Trash's problem, part one billion

I know this has been brought up before. There have been announcements about initiatives or changes meant to fix things, and they happen briefly, but ultimately nothing changes—especially when it comes to the "social media trash" thread. I’ll give credit where it's due: the moderator Isadora left a perfectly polite and reasonable message following the recent outbursts, but the reality remains that this entire topic is pathetic and offensive. If we pretend to actually care, it’s an embarrassment to this forum.

You will occasionally find actual garbage on the thread; for instance, toward the end, there were photos of some "small-town" fingernail clipping, which is fine—it's definitely trashy for someone to post something like that.

However, a huge portion of the thread is dedicated to mocking people for being unattractive, overweight, or overly made-up. And God forbid a Rom has a Facebook account; they immediately post every single one of his photos because, oh my God, he's Rom, hahaha, look how ridiculous and trashy he is. I am talking about completely ordinary photos someone posted on Facebook, yet these legendary "trashers" find them hilarious just because the person isn't conventionally attractive or something along those lines. Even when discussing things that truly fall under the category of trash, it frequently escalates into disgusting cyber-bullying against individuals, involving hundreds of statuses and photos, or even live-tracking everything they have ever said on Facebook.

To add to that, one of the few decent rules in that thread—which the moderators enforce strictly—is the ban on direct links to profiles. Yet, it is frankly laughable that just a bit further away, there is the Three-Seater thread, which has essentially consisted of nothing but links to other people's profiles for quite some time now. They have absolutely nothing to do with trash, by the way.

That is the crucial point, the thing that should actually be addressed, even though it has been written about a few times already and almost nothing has happened. The second part is less important, mainly because the moderators can't do anything about it: the sub-forum is practically half-dead anyway, flooded by people who haven't the slightest clue what "trash" even means—ranging from the "pearl of illiteracy" thread, which is dominated by the illiterate (the absolute highlight was the mockery of someone using perfectly correct grammar, alongside those who naively tried to point out that the spelling was actually fine 🙄), and so on.

Everyone has freedom of speech on this forum. If a post pops up that targets or insults someone, we take it down. We also stay pretty strict about protecting the privacy of anyone whose photos or profiles get posted in this thread.

I haven't actually seen anyone getting mocked specifically because of their nationality. Usually, people just want to grab a screenshot so they can dump it on Trash. If that happens, it doesn't matter who is in the photo—it doesn't matter their race, religion, or whatever other reason you'd use to discriminate. It's all the same to them.

Look, if you see something like that, just hit the little triangle icon to report it. If we look at it and agree that what you’re claiming is true, we’ll pull it.

As for your point about things that aren't considered "trash"—I can't really help you there. I'm not saying everything posted here is garbage; far from it. But as moderators, we don't operate by deleting stuff just because *we* personally think it isn't trash. That's just not how we run things, and it never will be.

I know people post stupid stuff, funny memes, and all sorts of random things, but hey, if the rest of the community doesn't think it's trash, then it stays.

Just to be clear, I’m not saying someone is being mocked directly for being, say, a Rom. What I mean is that for some people, simply being a Rom is enough reason to toss them into the social media trash because they find it hilarious. The same logic applies to anyone perceived as overweight or "unattractive."

As for your other point, I get where you're coming from, but in my view, that's precisely the core issue with that sub-forum—specifically these types of threads. It's not that you're talking nonsense, but it creates this vicious cycle. My take is that the moderators there should function by removing anything they deem isn't true trash. You'll never reach a total consensus on what qualifies, but if we're going to allow digging through another social network, then at least let it be at a level where silly photos with glittery captions or ridiculous Photoshop are acceptable... rather than stuff like this (just a random jump to page 71): https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.n..._7761986_n.jpg

The exact same thing goes for photos like this one (page 72): View on imgur (I mean, the woman has strange eyebrows, so let's all mock her on the forum—honestly, I think you see how close this is to cyberbullying, and I bet you've noticed how photos behind certain links "mysteriously" disappear. I just stumbled upon three "missing" ones within fifteen clicks; clearly, people find this uncomfortable, if not something worse)

I could easily dump a pile of links like these here, but this is just a quick, random sampling. And we both know it 😉 I understand your desire to stay as far away from this as possible, but I believe that approach is wrong for that sub-forum. It basically gives every idiot permission to drag any photo they dislike or find "hilarious" just because—hahaha, look at this fat girl, how dare she post a photo on her own Facebook profile.

