Proposed Rule Changes

Moo

ADISC Admin
Staff
Messages
5,852
Role
  1. Private
Overall goals:
  1. Clarity. There should be a clear dividing line between what is allowed, and what isn't.
  2. Consistency. The posted rules, and what our moderators enforce, should match.
  3. Loosening up. Our current rules were perhaps more strict (and generated more work for me / our moderators) than is necessary.

CURRENT EDITED VERSION OF RULES, WITH CHANGES HIGHLIGHTED:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/11ssf50DW-DIqNNpiuoDilyr3Sapqses6mFJXjM0EBzY/edit?usp=sharing

Proposed rule changes:
  1. Loosen the "crotch shots" rule. Right now we have people who report every image on the site that has someone wearing a diaper, which is not really what the rule was intended to cover. The rule was intended to cover sexualized crotch shots, IE images of someone wearing a diaper and nothing else, or images where someone uploads 30 slightly different photos of themselves in just a diaper to albums. The idea is to clarify and limit the rule so it can still apply for egregious cases but people aren't so quick to report any image which shows someone diapered.
  2. Change the rule against "business people only here to promote their business" to instead only prohibit "spammers". We don't mind company reps who occasionally post a thread about a new product of theirs, within the rules for company reps. We do mind people spamming us with ads.
  3. Loosen up the "personal ads" rule, to make it pretty clear that something has to be very blatently a personal ad with no other value to run afoul of this rule. IE: someone mentioning that they're looking for a mommy/etc in a post about something else does NOT break this rule. Neither do "anyone in (location)?" type posts.
  4. Or maybe we just open a "personal ads" forum, possibly requiring people to opt-in to see it... and forbid personal ads outside that forum.
  5. Clarify the PG-13 rule to explain that you can't post about sexual practices, kinks, etc.
  6. Add a new rule that expressly prohibits any thread asking about or discussing ways to become incontinent, on the grounds that deliberately reducing your control is considered self harm.
  7. Moving the "mature topics rules" thread into the actual rules, so that even people who have been removed from the MT forum can still read it and understand what they did wrong. Currently people warned for MT rule violations lose access to MT and thus to the MT rules thread, which inhibits their ability to learn what they did wrong.
  8. Adding a rule which explains that we consider VPN use to be suspicious, and accessing the site via a VPN or any other anonymity service may result in restrictions being placed on your account. This is already the case, and has been for a long time, it just isn't listed in the rules yet.
  9. Modifying the "follow staff instructions" rule to make it clear that talking about your ban/warning anywhere outside of PM with staff, or the requests forum, is not allowed, and may result in an additional warning. This is apparently not clear enough yet. Also including a note that says making a dramatic thread about how the site is moderated right after being warned for breaking a rule will be treated as violating this rule, even if you don't explicitly mention the word 'ban' or 'warning'.
  10. Adding a rule that prohibits the public posting of off-site contact info, such as email addresses, phone numbers, etc. This is to protect member privacy and prevent spambots detecting your email from a public post, then spamming you.
  11. Potentially adding a "Company News" forum which only company reps can post in, and which all their threads about their products/etc must be put in. Each thread put there can only be used to announce a new product of their own design, as now. But it would be easier to keep track of these threads. And maybe there would be an opt-out to allow the entire forum to be hidden.
  12. Adding a top-level rule specifically against name-calling other members. IE you can't call someone any derogatory term, including things like "idiot", "fool", etc.

This is obviously not the final version of these proposed changes.
Many of these are only ideas I am considering, with varying degrees of seriousness.
Still, if you have any thoughts on these, or wish to suggest any other rule changes for ADISC, please post them here.
 
Last edited:

ElPulpo

The friendly diapered octopus
Est. Contributor
Messages
1,185
Age
49
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
Sounds reasonable to me, just some minor points.

1. Maybe clarify what may be inside a crotch shot? I don't mind looking at a fresh diaper, but I imagine not everyone wants to see a used one.
5. There are some threads on using diapers in foreplay or masturbation, please clarify whether these apply or not.

Maybe add some hints about when to report someone or something? I'm sometimes at a loss whether something deserves being reported. Or maybe this is taken care of by rendering the rules more precisely, anyway.
 

Aby

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,889
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
  3. Little
  4. Carer
Please don't get to mad at me, but number 5 says we can't talk about kinks, but this is by some definitions is a website based on kink... So maybe that needs to be clarified ? Just a suggestion I don't mean to nitpick, sometimes I can't help myself.
 

tails1234

Est. Contributor
Messages
863
Role
  1. Private
^that. We even have a subforum for furries. So kinks outside of ABDL do get talked about here. But there is a difference in a post of "how do I bring up spanking with my Mommy/SO?" in the AB/MT forums and people diving right into XXX fantasy that is impossible to "rate PG-13"
 

sinceiwassmall

Est. Contributor
Messages
693
Age
57
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Little
I’m mostly fine with this, with appreciation for the requests for more clarity on point 5 and lots of support for the intent of what you list.

