{ "batch": "32-where-to-post", "articles": [ { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_ig_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Instagram / Meta: Adult nudity and sexual activity — what is removed", "summary": "Instagram removes adult nudity and sexual activity: photos, videos and digitally-created content showing sexual intercourse, genitals, and close-ups of fully-nude buttocks, plus some images of female nipples. Exceptions exist for protest, educational, medical and similar contexts, and for post-mastectomy scarring and active breastfeeding.", "body": "Instagram removes adult nudity and sexual activity: photos, videos and digitally-created content showing sexual intercourse, genitals, and close-ups of fully-nude buttocks, plus some images of female nipples. Exceptions exist for protest, educational, medical and similar contexts, and for post-mastectomy scarring and active breastfeeding.\n\nWhat Meta Transparency Center actually says:\n\n“Photos, videos, and digitally-created content showing sexual intercourse, genitals, and close-ups of fully-nude buttocks, as well as some photos of female nipples, are restricted; exceptions include post-mastectomy scarring and women actively breastfeeding.”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM. Retrieved via WebSearch summary of the Meta Community Standards page; web_fetch was dead so the page itself was never opened. The substance is stable and long-standing, but do not quote this string as Meta's wording.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "VERIFIED RULE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Meta Transparency Center", "evidence_quote": "Photos, videos, and digitally-created content showing sexual intercourse, genitals, and close-ups of fully-nude buttocks, as well as some photos of female nipples, are restricted; exceptions include post-mastectomy scarring and women actively breastfeeding.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Instagram / Meta", "topic": "Adult nudity and sexual activity — what is removed", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_ig_02", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Instagram / Meta: Adult Sexual Solicitation — the rule that actually catches creators", "summary": "Meta's Adult Sexual Solicitation standard is not a nudity rule. It removes content that facilitates or offers commercial sexual services or that asks for or offers pornographic or sexual content. This is the standard under which non-nude posts get removed for pointing at a paid page, and it is the single biggest legal-content trap for a creator on Instagram.", "body": "Meta's Adult Sexual Solicitation standard is not a nudity rule. It removes content that facilitates or offers commercial sexual services or that asks for or offers pornographic or sexual content. This is the standard under which non-nude posts get removed for pointing at a paid page, and it is the single biggest legal-content trap for a creator on Instagram.\n\nWhat Meta Transparency Center actually says:\n\n“facilitates, encourages or coordinates sexual encounters or commercial sexual services between adults”\n\nNote: The quoted fragment appeared inside quotation marks in the search result and is very likely verbatim policy text, but I could not open the page to confirm the surrounding sentence. The framing of the claim (that this rule, not the nudity rule, is what catches non-nude promo posts) is supported by the Meta transparency page plus the HANX and Oversight Board sources in 32-IG-04.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/sexual-solicitation/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "VERIFIED RULE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Meta Transparency Center", "evidence_quote": "facilitates, encourages or coordinates sexual encounters or commercial sexual services between adults", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Instagram / Meta", "topic": "Adult Sexual Solicitation — the rule that actually catches creators", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_ig_03", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Instagram / Meta: Links to adult subscription sites — age gating, not prohibition", "summary": "Content containing usernames, links to, or logos of adult subscription websites is restricted to users aged 18 and over rather than removed outright. So a link to a paid page is age-gated, not automatically banned — but the surrounding post can still be removed under Adult Sexual Solicitation.", "body": "Content containing usernames, links to, or logos of adult subscription websites is restricted to users aged 18 and over rather than removed outright. So a link to a paid page is age-gated, not automatically banned — but the surrounding post can still be removed under Adult Sexual Solicitation.\n\nWhat Meta Transparency Center actually says:\n\n“Content that contains usernames, links to or logos of Adult Subscription Websites is restricted to adults ages 18 and older.”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM, though close to the search summary's phrasing. This is the most commercially important line in the whole file and it is the one I am least able to certify — it needs a direct read of the Meta page before anyone acts on it. NO follower threshold or account-age threshold for linking was found anywhere in Meta's own documentation; see could_not_verify.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/sexual-solicitation/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "VERIFIED RULE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Meta Transparency Center", "evidence_quote": "Content that contains usernames, links to or logos of Adult Subscription Websites is restricted to adults ages 18 and older.", "volatility": "high", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Instagram / Meta", "topic": "Links to adult subscription sites — age gating, not prohibition", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_ig_04", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Instagram / Meta: Internal moderation guidance is broader than the published rule", "summary": "Meta's internal guidance to moderators on when to remove content under the Sexual Solicitation policy is broader than the public policy text and broader than the policy's own stated rationale, which leads to content being wrongly removed. Sex workers report being targeted for merely mentioning links, including non-OnlyFans links.", "body": "Meta's internal guidance to moderators on when to remove content under the Sexual Solicitation policy is broader than the public policy text and broader than the policy's own stated rationale, which leads to content being wrongly removed. Sex workers report being targeted for merely mentioning links, including non-OnlyFans links.\n\nWhat Meta Oversight Board; HANX actually says:\n\n“Meta's internal guidance to moderators on when to remove content under the Sexual Solicitation policy is far broader than the stated rationale for the policy, or the publicly available guidance, which creates confusion for users and moderators and leads to content being wrongly removed.”\n\nNote: This is the key policy-vs-enforcement record for Meta: the published rule understates what is actually removed. The Oversight Board is Meta-adjacent but independent, so tier B. Second source https://www.hanxofficial.com/blogs/naked-truths/so-why-is-meta-cracking-down-on-sex-positive-instagram-accounts is tier C creator/brand testimony. Retrieved via search summary.", "source_type": "research", "source_link": "https://www.oversightboard.com/news/1214820616135890-oversight-board-overturns-meta-s-original-decisions-in-the-gender-identity-and-nudity-cases/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "B", "source_publisher": "Meta Oversight Board; HANX", "evidence_quote": "Meta's internal guidance to moderators on when to remove content under the Sexual Solicitation policy is far broader than the stated rationale for the policy, or the publicly available guidance, which creates confusion for users and moderators and leads to content being wrongly removed.", "volatility": "low", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Instagram / Meta", "topic": "Internal moderation guidance is broader than the published rule", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_ig_05", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Instagram / Meta: Recommendation suppression is a separate, published mechanism", "summary": "Meta operates a two-tier system that is explicitly published: content that breaks Community Standards is removed; content that breaks the separate Recommendation Guidelines is not removed but is made harder to find. Sexually suggestive content — the example given is people in see-through clothing — falls in the second bucket. Suppression of suggestive content on Instagram is therefore documented policy, not a conspiracy theory.", "body": "Meta operates a two-tier system that is explicitly published: content that breaks Community Standards is removed; content that breaks the separate Recommendation Guidelines is not removed but is made harder to find. Sexually suggestive content — the example given is people in see-through clothing — falls in the second bucket. Suppression of suggestive content on Instagram is therefore documented policy, not a conspiracy theory.\n\nWhat Instagram Help Center / Meta Transparency Center actually says:\n\n“Content that may be sexually explicit or suggestive, such as pictures of people in see-through clothing, may be considered upsetting, offensive, or sensitive, and Instagram may make it harder to find rather than removing it.”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM. This is the most useful single fact for calibrating expectations: the reach loss creators call 'shadowbanning' on Instagram is, in its milder form, an openly documented product behaviour with a user-facing control (Sensitive Content Control). That does not account for all reported suppression — see 32-ENF-01.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://help.instagram.com/251027992727268", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "VERIFIED RULE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Instagram Help Center / Meta Transparency Center", "evidence_quote": "Content that may be sexually explicit or suggestive, such as pictures of people in see-through clothing, may be considered upsetting, offensive, or sensitive, and Instagram may make it harder to find rather than removing it.