And yeah, whenever you get a moment, take a look at how nonsensical the rules regarding Facebook and the three-seater actually are. I’m talking strictly about the policy—the idea that direct profile linking isn't allowed on the three-seater... even though, if you look at the latest post, it serves as a perfect example of content that no moderator would ever dream of flagging. They’d probably feel perfectly comfortable deleting anything that doesn't have a single thing to do with social media trash.

We’ve already talked about this before...

Feels like nothing’s actually changed. It’s all just social media trash again.

Since I’m already hanging out here, I might as well ask... isn't there some unwritten rule about not dumping Psychology and Health posts in here? 🤔

Jack Moore90 said:We've already covered this before...

It looks like nothing has changed. Once again, it’s all just trashh.

And it isn't just one thread, but at least three. Unfortunately, yes, there has been zero progress on the most critical issue.

Everything else is essentially beyond what the moderators can control. The reality is that Trash has long since been flooded by people who have absolutely no clue what trash actually is (some are quite literally trash themselves, which is a rather interesting irony), but all of that happens in other threads and remains benign—at worst, just irritating if you wake up on the wrong side of the bed. 😁

However, the "social media trash" thread sits right on the edge of cyber-bullying in its purest form, and more often than not, that line is openly crossed. The very idea of posting someone else's photos specifically to mock them is cyber-bullying. I assume that much is obvious to everyone. Why it is permitted, however, is certainly not. To make matters even more bizarre, when people post various statuses or stupid comments from Facebook, names are blurred or redacted (which is justified, of course). Yet, posting someone else's photos for the purpose of ridicule is allowed. It is truly strange.

What Brandon Lopez6 is saying or asking is also a valid point. The "forum" has long since devolved into a mindless chat interspersed with the occasional on-topic post; it's also packed with nonsense that has nothing to do with trash. But on the forum, at least everyone is anonymous, so you can't compare that to posting someone's actual photos. That said, there used to be a rule—which now seems largely ignored—stating that Health and Psychology shouldn't be touched due to the sensitive nature of those topics, despite the anonymity.

John Castillo7 said:Just to be clear, I’m not saying people are being explicitly insulting by using specific slurs. What I mean is that for some folks, just knowing someone is Rom is enough for them to toss them into the social media trash because they find it hilarious. It’s the same deal when it comes to people being fat or "ugly."

I get where you're coming from, but honestly, I think that’s the core issue with this sub-forum—specifically these types of threads. It's not that you're talking nonsense, it's just that we end up stuck in this endless loop. In my opinion, the mods should be stepping up and clearing out anything they deem social media trash. We're never going to reach a total consensus on what counts as "bad," but if we're going to allow people to dig through other platforms, at least let it stay at a level where it's just silly memes, glittery nonsense, or over-edited Photoshop fails... not stuff like this (just check page 71 of this random thread): https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.n..._7761986_n.jpg

The same logic applies to photos like this one (check page 72): I can't see the image you linked. Could you try uploading it again? I'd love to take a look. Look, this woman has some seriously weird eyebrows, so let’s just roast her on the forum. Honestly, I think you can see how this is teetering on the edge of cyberbullying. Plus, have you noticed how photos behind certain links "mysteriously" vanish? I just clicked through about fifteen different things and stumbled upon three that were suddenly gone. It’s obvious people are getting uncomfortable with this—if not something even worse.

I could probably dump a whole pile of links like this here, but I’m just throwing these out randomly for now. You and I both know how this goes. 😉 I get why you guys want to stay out of it, but honestly, I think that's a mistake for this sub. By staying silent, you're basically giving every idiot a free pass to rip apart any photo they don't like or find "hilarious." It just invites people to post stuff like, "LOL, look at this girl's weight, how does she even have the nerve to post that on her Facebook profile?"

Look, I get that what one person calls "social media trash," someone else might actually defend. Since you brought up those two examples, let me weigh in. Take this guy: his hair isn't naturally red; he dyed it himself and then went ahead and posted it online like he was doing something special. Nobody is making fun of his glasses or whether he has a round face or whatever—people are laughing because he straight-up dyed his hair bright red.