I feel differently about point 8. I consider a VPN good practice for anyone who can access one these days, Not because of the theme of this site, but because of years of somewhat technical reading about the invasive privacy practises of Facebook, Google and others.

As detailed in books like “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,“ the purpose of these trackers, and the core financial model of these companies, is now to gather and link every possible piece of information about each of us, Our aggregated profiles are then made available for targeting to anyone who wants to pay to influence our purchases, politics and behaviour.

I’ve run a VPN for about 3 years for these reasons, that I don’t feel are remotely suspicious. I would suggest that as long as members are in good standing and not misbehaving, this rule is not necessary and not in keeping with what are becoming relatively ordinary security practices.
 
Last edited:

Moo

ADISC Admin
Staff
Messages
5,852
Role
  1. Private
Additional changes I'm considering:
14. Splitting up rule 2 (keep it pg-13) into two rules, one regarding minors (no minors allowed) and one regarding content (no porn, or other sexually explicit stuff per point 5). Each one of those is important enough to be its own rule. The no minors rule isn't just "no minors on ADISC", it also includes "do not involve minors in anything AB/DL". That might get folded into a new "Real life and other outside-of-ADISC behavior that disqualifies someone from using ADISC" section.
15. Similarly the whole "Do not mention your ban/warning to other members." thing should be moved out of rule 11 and into its own rule.
16. Perhaps an entirely new "forum specific rules" section should be added, where all the special rules for the MT, IC, stories, etc sub-forums are in one place.
17. Devoting a little more space to the off-topic clause. E.g. mentioning how AB/DL stuff should not generally be added to IC forum threads.
 

Moo

ADISC Admin
Staff
Messages
5,852
Role
  1. Private
I also don't understand the VPN rule, I thought using one was a gold standard on the IT industry at protecting your privacy?
The issue with VPNs is that many (most) users of them are bots or other nefarious actors looking to cause trouble.
Surfing the internet while using a VPN is like walking around town in a head-to-toe trenchcoat, a hat and dark sunglasses.
Sure, nobody can identify exactly who you are. But you stick out like a sore thumb to anyone doing security screening.
Worse, since you cannot be distinguished from all the other people wearing the same costume (other users of that VPN) if one of them misbehaves, it can draw a lot of suspicion on you.
Basically, with VPNs, you're anonymous... but nobody trusts anonymous people.
 

Babybearuk

43/M/UK (SK5 Stockport)
Est. Contributor
Messages
342
Age
44
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
  3. Sissy
  4. Little
The issue with VPNs is that many (most) users of them are bots or other nefarious actors looking to cause trouble.
Surfing the internet while using a VPN is like walking around town in a head-to-toe trenchcoat, a hat and dark sunglasses.
Sure, nobody can identify exactly who you are. But you stick out like a sore thumb to anyone doing security screening.
Worse, since you cannot be distinguished from all the other people wearing the same costume (other users of that VPN) if one of them misbehaves, it can draw a lot of suspicion on you.
Basically, with VPNs, you're anonymous... but nobody trusts anonymous people.
It's a strange anology I've never heard of from friends in IT industry and when I travel I use a VPN, and never had any issues?
 

Babybearuk

43/M/UK (SK5 Stockport)
Est. Contributor
Messages
342
Age
44
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
  3. Sissy
  4. Little
The issue with VPNs is it can bypass IP bans I guess.
I thought IP bans were impossible now since the big IP address increase thing a few years back?

Thought everyone's IP address was dynamic (apart from those who pay for static) so impossible to ban?
 

sinceiwassmall

Est. Contributor
Messages
693
Age
57
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Little
The issue with VPNs is that many (most) users of them are bots or other nefarious actors looking to cause trouble.
Surfing the internet while using a VPN is like walking around town in a head-to-toe trenchcoat, a hat and dark sunglasses.
Sure, nobody can identify exactly who you are. But you stick out like a sore thumb to anyone doing security screening.
Worse, since you cannot be distinguished from all the other people wearing the same costume (other users of that VPN) if one of them misbehaves, it can draw a lot of suspicion on you.
Basically, with VPNs, you're anonymous... but nobody trusts anonymous people.
I respectfully suggest this is out of date. It’s commonly reported online that 25% of all Internet users have used a VPN within the last 30 days.

That figure is actually three years old, the number is rising rapidy You can get some of the best ones in the world for $30-$40 a year (e.g. NordVPN) and they are seamless to use and prevent all sorts of problems.

This isn’t Tor we’re talking about, It’s a very ordinary level of personal, mobile and office security.
 
