request "y" or other. This is unfortunate, but to some extent unavoidable, and the purpose of this little blog is to clarify this statement. This site is not Faceache, and we do not have the resources here to settle every piece of administrative overhead to the satisfaction of every individual. Sometimes people appear affronted that their opinions are not shared by everybody, or they may be simply dissatisfied with the "service" which is freely provided here.

We have a time generous team of moderators here who scan the site to keep the more dubious content at bay, and keep an eye on user behaviour and commenting, such that the site encourages a lively but safe and largely friendly interaction. Some people think we should do less, and not interfere at all with any postings, and that we should have a "free-for-all" on the site, which would quickly degenerate into a very large mess. Some people think we should do more, and of course better, and also more quickly, if not sooner. Sometimes this is just not possible, and often not even warranted as it can be good to get feedback from the user base before intervening. Some things can be done quickly, others are already done without anybody noticing, and still others are on the todo-list. Sometimes we don't do things perfectly, but we do try to do what's right, and promptly. There's a lot of background work which, by definition, goes entirely unseen but still needs to be done.

This is all well and good, but at the end of the day it should perhaps be kept in mind that the Naktiv social media network site is essentially a volunteer project run by volunteers on behalf the membership. If someone would like to fund the administration/development to the level of Faceache, (at least several million dollars please), then we are sure our service could be vastly improved. People who are dissatisfied in some way may sometimes have a different agenda in mind and, to "keep your eye on the prize", may be advised to re-read the <a href="http://www.naktiv.net/mission-statement">mission statement</a>

In the meantime please be assured that we, who are responsible for the moderation and the administration here, do our best to accommodate our users, within the limits of our available free time, within the resources at our disposal. We hope this is implicitly understood and that a little patience goes a long way to making the site both user-friendly and user-useful.

Lastly always remember that, if you like the site, to please tell your friends.

Cheers.

A number of people have expressed an interest in having a chat room onsite. There's been some discussion in the back rooms as to the best way of covering the fairly large network overhead and resources required to support this.

The current proposal is to fence off the chat system to a (low cost) subscription based part of the site. Along with this we might be able to also support video storage and other goodies. Utilizing space for Ads might also go some way to offset the costs, and is also being considered. The rest of the site, eg; most of the current facilities, would remain free to use for all logged in (no cost) members.

There is a poll associated with this question, for how to fund such a facility, here: http://www.naktiv.net/poll/458/chat-facility-feedback-proposals-what-are-your-thoughts/

There is also a related poll for whether a chat facility is actually wanted at all, and if so, with what features, here: http://www.naktiv.net/poll/438/should-we-have-chatrooms-with-video-voice-and-text-options-this-is-a-more-d/

The question is how much do people want a chat facility, etc, and how might it be supported.

Feedback welcome.

UPDATE: There has been some interest (pro-chat) in the idea of a chat facility here. However, there are sufficient (anti-chat) posts to indicate a fairly heavy swell of opinion against the idea too. Therefore, implementation of chat on the site will take a firm rain-check in the immediate term, perhaps to be revisited, in some form, at some undefined time, maybe. Thanks everybody, for all of your feedback.
(Exec. decision = no chat for now).

This is clearly an issue of concern. However, just because a photo turns up on
a porn site does not by itself mean it is a fake photo. After all, the photo is
(almost always) a photo of *somebody*. The question remains valid whether the
profile "represents the user", or not, and this (latter) case is described
within our standard set of rules as unacceptable.

You are welcome to raise this, and other issues with the moderators and or the
admin (as you just have), or in the Feedback group, and we will consider each
issue on it's merit.

We're keen at <a href="http://www.naktiv.net">the Naktiv site</a> to keep a level playing field. This means being accepting of each other's differences, and non-judgemental wherever possible. This utopia is not always possible, and some of us make inappropriate comments, from time to time, even when we do not mean to. Furthermore constantly being politically correct can be entirely tiresome, although engaging brain before speaking is almost always a good idea. Being non-PC does not mean accepting phobic bullying though, (of any kind), and such inappropriate behaviour will be swiftly and appropriately dealt with, usually this means a summary ban. However, this automatic and satisfyingly clumsy knee-jerk response is not the only one available to us.