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Instagram / Meta", "topic": "Recommendation suppression is a separate, published mechanism", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_ig_06", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Instagram / Meta: July 2026 enforcement wave against adult creators", "summary": "Instagram, X and Reddit tightened enforcement against adult creators within the same roughly two-week window in July 2026. Multiple long-established verified accounts were removed without warning, including performers Riley Reid and Gianna Dior, the studio account Team Skeet, and Bellesa's page (reported as ~700,000 followers and over ten years old). Instagram's head has publicly attributed OnlyFans creators' account losses to breaches of the nudity and solicitation rules.", "body": "Instagram, X and Reddit tightened enforcement against adult creators within the same roughly two-week window in July 2026. Multiple long-established verified accounts were removed without warning, including performers Riley Reid and Gianna Dior, the studio account Team Skeet, and Bellesa's page (reported as ~700,000 followers and over ten years old). Instagram's head has publicly attributed OnlyFans creators' account losses to breaches of the nudity and solicitation rules.\n\nWhat ViceSnob, citing an OnlyTraffic digest dated 20-26 July 2026; AOL/Instagram head statement actually says:\n\n“Instagram, X, and Reddit tightened enforcement against adult content creators within the same two-week window in July 2026, and multiple verified accounts with years of history were removed without warning.”\n\nNote: TIER C AND SHAKY. The publisher is an SEO/affiliate-flavoured site and its cited source (an OnlyTraffic weekly digest) is itself industry press. The named-account detail is specific enough to be checkable and would be worth confirming against mainstream tech press. I could not corroborate it independently because web_fetch was dead. The Instagram-head statement is separately reported at https://www.aol.com/entertainment/instagram-chief-reveals-reason-why-100000357.html (tier B, undated in the search result). Recorded because a July 2026 wave, if real, is directly relevant to anyone starting this week — but do NOT present it as established.", "source_type": "community", "source_link": "https://www.vicesnob.com/why-are-instagram-x-and-reddit-banning-onlyfans-creators-all-at-once-in-2026/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "CREATOR STRATEGY", "source_tier": "C", "source_publisher": "ViceSnob, citing an OnlyTraffic digest dated 20-26 July 2026; AOL/Instagram head statement", "evidence_quote": "Instagram, X, and Reddit tightened enforcement against adult content creators within the same two-week window in July 2026, and multiple verified accounts with years of history were removed without warning.", "volatility": "high", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Instagram / Meta", "topic": "July 2026 enforcement wave against adult creators", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_ig_07", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Instagram / Meta: Link-in-bio landing pages are crawled", "summary": "Creators report that routing around Instagram's link restrictions with a neutral link-in-bio page only works if the landing page itself is clean: explicit text, NSFW imagery or aggressive adult calls-to-action on the linked page are said to be read by Instagram's systems and penalised back onto the main account. Creators also report that in July 2026 Instagram closed the 'delete the flagged post to clear the flag' loophole, so deleting a flagged post no longer lifts the non-follower visibility restriction.", "body": "Creators report that routing around Instagram's link restrictions with a neutral link-in-bio page only works if the landing page itself is clean: explicit text, NSFW imagery or aggressive adult calls-to-action on the linked page are said to be read by Instagram's systems and penalised back onto the main account. Creators also report that in July 2026 Instagram closed the 'delete the flagged post to clear the flag' loophole, so deleting a flagged post no longer lifts the non-follower visibility restriction.\n\nWhat InstantDM; Aruna Talent; Inro actually says:\n\n“if your Linktree landing page contains explicit text, obvious NSFW imagery, or aggressive calls to action for adult content, Instagram's AI crawler will read it, process it, and penalize your main account.”\n\nNote: TIER C. Three separate creator-marketing sources in the same search asserted the crawl-the-landing-page behaviour, which is why voices is 3 — but they are commercially motivated agencies, not independent, and may be copying each other. Meta has never confirmed crawling outbound bio links. The 'delete-to-clear-a-flag loophole closed in July 2026' claim comes from a single source and is unconfirmed. Useful as a precaution (keep the landing page bland), not as fact.", "source_type": "community", "source_link": "https://instantdm.com/blog/avoiding-instagram-bans-for-onlyfans-creators-2026-guide", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "CREATOR STRATEGY", "source_tier": "C", "source_publisher": "InstantDM; Aruna Talent; Inro", "evidence_quote": "if your Linktree landing page contains explicit text, obvious NSFW imagery, or aggressive calls to action for adult content, Instagram's AI crawler will read it, process it, and penalize your main account.", "volatility": "high", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Instagram / Meta", "topic": "Link-in-bio landing pages are crawled", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_x_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "X (Twitter): Adult content is permitted if consensual and labelled", "summary": "X permits consensually produced and distributed adult nudity and sexual behaviour provided it is properly labelled and not prominently displayed. X's standalone Adult Content Policy dates from May 2024 and requires creator self-labelling; creators can set a media setting that auto-applies a content warning to all their images and video. Nudity in parody, activism, education, medical and artistic contexts is not treated as adult content. X is therefore the most permissive of the large mainstream platforms for a spicy creator.", "body": "X permits consensually produced and distributed adult nudity and sexual behaviour provided it is properly labelled and not prominently displayed. X's standalone Adult Content Policy dates from May 2024 and requires creator self-labelling; creators can set a media setting that auto-applies a content warning to all their images and video. Nudity in parody, activism, education, medical and artistic contexts is not treated as adult content. X is therefore the most permissive of the large mainstream platforms for a spicy creator.\n\nWhat X Help Center actually says:\n\n“any consensually produced and distributed material depicting adult nudity or sexual behavior that is pornographic or intended to cause sexual arousal”\n\nNote: The quoted definition appeared in quotation marks in the search result and is very likely verbatim from X's Adult Content Policy. The labelling and 'not prominently displayed' requirements are PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM. Practical read: the label is mandatory and self-applied, and failure to label is the main way a compliant creator gets actioned on X.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://help.x.com/en/rules-and-policies/adult-content", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "X Help Center", "evidence_quote": "any consensually produced and distributed material depicting adult nudity or sexual behavior that is pornographic or intended to cause sexual arousal", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "X (Twitter)", "topic": "Adult content is permitted if consensual and labelled", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_x_02", "category": "Promotion", "title": "X (Twitter): Monetisation of adult content is restricted", "summary": "Adult and sexual content is a restricted monetisation category on X. There is no separate adult-creator payout track; monetisation runs through X's standard Creator Monetization Standards, with eligibility requiring 18+, an active Premium subscription, an account in good standing, and identity and payout verification.", "body": "Adult and sexual content is a restricted monetisation category on X. There is no separate adult-creator payout track; monetisation runs through X's standard Creator Monetization Standards, with eligibility requiring 18+, an active Premium subscription, an account in good standing, and identity and payout verification.\n\nWhat AuditSocials (secondary summary of X's Creator Monetization Standards) actually says:\n\n“There is no dedicated adult-creator program; monetization runs through X's standard eligibility rules, and adult or sexual content is a restricted monetization category.”\n\nNote: TIER C, and the underlying X page was not reached. Downgraded from A because I could not open help.x.com. Practical read regardless: post on X for traffic, not for X revenue.", "source_type": "community", "source_link": "https://www.auditsocials.com/blog/x-creator-monetization-standards-2026", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "CREATOR STRATEGY", "source_tier": "C", "source_publisher": "AuditSocials (secondary summary of X's Creator Monetization Standards)", "evidence_quote": "There is no dedicated adult-creator program; monetization runs through X's standard eligibility rules, and adult or sexual content is a restricted monetization category.", "volatility": "high", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "X (Twitter)", "topic": "Monetisation of adult content is restricted", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_x_03", "category": "Promotion", "title": "X (Twitter): CONFLICTING — the alleged 'Adult Content Creator programme', January 2026", "summary": "Sources directly contradict each other on whether X launched a formal Adult Content Creator programme in January 2026 with government-ID verification, quarterly compliance reviews and a required 'trust score above 7.0 out of 10'. One source asserts the programme exists with those requirements; another states plainly that X has announced no such dedicated programme.", "body": "Sources directly contradict each other on whether X launched a formal Adult Content Creator programme in January 2026 with government-ID verification, quarterly compliance reviews and a required 'trust score above 7.0 out of 10'. One source asserts the programme exists with those requirements; another states plainly that X has announced no such dedicated programme.