Last edited:

TeddyUrsadorable

Living Plushie
Est. Contributor
Messages
572
Age
53
Role
  1. Babyfur
  2. Incontinent
Thought everyone's IP address was dynamic (apart from those who pay for static) so impossible to ban?

Depends on the ISP, and their lease times settings on their DHCP server. I have dynamic as well, but it's tied to the MAC address of my router.. so unless I change my router out (or change the MAC address), it keeps reassigning me the same IP address I've had for the past 6 years.
 

sinceiwassmall

Est. Contributor
Messages
693
Age
57
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Little
I respectfully suggest this is out of date. It’s commonly reported online that 25% of all Internet users have used a VPN within the last 30 days.

That figure is actually three years old, the number is rising rapidy You can get some of the best ones in the world for $30-$40 a year (e.g. NordVPN) and they are seamless to use and prevent all sorts of problems.

This isn’t Tor we’re talking about, It’s a very ordinary level of personal, mobile and office security.
Here’s a fresh stat. 35% of US adults use a VPN. 12% of US adults started using one in the last year. Working from home during COVID was a big driver of this.
 

winterheart01

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,318
Age
38
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
  3. Babyfur
  4. Incontinent
Yeah, looking at this website it appears you are right. VPN use has massively increased over the last year, and very much gone mainstream.
That being said, i must use a VPN on my work laptop, it's on by default to get to our network. Now , i wouldn't go to this site on my work laptop, which is obvious, but as IT infrastructure and datacenter system engineer i do find the VPN rule a little too far.
If the vpn from the bots is one from suspicious origin you can blacklist the entire subnet.
If the bot uses a widely popular one you can try filing complaint with the vpn company and ban the account. I'm aware the latter is more effort.
Another thing you could try is for the registration procedure to use a multi factor authentication process, or mail with link that requires you to complete a more complex captcha instead of filling in a code because the latter can be parsed.
 

Weatheronthe8s

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,027
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Other
I mostly agree with all of this. However I have a couple things I felt I would mention.

With number 5, I find that kinda confusing because sometimes it's hard to tell what is considered a kink here and what isn't. I really don't know where to discuss that stuff and then I end up venting it here because I don't know where else to go, so maybe clarify in the rules a better place to talk about that.

Also, with rule 8, I take quite a bit of issue with this. On my iPad with a Sprint data plan with the "inappropriate" site blocker enabled for some reason, I cannot access ADISC. However, if I use a VPN on it, I can. I think a better way to have this rule set up would be to not allow account creation on a VPN to help prevent spammers from making accounts. Not to block VPN use for existing members. Plus sometimes it gives a little extra peace of mind to not let some network admins know that we are on ADISC.
 

Moo

ADISC Admin
Staff
Messages
5,852
Role
  1. Private
That being said, i must use a VPN on my work laptop, it's on by default to get to our network. Now , i wouldn't go to this site on my work laptop, which is obvious, but as IT infrastructure and datacenter system engineer i do find the VPN rule a little too far.
If the vpn from the bots is one from suspicious origin you can blacklist the entire subnet.
If the bot uses a widely popular one you can try filing complaint with the vpn company and ban the account. I'm aware the latter is more effort.
Another thing you could try is for the registration procedure to use a multi factor authentication process, or mail with link that requires you to complete a more complex captcha instead of filling in a code because the latter can be parsed.
We have no plans to prevent already-registered members from logging in via a VPN.
We may have to continue blocking VPN and similar servers from registering accounts on ADISC, though, as we get hundreds of such attempted registrations per day, and attempting to contact each provider about their bots is practically impossible.
 

BobbiSueEllen

A sweet little forever AB toddler girl in Pampers
Est. Contributor
Messages
5,078
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Little
  3. Other
Some things that came to immediate mind after reading:

1. Crotch-shots: so diapered bottoms are exempt? That's what I've always thought. And the only diaper shots I tend to gag on are those where effluences are staining/bulging/running out or the male phallus is trying to make its presence painfully obvious. Ew.

3. Personal ads: I have to read between the lines on this. Those who blatantly solicit here are those I report and those who are subtly seeking a mate I report after their repetition. There are those who mention it in a by-the-way matter, such as "someday I hope for someone and will seek someone but not for now" and I just pass those up. Is this how you want it?

4. Open a "personal ads" forum? Could work...

10. "Adding a rule that prohibits the public posting of off-site contact info"...to additionally protect members from opportunists such as pedophiles or other sex offenders who weasel into ADISC to prey on those with CP, autism or other complications.

12. It's too bad it has to be spelled out. I generally assumed this rule was universally covered under "All I Really Needed to Know I Learned in Kindergarten" but a few alumni never got the sticky-notes.

17. On that note, I will no longer post in the IC section as (a) I'm not incontinent and (b) the times I have posted there, I've gone off-tangent a time or two. Mea culpa.
 
Top