We have people here, who are naked and who are active, they may even be "classic" naturists. Those same people might be gay, or trans, or bi, or (oh the horror) even heterosexual, or goodness knows what else. Jodiee's <a href="http://www.naktiv.net/blog/601/a-guide-to-understanding-trans/">blog</a> makes for an interesting read on this topic. People with a common interest should be promoting that common interest, not focusing on the differences. It's important that we learn to be able to accept other people for who they are, and not to impose our own expectations on others. What this means is not going around telling people: "tootsie must b the whacky bakky". Neither does it mean saying: "if you don't like my gay friends, that means you must be gay!". Neither does it mean saying: "well, fuck you and your liberal wackos!"

These situations are sometimes one-sided bullying, and sometimes these situations are people trying to control others via being a loud crying victim. Sometimes it's simply hard to tell the difference, and it's especially hard when there is a mixture of both involved, we humans are complicated. Basically we've seen all of this before, and we'll see all of this again. The important thing for a loosely connected network of individuals and free-thinking people is that we can try to educate people, one another, as to what the appropriate behaviour might be at any given time. Rest assured, if this attempt fails, the ban functionality *will* be used. However, if no aspiration at education is even attempted, then surely this is also a fail?

As active participants in this situation, (whether you like it or not), we all need to take a step back and to consider how we can contribute in a positive manner to the current situation. How can we reduce the friction, and how can we increase the mutual understanding factor. Only then will we actually promote any kind of real change in our world. Without that, we are the same as "them", whoever they are.

Speech over, discuss.

I'm keen to get motivated people who are active on the site involved with keeping a semi-eagle eye on the content, and people in different time zones and with different interests too. I believe we share a common perspective and that you might make a good moderator based on the <a href="http://www.naktiv.net/mission-statement">Info->Mission Statement</a> ). There are no *duties* as such, and there NO time-on-site expectation. Being a moderator means you have more influence over site content, and that if you happen to notice something especially inappropriate you CAN do something about it. Might you be interested?

Great. You'll find most of the info. you need in the <a href="http://www.naktiv.net/moderators-readme">Moderators->README</a> and for any questions just post in the dedicated group. Welcome aboard! Thumbs-up

Naked folk across the world decry the puritan censorship of mainstream socialmedia networks, yet continue to use them because of a paucity of options. Now there is a true alternative, designed especially with naked people in mind.

This is a place where being Naked Online OK. A place where it’s possible to share information, photos, blogs, links, events and friendship, with each other, and out to Faceache and Twixxer and many others too, and back again. A place to discuss naked issues from many sides and to see clearly how mainstream society needs a wake-up call regarding simple harmless nudity. It’s a free social media network, and if you like it, please tell your friends!

Welcome to the Naktiv network!

I've noticed that once people become moderators on a site, they appear to lose interest in participation, and seem to think their only reason to be onsite is to censor other people's contributions. Rightly or wrongly. This appears to be the case regardless of whether they remain a moderator, or not.

Please note that this is <b>not</b> aimed at anyone in particular, <b>nor</b> is it aimed at all moderators. This is just a general observation, based on limited experience.

Given that moderators are usually selected based on their contributions, the idea that making a user a moderator will stop their contributing is a hard one. I think this is not good. Perhaps moderator groups by their nature are counter-productive to an lively and interactive site?

Thoughts, anyone?

the Naktiv site is NOT a private network, it IS a social network with excellent facilities for sharing and connecting to other online networks. Because it is the core view of the Naktiv site that we want to PROMOTE simple and harmless nudity to the wider world, an essential component of doing this is being prepared for the great unwashed outside world, (which we want to educate), to see content describing the naked human body. Yes, images too!

http://www.naktiv.net/permissions/

The permissions documentation describes this all in greater detail. Do you agree? Do you disagree? Comments and feedback are always welcome – please share this far and wide!

Here’s the first paragraph of the http://www.naktiv.net/mission-statement as a reminder of why we’re here:

The Naktiv site is provided as a safe place for people to post Naked and Active content, to share both images and our opinions as far and wide as possible. Please note that this refers to non-sexual images of nudity which includes Art, nudism and naturism, and excludes pornography and violence. We all know that sex is one of the many things people do naked. Non-naturists may think it’s the only thing, and traditional nudists deny that we do it at all. The Naktiv site is here so we can discuss these issues, and to promote the simple idea that the naked human body is fully acceptable in all contexts.

the Naktiv site has a clear <a href="/mission-statement">Mission Statement</a>, and extensive documentation describing the function of the site; what the <a href="/rules">Rules</a> are; how to use the <a href="/permissions">Permissions</a> system; <a href="/copyright">Copyright and Attributions</a> guidelines; <a href="/photo-uploads">Photo Tips</a>; etc. and so forth. It's hoped that the clearly stated site policies, (which everyone signed up to when they registered), are clear enough, but perhaps some of the documentation is unclear, hence this singular and exceptional blog post from the administration to the membership.