\n\nWhat Aruna Talent vs AuditSocials — mutually contradictory actually says:\n\n“X has not announced a dedicated 'Adult Content Creator' program, and instead adult content is governed by X's adult-content policy”\n\nNote: RECORDED AS A CONFLICT, NOT AS A FACT. The 'trust score above 7.0 out of 10' detail is the kind of specific-but-unsourceable number that machine-written SEO content invents, and I found it only on auditsocials.com. Do not propagate it. A creator should assume X's ordinary adult-content policy applies until an official X page says otherwise. Needs a direct read of help.x.com to settle.", "source_type": "community", "source_link": "https://arunatalent.com/blog/x-adult-content-creator-program-2026/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "CREATOR STRATEGY", "source_tier": "C", "source_publisher": "Aruna Talent vs AuditSocials — mutually contradictory", "evidence_quote": "X has not announced a dedicated 'Adult Content Creator' program, and instead adult content is governed by X's adult-content policy", "volatility": "high", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "X (Twitter)", "topic": "CONFLICTING — the alleged 'Adult Content Creator programme', January 2026", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_bsky_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Bluesky: adult content allowed when labelled", "summary": "Bluesky's Community Guidelines allow consensual adult sexual content, including fictional depictions, when it is appropriately labelled and subject to appropriate age restrictions. Sexual content involving non-consensual activity is not allowed, and neither is content that sexualizes minors.", "body": "Bluesky's Community Guidelines allow consensual adult sexual content, including fictional depictions, when it is appropriately labelled and subject to appropriate age restrictions. Sexual content involving non-consensual activity is not allowed, and neither is content that sexualizes minors.\n\nWhat Bluesky Social, PBC actually says:\n\n“We allow consensual adult sexual content, including fictional depictions, when appropriately labeled and subject to appropriate age restrictions. … We do not allow sexual content involving non-consensual activity including synthetic, simulated, illustrated, or animated versions.”\n\nNote: The guidelines page shows 'Last Updated: September 19, 2025'. It does not list label names or a specific penalty for missing labels.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://bsky.social/about/support/community-guidelines", "last_verified": "2026-09-25", "reliability": "VERIFIED RULE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Bluesky Social, PBC", "evidence_quote": "We allow consensual adult sexual content, including fictional depictions, when appropriately labeled and subject to appropriate age restrictions. … We do not allow sexual content involving non-consensual activity including synthetic, simulated, illustrated, or animated versions.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Bluesky", "topic": "adult content allowed when labelled", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_bsky_02", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Bluesky: Adult content is hidden by default and invisible logged-out — the discovery ceiling", "summary": "Adult content on Bluesky is hidden by default for new users and hidden entirely from logged-out visitors. Users must opt in before they can see it. Reporting also indicates the opt-in toggle is unreliable or unavailable in the mobile apps and must in practice be enabled through a browser.", "body": "Adult content on Bluesky is hidden by default for new users and hidden entirely from logged-out visitors. Users must opt in before they can see it. Reporting also indicates the opt-in toggle is unreliable or unavailable in the mobile apps and must in practice be enabled through a browser.\n\nWhat Bluesky/atproto GitHub discussion; Fedica; Hypefury actually says:\n\n“Bluesky hides adult content for not logged-in users by default. By default, adult content is hidden for new users until they enable adult content.”\n\nNote: This is the practical catch that makes Bluesky look more welcoming than it converts. Permission to post is not the same as ability to be found: your addressable audience is only the subset who have opted in, and none of your work is visible to a logged-out visitor arriving from a search engine. The mobile-toggle problem is reported by multiple secondary sources and dated as far back as July 2025; I could not verify its status as of 2026-08-28.", "source_type": "research", "source_link": "https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/discussions/3628", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "B", "source_publisher": "Bluesky/atproto GitHub discussion; Fedica; Hypefury", "evidence_quote": "Bluesky hides adult content for not logged-in users by default. By default, adult content is hidden for new users until they enable adult content.", "volatility": "high", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Bluesky", "topic": "Adult content is hidden by default and invisible logged-out — the discovery ceiling", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_tt_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "TikTok: Nudity and sexual activity are prohibited outright", "summary": "TikTok does not allow adult nudity or sexual activity, with narrow exceptions for documentary, sex-education, fictional and artistic contexts. Content showing explicit nudity, sexual acts, sexualised body parts or fetish behaviour is removed even where it is blurred or implied. TikTok's Community Guidelines were updated on 24 September 2026.", "body": "TikTok does not allow adult nudity or sexual activity, with narrow exceptions for documentary, sex-education, fictional and artistic contexts. Content showing explicit nudity, sexual acts, sexualised body parts or fetish behaviour is removed even where it is blurred or implied. TikTok's Community Guidelines were updated on 24 September 2026.\n\nWhat TikTok Community Guidelines actually says:\n\n“While TikTok generally doesn't allow adult nudity or sexual activity, they make limited exceptions for documentaries, sex education, fiction, and art.”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM. DATE ANOMALY WORTH FLAGGING: the search result gives the guidelines update as 24 September 2026, which is AFTER this run's date of 28 August 2026. Either the source is wrong, the date refers to a prior year, or the search index is ahead of the stated run date. Do not rely on that date without checking.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://www.tiktok.com/safety/en/policies-and-engagement/sensitive-mature-themes", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "VERIFIED RULE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "TikTok Community Guidelines", "evidence_quote": "While TikTok generally doesn't allow adult nudity or sexual activity, they make limited exceptions for documentaries, sex education, fiction, and art.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "TikTok", "topic": "Nudity and sexual activity are prohibited outright", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_tt_02", "category": "Promotion", "title": "TikTok: Three-tier moderation: remove / age-restrict / de-recommend", "summary": "TikTok operates three independent enforcement tiers: outright removal for prohibited content; age restriction for mature content; and For You Feed ineligibility for content that fails recommendation standards. The third tier is a distribution restriction that is not a removal and operates independently of the other two. Significant adult body exposure and sexually suggestive behaviour by adults is age-restricted AND FYF-ineligible. Implied nudity and 'sensual content' are named as non-recommendable categories.", "body": "TikTok operates three independent enforcement tiers: outright removal for prohibited content; age restriction for mature content; and For You Feed ineligibility for content that fails recommendation standards. The third tier is a distribution restriction that is not a removal and operates independently of the other two. Significant adult body exposure and sexually suggestive behaviour by adults is age-restricted AND FYF-ineligible. Implied nudity and 'sensual content' are named as non-recommendable categories.\n\nWhat TikTok, For You Feed Eligibility Standards actually says:\n\n“Some content, like significant adult body exposure or sexually suggestive behavior involving adults, is age-restricted and ineligible for the For You feed.”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM but the substance is published in a dedicated TikTok policy page whose whole purpose is to document non-removal suppression. This is the cleanest tier-A evidence in the whole file that reach suppression of suggestive content is stated policy, not folklore. TikTok has also stated it repeatedly recommends less of this category to avoid negative experiences, and restricts it from being recommended to or searchable by teen accounts.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://www.tiktok.com/community-guidelines/en/fyf-standards/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "VERIFIED RULE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "TikTok, For You Feed Eligibility Standards", "evidence_quote": "Some content, like significant adult body exposure or sexually suggestive behavior involving adults, is age-restricted and ineligible for the For You feed.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "TikTok", "topic": "Three-tier moderation: remove / age-restrict / de-recommend", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_tt_03", "category": "Promotion", "title": "TikTok: Repeat suggestive posting restricts the account, not just the post", "summary": "TikTok has stated it will block users from the For You feed if they repeatedly post content it classes as problematic, a category that explicitly includes sexually suggestive content. The penalty escalates from the post to the account.", "body": "TikTok has stated it will block users from the For You feed if they repeatedly post content it classes as problematic, a category that explicitly includes sexually suggestive content. The penalty escalates from the post to the account.\n\nWhat Variety actually says:\n\n“TikTok Will Block Users From For You Feed If They Repeatedly Post 'Problematic' Content, Such as Sexually Suggestive, 'Extreme Fitness' or Sadness Videos”\n\nNote: Quote is the Variety headline, which is verbatim as a headline. Dated 2024 and may have been superseded. Practical read: on TikTok the borderline-suggestive strategy has an account-level cost that compounds, unlike a one-off removal.", "source_type": "research", "source_link": "https://variety.com/2024/digital/news/tiktok-block-for-you-feed-problematic-content-sexually-suggestive-1235973944/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "B", "source_publisher": "Variety", "evidence_quote": "TikTok Will Block Users From For You Feed If They Repeatedly Post 'Problematic' Content, Such as Sexually Suggestive, 'Extreme Fitness' or Sadness Videos", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "TikTok", "topic": "Repeat suggestive posting restricts the account, not just the post", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_tt_04", "category": "Promotion", "title": "TikTok: Adult services are prohibited in advertising", "summary": "TikTok's advertising policies prohibit member-exclusive content, webcam streaming of adult content such as stripping, nude modelling and masturbation, and services that create content for sexual pleasure. Paid promotion of a spicy creator business on TikTok is therefore closed.", "body": "TikTok's advertising policies prohibit member-exclusive content, webcam streaming of adult content such as stripping, nude modelling and masturbation, and services that create content for sexual pleasure. Paid promotion of a spicy creator business on TikTok is therefore closed.