That lady in this example definitely wasn't born with those eyebrows; she’s either plucking them or drawing them on. It's not some permanent feature she's stuck with—honestly, she probably takes a lot of pride in her look. I don't see anything wrong with people having a little laugh if they think they look a bit off.

Look, I know these examples feel totally random. I'm not saying I could defend every single thing you throw out there, but honestly, I don't see myself as some kind of judge who gets to decide what’s trash and what isn't. It’s all subjective. What one person thinks is social media trash, someone else might find perfectly fine. To me, having just one or two people calling the shots on what can or can't be posted feels a bit too much like a dictatorship, and that's just not my vibe.

Look, there’s a limit to what can be posted here, so certain things just won't be allowed—it's all clearly laid out in the rules. Beyond the formal stuff, there's also a moral aspect to consider. I trust that people will eventually get it on their own. Usually, when someone posts something thinking it belongs in the social media trash, only to realize later that it's actually a serious issue—like poverty or something similar—they don't make that mistake again. We've seen plenty of cases like this where other forum members stepped up to explain why a topic wasn't trash, and honestly, those kinds of slip-ups seem to be happening a lot less often now.

John Castillo7 said:And yeah, whenever you have a sec, take a look at how inconsistent the rules are regarding FB versus Three-seater. Just looking at the rules—specifically how direct profile links aren't allowed on Three-seater... even though, especially with that last post, it's a perfect example of a thread where no moderator would actually complain if they took the liberty of deleting stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with social media trash.

I get where you're coming from, but you can't really compare Three-seater to Facebook. Facebook is a network where people share deeply personal stuff—real names, photos, education history, you name it—and everyone treats it that way. No matter how stupid I or anyone else might think it is, that's just the reality. Three-seater is a totally different beast. As far as I know, nobody uses their real name there, so linking a profile is basically the same as just posting a link to a photo from Facebook.

Elizabeth Davis said:Since I'm already here, let me ask... isn't there an unwritten rule about not posting stuff related to Psychology or Health?🤔

I'm not aware of any rule like that, but yeah, if someone started mocking someone else's illness or something similar, I'd delete it (and hand out a ban if necessary). Regardless of whether a formal rule exists or not.

Did I miss something? 🤷

We were posting at the exact same time, so let’s avoid bickering over what qualifies as social media trash and what doesn't. And honestly, if you think red-dyed bangs are enough of a reason to mock someone, then you're clearly living in some backward, regressive corner of the world—which I sincerely hope isn't the case here in America. To me, the much larger, more systemic issue is the fact that taking photos from someone's private profile and reposting them elsewhere is straight-up cyberbullying. It might be a milder version most of the time, but that doesn't change the reality of what it is. It is.

I assume you can see the flaw in that logic—that we should blur out Pero Perić's face if he says something stupid, yet we're perfectly fine with reposting his photos just to make fun of him.

And before anyone starts arguing that those photos were set to "public," let me make two points. First, every time Facebook updates its interface, it seems to automatically reset almost everything to public settings; besides, there are countless people who simply don't understand how these privacy toggles work and genuinely believe only their friends can see their posts. Second, a huge number of these images aren't even direct links to Facebook; they're hosted on sites like TinyPic, ImageShack, or Imgur, which means people are essentially reposting photos that were explicitly set to private on Facebook.

Besides, in one part of my own post—and I’m not trying to twist your words, even if it seems like that’s how you feel—you actually mention Facebook as a highly private space where people share their full names, personal details, and PHOTOS....
The issue isn't just the photos themselves; it's the mockery that follows them. To me, knowing someone like John Doe from Chicago means absolutely nothing if I don't personally know him. And if I do know him, I'll recognize his face in a photo regardless of whether his name is attached to it. In either case, the privacy violation is exactly the same.

Sure, there are those extreme cases that are undeniably pure social media trash—like some old photo of a deceased grandfather in a casket, or those blatant Photoshop jobs where a girl gets an exaggerated chest or a guy gets massive biceps while the bedroom background looks completely warped. But 90% of the photos being discussed here are precisely what you pointed out: deeply personal matters. Mocking someone because they dyed a few strands of hair red, or a girl because you don't like her eyebrows, or a woman for daring to be thick and dance, or some guy just drinking a beer... that's pathetic, and it's straight-up cyberbullying.

