Or perhaps people could choose to specify a reason when they submit a vote. Nudity, skimpy clothing, loud noise, violent images, offensive text, whatever.

Well, I guess there could be simple "just vote" and advanced "vote and give a reason" bookmarklets, so people could choose which they'd prefer.

And for your second point, I guess we'd just have to hope for widespread adoption, so not-safe URLs get added more quickly.

I dunno. "88% of voters considered this page NSFW. Additionally, the following reasons were given by some voters: Images of nudity, sexual language." That doesn't seem too confusing to me.

I think I'd rather keep the number of bookmarklets to a minimum. People don't like to have their bookmarklet toolbars cluttered, and requiring two to vote is already pushing it. (Ha ha, pun.)

Or alternatively, variable comfort levels. Have a slider for the % of people who need to have voted something NSFW before you get warned about it.

Of course, this'd be massively abusable if it ever got widely adopted. Googlewars all over again.

Sure, but they all use closed rating lists and don't base it on public opinion, and generally don't let you choose whether to view the blocked sites. This is less of a site-blocking tool and more of a first warning system so your work computer doesn't randomly yell obscenities when you visit that URL your "friend" IM'ed you.

DIEBOLD already holds that patent, #7,234,285. The whole voting screen is one large virtual button (but displays a graphic like it had more than one choice).

I think they'd be more likely to pay off if I actually had the perseverance to follow through and implement them fully. I have loads of unfinished projects sitting on my hard drives, mocking me. Sigh.

But thanks for the vote of confidence!

But to use something like a trust network, you'd need to add some sort of account management system, which suddenly ups the complexity hugely.

Despite your warning, I'm inclined to give it a try, just to see for myself how it turns out. If it ends up being largely useless, you have every right to say "I told you so!"

Hmm. As long as the reasons are restricted to a set that deals with worksafeness, that's all that people would be able to rate. I guess anti-X people could collaboratively rate an X-related site as NSFW and perhaps turn away some visitors, but I would hope that the fair-mindedness of the majority would overrule that.

You're right, though, it could easily be tricky, and as an admin I'd probably have to do a fair amount of dispute mediation. That could get bothersome.

I agree that it's worth a try. Maybe the whole thing will turn out to be a bust, but at least the attempt will have been made.