\n\nWhat TikTok Advertising Policies actually says:\n\n“member exclusive content and streaming of adult content through a webcam, such as stripping, nude modeling and masturbation (sexcamming) and services that create content for sexual pleasure are not allowed.”\n\nNote: Close to verbatim in the search summary but not confirmed against the page. Note this is the ADS policy, distinct from the organic Community Guidelines.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://ads.tiktok.com/help/article/tiktok-ads-policy-adult-content", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "VERIFIED RULE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "TikTok Advertising Policies", "evidence_quote": "member exclusive content and streaming of adult content through a webcam, such as stripping, nude modeling and masturbation (sexcamming) and services that create content for sexual pleasure are not allowed.", "volatility": "low", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "TikTok", "topic": "Adult services are prohibited in advertising", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_rdt_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Sitewide model — Reddit permits adult content but devolves the rules", "summary": "Reddit marks sexually explicit and mature material NSFW and prohibits sexual content involving anyone under 18. It devolves most day-to-day moderation to subreddit moderators while maintaining platform-wide rules that override community norms. The practical consequence is that there is no single Reddit rulebook for a creator: the binding rules are per-subreddit and must be read individually.", "body": "Reddit marks sexually explicit and mature material NSFW and prohibits sexual content involving anyone under 18. It devolves most day-to-day moderation to subreddit moderators while maintaining platform-wide rules that override community norms. The practical consequence is that there is no single Reddit rulebook for a creator: the binding rules are per-subreddit and must be read individually.\n\nWhat Reddit Help actually says:\n\n“Reddit marks sexually explicit or otherwise mature material as NSFW and flatly prohibits sexual content involving anyone under 18, and it delegates much day-to-day moderation to subreddit moderators while maintaining platform-wide rules that supersede community norms.”\n\nNote: DOWNGRADED TO B. The URL is Reddit's own help page but reddit domains are blocked to both the search agent and the browser here, so this is a secondary characterisation, not a read of Reddit's page. This devolution is exactly why deliverable A matters and exactly why its absence hurts.", "source_type": "research", "source_link": "https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360061032831-How-do-I-view-NSFW-communities", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "B", "source_publisher": "Reddit Help", "evidence_quote": "Reddit marks sexually explicit or otherwise mature material as NSFW and flatly prohibits sexual content involving anyone under 18, and it delegates much day-to-day moderation to subreddit moderators while maintaining platform-wide rules that supersede community norms.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Reddit", "topic": "Sitewide model — Reddit permits adult content but devolves the rules", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_rdt_02", "category": "Promotion", "title": "[Unverified - being checked] Reddit: Age verification is now hard-gated in some jurisdictions", "summary": "[Unverified - being checked] Reddit gates NSFW content behind a self-attested 'I'm over 18' prompt in most jurisdictions, but where regulators require proof — most prominently the UK under the Online Safety Act — Reddit uses a third-party verification provider (Persona) requiring photo ID or a biometric check before granting access to NSFW subreddits.", "body": "Reddit gates NSFW content behind a self-attested 'I'm over 18' prompt in most jurisdictions, but where regulators require proof — most prominently the UK under the Online Safety Act — Reddit uses a third-party verification provider (Persona) requiring photo ID or a biometric check before granting access to NSFW subreddits.\n\nWhat Factually (fact-check aggregator) actually says:\n\n“where regulators demand proof—most prominently the UK under the Online Safety Act—Reddit introduced mandatory age verification using a third-party service (Persona) that asks for photo ID or biometric checks before granting access to NSFW subreddits.”\n\nNote: Directly relevant to audience size: a UK audience now has to clear an ID check before it can see your NSFW post at all. Volatility high — age-verification law is moving fast in multiple jurisdictions and this should be re-checked often.", "source_type": "research", "source_link": "https://factually.co/fact-checks/media/reddit-nsfw-policies-age-restrictions-enforcement-191360", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "B", "source_publisher": "Factually (fact-check aggregator)", "evidence_quote": "where regulators demand proof—most prominently the UK under the Online Safety Act—Reddit introduced mandatory age verification using a third-party service (Persona) that asks for photo ID or biometric checks before granting access to NSFW subreddits.", "volatility": "high", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Reddit", "topic": "Age verification is now hard-gated in some jurisdictions", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" }, "verification": { "status": "unverified", "label": "Unverified - being checked", "reasons": [ "legal_fetch_over_cap" ], "checked_utc": "20261021-123916Z" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_rdt_03", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Reddit: The 9:1 self-promotion rule is retired; karma gates replaced it", "summary": "Reddit's formal 9-to-1 self-promotion rule (nine non-promotional contributions per promotional one) was official guidance in Reddit's early years but has been retired. It was replaced by a qualitative spam policy enforced by moderators and AutoModerator rather than by Reddit centrally, which is why the rules vary so much between subreddits. In practice the binding gate for a new creator is karma: without a minimum karma level most high-traffic NSFW and promo subreddits will auto-remove posts.", "body": "Reddit's formal 9-to-1 self-promotion rule (nine non-promotional contributions per promotional one) was official guidance in Reddit's early years but has been retired. It was replaced by a qualitative spam policy enforced by moderators and AutoModerator rather than by Reddit centrally, which is why the rules vary so much between subreddits. In practice the binding gate for a new creator is karma: without a minimum karma level most high-traffic NSFW and promo subreddits will auto-remove posts.\n\nWhat RedShip; KarmaGuy; OneUp Today; Enforcity actually says:\n\n“Reddit retired the formal 9 self-promotion rule years ago, and the qualitative spam policy that replaced it is enforced by moderators and AutoMod, not by Reddit itself, which is why rules vary so much per subreddit.”\n\nNote: TIER C but with four independent-looking sources converging, and it matches Reddit's own documented spam definition ('repeated, unwanted, or unsolicited actions'). The 90/10 heuristic survives as informal community convention even though it is no longer a Reddit rule. Specific karma numbers were quoted in one source as 100-1000 comment/post karma and account ages of 7-30 days, but these are aggregator generalisations across unnamed subs, not rules I read anywhere — do NOT treat as thresholds.", "source_type": "community", "source_link": "https://redship.io/blog/reddit-self-promotion-rules", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "CREATOR STRATEGY", "source_tier": "C", "source_publisher": "RedShip; KarmaGuy; OneUp Today; Enforcity", "evidence_quote": "Reddit retired the formal 9 self-promotion rule years ago, and the qualitative spam policy that replaced it is enforced by moderators and AutoMod, not by Reddit itself, which is why rules vary so much per subreddit.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Reddit", "topic": "The 9:1 self-promotion rule is retired; karma gates replaced it", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_rdt_04", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Shadowbanning on Reddit is a real, named mechanism", "summary": "A Reddit shadowban silently hides an account's posts and comments from other users without notifying the account holder; the user still sees their own content. Creator-facing sources attribute shadowbans to spam detection triggered by promotional behaviour, use of multiple accounts, and vote manipulation.", "body": "A Reddit shadowban silently hides an account's posts and comments from other users without notifying the account holder; the user still sees their own content. Creator-facing sources attribute shadowbans to spam detection triggered by promotional behaviour, use of multiple accounts, and vote manipulation.\n\nWhat Multiple creator-marketing sources (AuditSocials, ReddiReach, Respoof, TabooGrow, ReddGrow) actually says:\n\n“A shadowban is when Reddit silently hides all your posts and comments from other users without telling you. You can still see your own content, but nobody else can.”\n\nNote: TIER C — five creator/SEO sources describing the same mechanism, but they are a genre that copies itself, so five voices here is weaker evidence than five independent testimonies would be. Reddit shadowbanning is nonetheless long-documented and the mechanism description is uncontroversial. The listed triggers are the sources' attribution, not Reddit's.", "source_type": "community", "source_link": "https://www.auditsocials.com/blog/reddit-ban-suspension-policy-2026-shadowban-appeal-guide", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "CREATOR STRATEGY", "source_tier": "C", "source_publisher": "Multiple creator-marketing sources (AuditSocials, ReddiReach, Respoof, TabooGrow, ReddGrow)", "evidence_quote": "A shadowban is when Reddit silently hides all your posts and comments from other users without telling you. You can still see your own content, but nobody else can.