John Castillo7 said:... at least make it decent. Let's have okay photos with stupid captions, covered in glitter, and heavy Photoshop... rather than something like this (just a random page 71): https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.n..._7761986_n.jpg

This is Photoshop too. So what?
Is a guy who airbrushes his hair (matching it to—get this—his "loungewear" shirt color, thinking nobody will catch the "fraud") somehow less social media trash than someone airbrushing their body (biceps, for example)?

This applies equally to photos like this one (page 72): View on imgur (where the woman has strange eyebrows...)

That’s Photoshop as well. Except it isn't digital; it's "real-life" Photoshop. Honestly, you could argue this is even more social media trash than the first photo.
If the person in the picture lost their eyebrows due to illness, fine—that's sad to an extent. But even if that were true, she drew on trashy eyebrows. They are trashy in terms of functionality (if we consider "functionality" purely in an aesthetic sense; a person without eyebrows looks somewhat unnatural to others, so drawn-on ones serve a logical purpose)...
There is no point in explaining the scene itself (the photo as a whole, with its narrative read both directly and between the lines), because it's the combination that makes it trash. There's no need to dwell on it, since the criteria for calling something trash is technically very similar to the criteria for calling it ridiculous...

Like I said—this isn't about me making arbitrary calls on what qualifies as social media trash. I have no intention of getting dragged into a debate like that.

Anyone with even a halfway decent vocabulary could sit around and manufacture reasons why a photo is garbage according to their own personal standards.

Over at Fashion, there’s this strict rule where you aren't allowed to post photos that show your own face. I can't help but wonder why we don't apply that same logic to the Facebook threads over on Trashh. It seems especially necessary considering how many people are posting pictures of minors and children...

John Castillo7 said:We were both posting at the same time, so I want to avoid a back-and-forth argument over what counts as "trashh" and what doesn't. Honestly, thinking that someone’s red dyed bangs are somehow worthy of being mocked is the kind of mindset you only see in backwards, regressive places—and I really hope America isn't one of them. But beyond that, I think there's a much bigger, more serious issue here. Taking photos from someone's private profile and reposting them on other platforms is straight-up cyberbullying. Sure, most people call it "mild," but that doesn't change the fact that it is exactly what it is. It's bullying. Period.

I think you can see the flaw in that logic—if Pero Perić says something stupid, we have to censor him or scrub his name, yet posting photos of him just to mock him or make fun of him is totally fine.

Without getting into a whole debate about whether those photos were set to "public," I’ve got two main gripes. First off, every time Facebook updates their interface, they seem to default almost everything back to public settings—and honestly, there are so many people who don't even grasp how the privacy toggles work, thinking their photos are only visible to friends when they aren't. Second, a ton of these posts aren't even direct Facebook links; they're hosted on sites like Imgur or Flickr. That means someone's "proud" friends could be sharing photos that were actually intended to stay private on Facebook.

The thing is, if you just type a name into the Facebook search bar, finding someone's profile is way too easy. We want to shut that down, which is why we don't allow full names to be posted here. If you just use photos, you can't easily track someone down or dig up their private info. Sometimes it might happen, sure, but for most pictures, it keeps people anonymous.

I don't get what you're even trying to achieve here. People do stupid things and make fools of themselves all the time, and trashh is just the place where we laugh about it—within the rules, obviously. If that’s not your vibe, then honestly, don't go there. I really don't know how else to help you out, because I seriously doubt they're going to start banning people for posting pictures. Even if they did, you'd end up having to judge everything by your own standards to decide what counts as trash and what doesn't, which would just lead to more bans. So what then? Am I supposed to start handing out participation trophies just because I personally don't think what someone calls "trash" actually fits the description? What kind of criteria would that even be? 😕

silverbear5 said:On Moda, there’s a strict rule against posting photos where you can actually see your face. Why shouldn't we apply that same logic to the Facebook thread over on trashh? Especially considering how many people are posting pictures of minors and kids.

Nah, we don't allow photos of kids here—they get wiped. We might leave photos of older teens up, though, since it’s pretty tough to tell someone's exact age just by looking at a picture.