What do you think? Are the <a href="/mission-statement">site policy</a> pages and help documentation, clear enough, or do they need more explanation? Perhaps they are too complicated, or are they too simple? Or are they open to misinterpretation in some way which has not been understood by the writer? This is the right place to post any replies and comments on this issue, and your feedback and suggestions, as always on the Naktiv site, are appreciated.

This site, like all good sites, has an active team of moderators.

It is possible a moderator may have identified one or more of your images as inappropriate and the team has been busy looking in to whether the images really are unsuitable or have been removed erroneously. During this process, some moderators have made comments on some of the images, and it is likely some of you have seen these as "no" and "yes", recently.

There have been accusations of being black-balled being bandied about. Nobody is being black-balled. The site moderators are simply going through a backlog of images which have been placed to the side, and trying to determine if these should remain in the "filtered" section, or not. Please remain calm.

Currently our moderation process is going through a state of flux, which means some of the process is not as smooth as we would like it to be. We would appreciate your bearing with us as bugs in the system are ironed out. This is not Facebook, we do not have several million pounds/dollars to throw into development. the Naktiv site is a work in progress.

Finally, if you are unhappy about your photos on this site, nobody is obliged to upload any images here, please feel free to remove them if you wish. I can, however, assure you that the moderators will continue to do their job, on behalf the users of this site, to ensure a safe and yet largely censor-free zone. This is a difficult balancing act at times, but on the whole, I think the moderating team does a reasonable job of it.

This is largely a thankless task, and while we don't expect payment, we would most certainly appreciate your patience.

Many thanks.

To promote a positive impression of a naked lifestyle, and to comply with the <a href="/mission-statement">mission statement</a>, (which everyone has read, right?), it's important to maintain the posting of good quality, and interesting, material on <a href="/nook">the Naktiv site</a>. We have a lot of this already, which is a good thing.

Many photos which are uploaded to websites, including this one, are deemed to be either grossly inappropriate, (featuring erections or sex or whatever), but many more are just harmlessly lacking any "redeeming" feature. Neither should be uploaded. The latter is the most insidious image to manage. Many nudists and naturists, and people who want to be, seem to think it is really interesting to see a photo of a naked man in a private room, usually with their legs invitingly spread wide open. Worse, many people, (almost always male), having posted one photo, want nothing more than to put their camera on a tripod in time-lapse mode, and take sequential shots of themselves walking to the window of their bedroom and back to their door, and again. Or in the bathroom, or in the bike shed. Yawn.

Let me tell you, one image is quite sufficient.

We get hundreds of these, do we really need more? Is it not possible to at least attempt to upload an interesting image. Maybe a different image? Instead of the same photo, taken one second apart, of the same naked person in the same pose, in the same room, from the same position, over and over, and over again. Please excuse this minor rant, and note that this is NOT directed only at you, (replace-your-user-name-here), but at everyone who seem to think time-lapse naked in bedroom/lounge/bathroom shots are interesting. They're not, and they really are very boring.

If you take care to actually read the <a href="/rules/">rules</a> you will see that this is actually covered under <a href="/rules/#1">rule #1</a> Take notice: if we get too many of these on the Naktiv site, we'll simply be deleting them. This is censorship alright, censorship for taste, and to stop this site going the way of many others. This site will NOT become a dumping ground for inane photo collections. Feel free to discuss, but take notice that you have been warned!

Thank you.

The puritan religious right still consider homosexuals a "sin against god", (ie; they don't like it). The mindless liberal left consider homosexuals a boon to mankind, (ie; it's politically correct to approve and woe betide anyone who doesn't).

Never mind whether it's right or wrong, because that is based on local culturally based morality. The only question is whether the activity harms anyone? If the answer is no, (and the answer *IS* no), then there is no need to have laws or prohibitions against it. Period.

Exactly the same as nudity.