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Reddit", "topic": "Shadowbanning on Reddit is a real, named mechanism", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_yt_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "YouTube: Age restriction is the middle tier, and it costs distribution", "summary": "YouTube may age-restrict content containing nudity or sexual content that does not meet the removal threshold. Age-restricted videos are not viewable by anyone under 18 or signed out, cannot be embedded on most third-party sites, and are excluded from Trending and from certain search recommendations. Nudity or sexual content may be permitted where the primary purpose is educational, documentary, scientific or artistic and it is not gratuitously graphic.", "body": "YouTube may age-restrict content containing nudity or sexual content that does not meet the removal threshold. Age-restricted videos are not viewable by anyone under 18 or signed out, cannot be embedded on most third-party sites, and are excluded from Trending and from certain search recommendations. Nudity or sexual content may be permitted where the primary purpose is educational, documentary, scientific or artistic and it is not gratuitously graphic.\n\nWhat YouTube Help — Nudity & Sexual Content Policy actually says:\n\n“Age-restricted content isn't viewable to anyone under 18 years of age or signed out. Age-restricted videos cannot be embedded on most third-party websites and are excluded from the 'Trending' section and certain search recommendations.”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM but the substance is stable and long-published. Another clean example of published, admitted distribution suppression. The signed-out exclusion is the important one for discovery: an age-restricted video cannot be found by a casual, logged-out browser.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2802002?hl=en", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "VERIFIED RULE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "YouTube Help — Nudity & Sexual Content Policy", "evidence_quote": "Age-restricted content isn't viewable to anyone under 18 years of age or signed out. Age-restricted videos cannot be embedded on most third-party websites and are excluded from the 'Trending' section and certain search recommendations.", "volatility": "low", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "YouTube", "topic": "Age restriction is the middle tier, and it costs distribution", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_yt_02", "category": "Promotion", "title": "YouTube: Strike escalation timeline", "summary": "A first Community Guidelines violation leads to a one-week upload suspension; a second within 90 days to a two-week suspension; three strikes within 90 days terminates the channel permanently. Severe violations such as non-consensual sexual imagery or CSAM cause immediate termination without the strike ladder.", "body": "A first Community Guidelines violation leads to a one-week upload suspension; a second within 90 days to a two-week suspension; three strikes within 90 days terminates the channel permanently. Severe violations such as non-consensual sexual imagery or CSAM cause immediate termination without the strike ladder.\n\nWhat YouTube Help actually says:\n\n“First violations lead to a one-week upload suspension, second violations within 90 days result in a two-week suspension, and three strikes within 90 days result in permanent channel termination.”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM. The 90-day rolling window is the practically important number: strikes expire, so pacing matters.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2802002?hl=en", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "VERIFIED RULE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "YouTube Help", "evidence_quote": "First violations lead to a one-week upload suspension, second violations within 90 days result in a two-week suspension, and three strikes within 90 days result in permanent channel termination.", "volatility": "low", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "YouTube", "topic": "Strike escalation timeline", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_tw_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Twitch: Attire and sexual themes — what a label buys you", "summary": "Twitch does not permit full or partial nudity, real or fictional. It does permit, with a Sexual Themes content classification label, content that deliberately highlights breasts, buttocks or the pelvic region, and body writing or body painting on female-presenting breasts and/or buttocks regardless of gender. Twerking, grinding and pole dancing are permitted without a label.", "body": "Twitch does not permit full or partial nudity, real or fictional. It does permit, with a Sexual Themes content classification label, content that deliberately highlights breasts, buttocks or the pelvic region, and body writing or body painting on female-presenting breasts and/or buttocks regardless of gender. Twerking, grinding and pole dancing are permitted without a label.\n\nWhat Dot Esports / Variety, reporting Twitch's sexual content policy actually says:\n\n“deliberately highlight[s] breasts, buttocks or pelvic region”\n\nNote: The quoted fragments appeared in quotation marks in the search summary and are journalists quoting Twitch's policy text. TIER B, NOT A: Twitch's own policy page was not reached. HIGH VOLATILITY WARNING — Twitch reversed its artistic-nudity policy within roughly 48 hours in December 2023 (TechCrunch covered both the launch and the rollback). This is the least stable policy in the file; verify directly before relying on it.", "source_type": "research", "source_link": "https://dotesports.com/streaming/news/what-is-twitchs-new-sexual-content-policy-all-changes-explained", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "B", "source_publisher": "Dot Esports / Variety, reporting Twitch's sexual content policy", "evidence_quote": "deliberately highlight[s] breasts, buttocks or pelvic region", "volatility": "high", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Twitch", "topic": "Attire and sexual themes — what a label buys you", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_tw_02", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Twitch: You may have an adult business; you may not link to it", "summary": "Twitch permits creators to have identities and businesses outside the platform, including adult subscription pages, but prohibits pornography on Twitch and bars direct promotion of, or linking to, websites primarily devoted to sexual content. Separately, broadcasts carrying an adult content classification label do not appear in recommendations or on the Twitch homepage.", "body": "Twitch permits creators to have identities and businesses outside the platform, including adult subscription pages, but prohibits pornography on Twitch and bars direct promotion of, or linking to, websites primarily devoted to sexual content. Separately, broadcasts carrying an adult content classification label do not appear in recommendations or on the Twitch homepage.\n\nWhat WowPlus, summarising Twitch policy actually says:\n\n“Twitch allows creators to have identities and businesses outside the platform, including adult subscription pages, but it prohibits pornography on Twitch and bars direct promotion or linking to websites primarily devoted to sexual content.”\n\nNote: TIER C and the underlying Twitch page was not reached — treat the exact boundary as unknown. The distinction it describes (existing as an adult creator is fine; pointing Twitch traffic at the adult page is not) matches how every other mainstream platform in this file draws the line, which is why I record it despite the weak source. The recommendations/homepage exclusion for labelled adult broadcasts is the concrete discovery cost.", "source_type": "community", "source_link": "https://wowplus.net/twitch-onlyfans-rules-2026-streamers-promotion/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "CREATOR STRATEGY", "source_tier": "C", "source_publisher": "WowPlus, summarising Twitch policy", "evidence_quote": "Twitch allows creators to have identities and businesses outside the platform, including adult subscription pages, but it prohibits pornography on Twitch and bars direct promotion or linking to websites primarily devoted to sexual content.", "volatility": "high", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Twitch", "topic": "You may have an adult business; you may not link to it", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_snap_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Snapchat: Sexually explicit content and offers of sexual services are prohibited", "summary": "Snapchat prohibits sharing, promoting or distributing sexually explicit content and conduct, including pornography, sexual nudity, and offers of sexual services. Snapchat's Community Guidelines were updated in March 2026.", "body": "Snapchat prohibits sharing, promoting or distributing sexually explicit content and conduct, including pornography, sexual nudity, and offers of sexual services. Snapchat's Community Guidelines were updated in March 2026.\n\nWhat Snap Inc. Community Guidelines actually says:\n\n“The platform prohibits sexual harassment and sharing, promoting, or distributing sexually explicit content and conduct, including pornography, sexual nudity, or offers of sexual services.”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM. Note the phrase 'promoting or distributing' — on Snap the promotion is prohibited alongside the content itself, which is a stricter construction than Instagram's age-gating of adult-site links.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://values.snap.com/policy/policy-community-guidelines/sexual-content", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Snap Inc. Community Guidelines", "evidence_quote": "The platform prohibits sexual harassment and sharing, promoting, or distributing sexually explicit content and conduct, including pornography, sexual nudity, or offers of sexual services.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Snapchat", "topic": "Sexually explicit content and offers of sexual services are prohibited", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_snap_02", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Snapchat: Spotlight recommendation guidelines ban all nudity in any medium", "summary": "Snapchat publishes separate Content Guidelines for Recommendation Eligibility governing what can be surfaced to a wider audience on Spotlight. To be recommended, content must contain no nudity, sex acts or sexual services. The recommendation guidelines prohibit all nudity in any context even where it is not photographic or realistic — paintings and AI-generated images are named. All Spotlight submissions are reviewed by automated systems before receiving any distribution.", "body": "Snapchat publishes separate Content Guidelines for Recommendation Eligibility governing what can be surfaced to a wider audience on Spotlight. To be recommended, content must contain no nudity, sex acts or sexual services. The recommendation guidelines prohibit all nudity in any context even where it is not photographic or realistic — paintings and AI-generated images are named. All Spotlight submissions are reviewed by automated systems before receiving any distribution.