It’s not illegal to post shock videos. It’s protected by the first amendment. The same is true of porn, for the most part (while “you know it when you see it” is a suggested standard for obscenity the concept differs greatly from one observer to another — see what answers you get from Los Angeles and Karachi about what’s manifestly obscene and I bet the answers are different). I still don’t think most people want to go to a site overrun with this kind of content.

Are you really attempting to justify censorship to keep porn off of the site? We’ve had algorithms for years now that can detect nudity. It’s a simple filter that can be added that allows the user to select if they want to see it or not. Much like DDG and Google image search.

There's a difference between nudity and porn. Facebook banned the famous "Napalm Girl" photo, and then later un-banned it. Rules appear to be arbitrary and constantly changing.

https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/09/10/49...

Yea child nudity is going to be a difficult one for all algorithms as they lack context. The only reason that picture is allowed is because of the context. If it were a random naked child in a field it would and should be banned.

The point of this example is to poke holes in what appears to be an ironclad, simple, and consistent principle by pointing out that few advocates for it actually wish for what it implies.