\n\nWhat Snap Inc. Content Guidelines for Recommendation Eligibility actually says:\n\n“The Content Guidelines prohibit all nudity in any context, even if not photographic or realistic (for example, paintings or AI-generated images).”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM. Snapchat is effectively closed as a discovery channel for this category: the only growth surface (Spotlight) is pre-screened by automation against a stricter no-nudity-of-any-kind standard. Snapchat is a channel for an audience you already have, not one for getting found.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://www.snap.com/content-recommendation-guidelines", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Snap Inc. Content Guidelines for Recommendation Eligibility", "evidence_quote": "The Content Guidelines prohibit all nudity in any context, even if not photographic or realistic (for example, paintings or AI-generated images).", "volatility": "low", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Snapchat", "topic": "Spotlight recommendation guidelines ban all nudity in any medium", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_tum_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Tumblr: Nudity is allowed again with Community Labels; explicit acts are not", "summary": "Tumblr reversed its December 2018 adult content ban and now permits nudity, mature subject matter and sexual themes when tagged with the appropriate Community Label, including a specific 'Sexual Themes' category. Visual depictions of sexually explicit acts remain prohibited. Blogs focused on mature content may be ineligible for certain Tumblr features including monetisation.", "body": "Tumblr reversed its December 2018 adult content ban and now permits nudity, mature subject matter and sexual themes when tagged with the appropriate Community Label, including a specific 'Sexual Themes' category. Visual depictions of sexually explicit acts remain prohibited. Blogs focused on mature content may be ineligible for certain Tumblr features including monetisation.\n\nWhat Tumblr User Guidelines / Tumblr Help Center actually says:\n\n“even if creations contain nudity, mature subject matter, or sexual themes, they can be shared on Tumblr using appropriate Community Labels”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM. The sources retrieved were mostly dated 2018 and 2022; I found NO 2026-dated confirmation that this is still the current position. The 'nudity yes, explicit acts no, monetisation restricted' shape is a meaningful middle ground and makes Tumblr a genuine option for suggestive rather than hardcore work, but the currency of the policy is unverified as of 2026-08-28.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://www.tumblr.com/policy/en/user-guidelines", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Tumblr User Guidelines / Tumblr Help Center", "evidence_quote": "even if creations contain nudity, mature subject matter, or sexual themes, they can be shared on Tumblr using appropriate Community Labels", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Tumblr", "topic": "Nudity is allowed again with Community Labels; explicit acts are not", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_pin_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Pinterest: Closed — all nudity banned as of June 2025", "summary": "Pinterest does not allow pornographic content and limits distribution of or removes mature and explicit content. As of June 2025 Pinterest removed its remaining exceptions for artistic and educational nudity, treating all nudity the same as pornography. Pinterest is closed to this category with no label or gating workaround.", "body": "Pinterest does not allow pornographic content and limits distribution of or removes mature and explicit content. As of June 2025 Pinterest removed its remaining exceptions for artistic and educational nudity, treating all nudity the same as pornography. Pinterest is closed to this category with no label or gating workaround.\n\nWhat Pinterest Community Guidelines; Platform Governance Archive; Open Terms Archive actually says:\n\n“As of June 2025, Pinterest updated its community guidelines to remove all exceptions for artistic or educational nudity, treating nudity the same as pornography.”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM, but the change is independently documented by two policy-tracking archives (Platform Governance Archive and Open Terms Archive), which are unusually reliable tier-B corroboration for a policy diff. The Open Terms Archive memo is titled 'Pinterest bans all nudity'. Practical read: do not spend week-one effort here.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://policy.pinterest.com/en/community-guidelines", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Pinterest Community Guidelines; Platform Governance Archive; Open Terms Archive", "evidence_quote": "As of June 2025, Pinterest updated its community guidelines to remove all exceptions for artistic or educational nudity, treating nudity the same as pornography.", "volatility": "low", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Pinterest", "topic": "Closed — all nudity banned as of June 2025", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_tg_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Telegram: Public channels vs private groups", "summary": "Telegram's Terms of Service prohibit posting illegal pornographic content on publicly viewable channels and bots. Reporting indicates the public-sharing restriction does not extend to private groups and chats, and that legal NSFW content is tolerated more broadly than on mainstream platforms. Telegram operates zero tolerance for CSAM and has since 2018 automatically checked public images against a hash database.", "body": "Telegram's Terms of Service prohibit posting illegal pornographic content on publicly viewable channels and bots. Reporting indicates the public-sharing restriction does not extend to private groups and chats, and that legal NSFW content is tolerated more broadly than on mainstream platforms. Telegram operates zero tolerance for CSAM and has since 2018 automatically checked public images against a hash database.\n\nWhat Telegram Terms of Service / Telegram Safety Overview actually says:\n\n“users are prohibited from posting illegal pornographic content on publicly viewable Telegram channels, bots, etc.”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM, and the search results were internally inconsistent — one line said Telegram 'bans the public sharing of pornographic content' while another said the rules 'allow users to post NSFW content as long as it's legal, even in public channels.' The word doing the work in Telegram's actual ToS is 'illegal'. I could not open telegram.org/tos to resolve this and it MUST be read directly. Note also that Telegram has no discovery surface worth the name — it is a retention and delivery channel, not a place to get found.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://telegram.org/tos", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Telegram Terms of Service / Telegram Safety Overview", "evidence_quote": "users are prohibited from posting illegal pornographic content on publicly viewable Telegram channels, bots, etc.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Telegram", "topic": "Public channels vs private groups", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_dis_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Discord: Explicit content permitted in correctly labelled age-restricted spaces", "summary": "Discord servers may host sexually explicit adult content provided it does not otherwise violate Discord policy, the server owner and all moderators are over 18, and every channel hosting sexually explicit content carries an age-restricted label. A server must be classified age-restricted if it is organised around age-restricted themes or if the majority of its content is 18+, and Discord may itself age-gate an entire server that appears to be primarily used to host sexual content. Content sexualising minors is never permitted anywhere.", "body": "Discord servers may host sexually explicit adult content provided it does not otherwise violate Discord policy, the server owner and all moderators are over 18, and every channel hosting sexually explicit content carries an age-restricted label. A server must be classified age-restricted if it is organised around age-restricted themes or if the majority of its content is 18+, and Discord may itself age-gate an entire server that appears to be primarily used to host sexual content. Content sexualising minors is never permitted anywhere.\n\nWhat Discord Safety / Discord Support actually says:\n\n“Servers can host sexually explicit content within their server as long as it does not violate Discord's policies, the server owner and moderators are all over the age of 18, and any channel where sexually explicit content is hosted is marked with an age-restricted label.”\n\nNote: PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM but consistent across three Discord-owned URLs. Discord is a retention/community channel, not a discovery channel. NOTE: the commercial question — whether you may SELL access to sexual content via Discord — was not answered by any source I reached. See could_not_verify.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://discord.com/safety/sexual-content-policy-explainer", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Discord Safety / Discord Support", "evidence_quote": "Servers can host sexually explicit content within their server as long as it does not violate Discord's policies, the server owner and moderators are all over the age of 18, and any channel where sexually explicit content is hosted is marked with an age-restricted label.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Discord", "topic": "Explicit content permitted in correctly labelled age-restricted spaces", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_dis_02", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Discord: Age assurance now gates access to your audience", "summary": "Discord is rolling out a platform-wide age-assurance system that treats every account as a teen account until proven otherwise. Only age-assured users can access age-restricted channels, servers and app commands. Reporting places a significant change in March 2026.", "body": "Discord is rolling out a platform-wide age-assurance system that treats every account as a teen account until proven otherwise. Only age-assured users can access age-restricted channels, servers and app commands. Reporting places a significant change in March 2026.\n\nWhat Discord Safety; GNL Magazine actually says:\n\n“Age-assured users are the only ones who can access age-restricted channels, servers, and app commands.”\n\nNote: Mixed sourcing: the mechanism is described on Discord's own safety pages; the March 2026 dating comes from GNL Magazine (tier C). Marked B overall. Practical read: the default-to-teen posture means an unverified member of your server cannot see your adult channels at all, so audience attrition at the age gate should be expected.", "source_type": "research", "source_link": "https://discord.com/safety/360043653552-age-restricted-content-on-discord", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "B", "source_publisher": "Discord Safety; GNL Magazine", "evidence_quote": "Age-assured users are the only ones who can access age-restricted channels, servers, and app commands.", "volatility": "high", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Discord", "topic": "Age assurance now gates access to your audience", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_thr_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Threads inherits Meta's Community Standards — closed to adult content", "summary": "Threads follows Meta's unified Community Standards and does not allow adult nudity or sexual activity. Suggestive content such as see-through clothing and sexual slang is permitted but is restricted from recommendations and can be further limited by users' Sensitive Content Control. There is no Threads adult-creator programme or labelling regime equivalent to X's or Bluesky's.", "body": "Threads follows Meta's unified Community Standards and does not allow adult nudity or sexual activity. Suggestive content such as see-through clothing and sexual slang is permitted but is restricted from recommendations and can be further limited by users' Sensitive Content Control. There is no Threads adult-creator programme or labelling regime equivalent to X's or Bluesky's.\n\nWhat Meta AI account on Threads, summarising Meta Community Standards actually says:\n\n“No, Threads and Instagram don't allow 'inappropriate sexual content' like adult nudity or sexual activity — per public sources, Meta removes that stuff because it violates Community Standards. What you might still see is 'suggestive' content — see-through clothing, sexual slang, etc — which Meta says is allowed but restricted from recommendations”\n\nNote: The quote is verbatim from a Threads post by Meta's own AI account as it appeared in the search index. That is a Meta-operated account but an AI-generated post, so it is NOT authoritative policy text — tier B, not A. The underlying claim (Threads = Instagram rules) is uncontroversial. Threads has no separate published adult-content policy that I could find.", "source_type": "research", "source_link": "https://www.threads.com/@meta.ai/post/Dac9vKtDzAx/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "B", "source_publisher": "Meta AI account on Threads, summarising Meta Community Standards", "evidence_quote": "No, Threads and Instagram don't allow 'inappropriate sexual content' like adult nudity or sexual activity — per public sources, Meta removes that stuff because it violates Community Standards. What you might still see is 'suggestive' content — see-through clothing, sexual slang, etc — which Meta says is allowed but restricted from recommendations", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Threads", "topic": "Threads inherits Meta's Community Standards — closed to adult content", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_enf_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Cross-platform: Shadowbanning of sex workers — the primary quantitative study", "summary": "Hacking//Hustling's 'Posting Into the Void' used participatory action research (n=262) to measure content moderation effects on sex workers and activists after the 2020 uprisings. Sex workers were significantly more likely to report having been shadowbanned (30.77%) than activists/organisers/protesters (12.82%). Among respondents who identified as both sex worker and activist, 51.28% reported being shadowbanned. Reported symptoms included sudden drops in follower count, involuntary unfollowing of other shadowbanned accounts, posts deleted without notification, and inability to post at all.", "body": "Hacking//Hustling's 'Posting Into the Void' used participatory action research (n=262) to measure content moderation effects on sex workers and activists after the 2020 uprisings. Sex workers were significantly more likely to report having been shadowbanned (30.77%) than activists/organisers/protesters (12.82%). Among respondents who identified as both sex worker and activist, 51.28% reported being shadowbanned. Reported symptoms included sudden drops in follower count, involuntary unfollowing of other shadowbanned accounts, posts deleted without notification, and inability to post at all.\n\nWhat Hacking//Hustling actually says:\n\n“Sex workers are significantly more likely (30.77%) to report they have been shadowbanned on social media while activists/organizers/protesters are significantly less likely to report the same (12.82%).”\n\nNote: The strongest single enforcement source in this file. Important framing caveat: these are SELF-REPORTS of perceived shadowbanning, not platform-side measurement, and the study says so. That is a real limitation and it should not be laundered. Dated September 2020, so it predates every current policy in this file by six years — it establishes that the phenomenon is real and disproportionate, not that today's rates are these rates. voices=262 is the study n. Full-text PDF and dataset also mirrored at saltyworld.net and redumbrellafund.org.", "source_type": "research", "source_link": "https://hackinghustling.org/posting-into-the-void-content-moderation/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "B", "source_publisher": "Hacking//Hustling", "evidence_quote": "Sex workers are significantly more likely (30.77%) to report they have been shadowbanned on social media while activists/organizers/protesters are significantly less likely to report the same (12.82%).", "volatility": "low", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Cross-platform", "topic": "Shadowbanning of sex workers — the primary quantitative study", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_enf_02", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Cross-platform: Academic framing — 'shadowbanning' is a poor term, and the labour is invisible", "summary": "Two peer-reviewed/institutional treatments exist that reframe the phenomenon: Gabriel Nicholas's 'Sunsetting Shadowbanning' (Yale Law School ISP essay series, 2023) argues the term collapses too many distinct platform behaviours to be analytically useful, and 'Dialing it Back: Shadowbanning, Invisible Digital Labor, and how Marginalized Content Creators Attempt to Mitigate the Impacts of Opaque Platform Governance' (Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction) documents the unpaid labour marginalised creators expend self-censoring against opaque governance.", "body": "Two peer-reviewed/institutional treatments exist that reframe the phenomenon: Gabriel Nicholas's 'Sunsetting Shadowbanning' (Yale Law School ISP essay series, 2023) argues the term collapses too many distinct platform behaviours to be analytically useful, and 'Dialing it Back: Shadowbanning, Invisible Digital Labor, and how Marginalized Content Creators Attempt to Mitigate the Impacts of Opaque Platform Governance' (Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction) documents the unpaid labour marginalised creators expend self-censoring against opaque governance.\n\nWhat Yale Law School Information Society Project; ACM PACM HCI actually says:\n\n“could_not_verify — only the titles and venues were retrievable via search; neither full text was reachable because web_fetch was dead.”\n\nNote: RECORDED AS POINTERS, NOT AS FINDINGS. I am asserting only that these two works exist at these venues on this subject. I have NOT read either and I am not characterising their conclusions beyond what their titles state. Second URL: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3701191. Both should be read directly — 'Dialing it Back' in particular is likely the most rigorous account of the mitigation strategies creators actually use.", "source_type": "research", "source_link": "https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/area/center/isp/documents/sunsettingshadowbanning_ispessayseries_2023.pdf", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "B", "source_publisher": "Yale Law School Information Society Project; ACM PACM HCI", "evidence_quote": "could_not_verify — only the titles and venues were retrievable via search; neither full text was reachable because web_fetch was dead.", "volatility": "low", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Cross-platform", "topic": "Academic framing — 'shadowbanning' is a poor term, and the labour is invisible", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_link_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Link-in-bio tools: Linktree permits adult links with conditions; AllMyLinks is the unmoderated default", "summary": "Linktree permits links to adult content where it is legal in the creator's region, does not advertise full-service sex work, and is marked as sensitive, and permits advertising adult media the creator makes and sells elsewhere. Linktree does not permit uploading adult media (images or video, including nudity) to the Linktree page itself, and does not permit collecting payment or donations for adult content through Linktree. AllMyLinks stayed open through Linktree's 2022 removals and is described as the de facto standard in the creator space because it does not moderate adult links. Beacons is described as tolerant in practice but with terms written for mainstream creators.", "body": "Linktree permits links to adult content where it is legal in the creator's region, does not advertise full-service sex work, and is marked as sensitive, and permits advertising adult media the creator makes and sells elsewhere. Linktree does not permit uploading adult media (images or video, including nudity) to the Linktree page itself, and does not permit collecting payment or donations for adult content through Linktree. AllMyLinks stayed open through Linktree's 2022 removals and is described as the de facto standard in the creator space because it does not moderate adult links. Beacons is described as tolerant in practice but with terms written for mainstream creators.\n\nWhat Linktree Community Standards (for the Linktree claims); SirenCY and Maho Management (for AllMyLinks/Beacons) actually says:\n\n“Linktree allows you to create links to adult content as long as it is legal in your region, doesn't advertise full service sex work, and is marked as sensitive.”\n\nNote: MIXED TIERS IN ONE RECORD — flagging explicitly. The Linktree half is tier A (its own Community Standards page, retrieved via search summary, PARAPHRASE-NOT-VERBATIM). The AllMyLinks and Beacons characterisations are TIER C from creator-marketing blogs and are NOT sourced to those companies' own terms. Historical context: Vice reported in 2022 that Linktree removed many sex workers' pages (https://www.vice.com/en/article/linktree-banned-removed-inappropriate-use-sex-work/, tier B) — the current permissive standards are a later reversal, which is exactly why the risk of another reversal is non-trivial. Practical read: this is the pivot point of the whole funnel, so read AllMyLinks' actual terms before committing to it.", "source_type": "official", "source_link": "https://linktr.ee/s/about/community-standards", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "STRONG PRACTICE", "source_tier": "A", "source_publisher": "Linktree Community Standards (for the Linktree claims); SirenCY and Maho Management (for AllMyLinks/Beacons)", "evidence_quote": "Linktree allows you to create links to adult content as long as it is legal in your region, doesn't advertise full service sex work, and is marked as sensitive.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Link-in-bio tools", "topic": "Linktree permits adult links with conditions; AllMyLinks is the unmoderated default", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_strat_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Reddit strategy: Niche beats reach — the sizing heuristic", "summary": "Creator-marketing sources converge on a sizing heuristic: the highest-converting subreddits are niche communities of roughly 10K-200K subscribers matching the content type precisely; large general NSFW subs of 500K+ deliver reach but lower conversion; subs of 10K-50K often have highly engaged audiences and far less competition. One source recommends a roughly 30/70 split of posts between general subs for reach and niche subs for conversion. Verification-gated subs are described as harder to enter but significantly higher engagement once in, with the barrier itself being the advantage.", "body": "Creator-marketing sources converge on a sizing heuristic: the highest-converting subreddits are niche communities of roughly 10K-200K subscribers matching the content type precisely; large general NSFW subs of 500K+ deliver reach but lower conversion; subs of 10K-50K often have highly engaged audiences and far less competition. One source recommends a roughly 30/70 split of posts between general subs for reach and niche subs for conversion. Verification-gated subs are described as harder to enter but significantly higher engagement once in, with the barrier itself being the advantage.\n\nWhat Aruna Talent; Desirely; SirenCY; Unfiltered Management actually says:\n\n“The highest-converting subreddits for OnlyFans are niche communities of 10K–200K subscribers that match your content type precisely, while large general NSFW subreddits (500K+) provide reach but lower conversion.”\n\nNote: TIER C, AND THE SOURCES ARE INTERESTED PARTIES — every one is an agency selling management services to creators, and none published underlying data. The specific numbers (10K-200K, 30/70) should be read as folk heuristics, not measurements. Recorded because four sources independently framed the problem the same way and because the qualitative direction (niche converts better than reach) is the single most repeated piece of advice in the space. One further tier-C observation worth noting: multiple sources warned that published subreddit lists go stale fast and must be re-checked against the sub's own rules — which is precisely what I was unable to do.", "source_type": "community", "source_link": "https://arunatalent.com/blog/best-subreddits-for-onlyfans-promotion-2026/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "CREATOR STRATEGY", "source_tier": "C", "source_publisher": "Aruna Talent; Desirely; SirenCY; Unfiltered Management", "evidence_quote": "The highest-converting subreddits for OnlyFans are niche communities of 10K–200K subscribers that match your content type precisely, while large general NSFW subreddits (500K+) provide reach but lower conversion.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Reddit strategy", "topic": "Niche beats reach — the sizing heuristic", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_ver_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "What subreddit verification typically involves", "summary": "Subreddit-level NSFW verification is not a Reddit feature; it is per-community and typically requires a photo of the creator holding a handwritten sign showing their username, the date, and often the subreddit name. Some communities require the paper to be crumpled and flattened to defeat digital forgery. Reported faceless workarounds include full-body shots with the face cropped or obscured, masks where the mod team has previously accepted them, and messaging mods directly to explain safety reasons.", "body": "Subreddit-level NSFW verification is not a Reddit feature; it is per-community and typically requires a photo of the creator holding a handwritten sign showing their username, the date, and often the subreddit name. Some communities require the paper to be crumpled and flattened to defeat digital forgery. Reported faceless workarounds include full-body shots with the face cropped or obscured, masks where the mod team has previously accepted them, and messaging mods directly to explain safety reasons.\n\nWhat Pseudoface; Creators Spicy Tea actually says:\n\n“Successful verification methods include handwritten signs clearly showing username, date, and sometimes subreddit; full body shots with face cropped or obscured demonstrating likeness to posted promotional imagery; masks used in a way that mod teams have already shown acceptance for.”\n\nNote: TIER C. Pseudoface describes its material as a primary-data guide and reports that 38.5% of creators attempting a faceless workaround succeeded against 46.2% outright rejected — but Pseudoface sells face-anonymisation software, so it has a direct commercial interest in the framing of that statistic, and no methodology or sample size was visible to me. Treat the percentages as illustrative only. The handwritten-sign mechanic itself is corroborated across sources and is long-standing. Note this is DISTINCT from Reddit's own account-level Verified Profiles feature (gray badges for public figures), which TechCrunch reported Reddit began testing in December 2025 and which does not serve this purpose.", "source_type": "community", "source_link": "https://www.pseudoface.com/guides/faceless/faceless-promotion/nsfw-subreddit-verification-no-face", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "CREATOR STRATEGY", "source_tier": "C", "source_publisher": "Pseudoface; Creators Spicy Tea", "evidence_quote": "Successful verification methods include handwritten signs clearly showing username, date, and sometimes subreddit; full body shots with face cropped or obscured demonstrating likeness to posted promotional imagery; masks used in a way that mod teams have already shown acceptance for.", "volatility": "low", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Reddit verification", "topic": "What subreddit verification typically involves", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } }, { "id": "learn_r32_where_to_post_32_shape_01", "category": "Promotion", "title": "Cross-platform: The structural shape of the map — where you can actually be found", "summary": "Synthesising the platform records above, the mainstream platforms sort into four groups. (1) Adult content permitted with mandatory self-labelling, so posting is viable but labelled content is de-ranked or opt-in-gated: X, Bluesky, Tumblr (suggestive only), Reddit (per-subreddit). (2) Adult content prohibited but the platform is usable as top-of-funnel with clean content and an indirect link: Instagram, Threads, TikTok, YouTube. (3) Retention and delivery channels with no meaningful discovery surface: Discord, Telegram, Snapchat. (4) Effectively closed: Pinterest, and Twitch for anything beyond labelled suggestive streaming with no adult link. No mainstream platform in group 1 or 2 offers both permission to post explicit content AND algorithmic distribution of it.", "body": "Synthesising the platform records above, the mainstream platforms sort into four groups. (1) Adult content permitted with mandatory self-labelling, so posting is viable but labelled content is de-ranked or opt-in-gated: X, Bluesky, Tumblr (suggestive only), Reddit (per-subreddit). (2) Adult content prohibited but the platform is usable as top-of-funnel with clean content and an indirect link: Instagram, Threads, TikTok, YouTube. (3) Retention and delivery channels with no meaningful discovery surface: Discord, Telegram, Snapchat. (4) Effectively closed: Pinterest, and Twitch for anything beyond labelled suggestive streaming with no adult link. No mainstream platform in group 1 or 2 offers both permission to post explicit content AND algorithmic distribution of it.\n\nWhat Synthesis of records 32-IG-01 through 32-THR-01 in this file actually says:\n\n“could_not_verify — this record is my own synthesis, not a claim from any source.”\n\nNote: FLAGGED AS SYNTHESIS, TIER C BY CONSTRUCTION. Every constituent fact is sourced in the records above; the grouping and the closing generalisation are mine and no source states them. Included because the four-way split is the actually useful mental model and it is not written down anywhere I found. The final sentence is the load-bearing one: labelling buys permission and costs distribution, on every platform that offers labelling. Do not attribute this record to Meta despite the placeholder source_url.", "source_type": "community", "source_link": "https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/", "last_verified": "2026-08-28", "reliability": "CREATOR STRATEGY", "source_tier": "C", "source_publisher": "Synthesis of records 32-IG-01 through 32-THR-01 in this file", "evidence_quote": "could_not_verify — this record is my own synthesis, not a claim from any source.", "volatility": "medium", "from_batch": "32-where-to-post", "subject": "Cross-platform", "topic": "The structural shape of the map — where you can actually be found", "tags": { "lane": "any", "stage": "any", "region": [ "any" ], "platform": "any", "topic": [ "unclassified" ], "explicitness": "any" } } ] }