[eesmith]

> why does Drew DeVault care that I would have a private repository with "explicit sexual content"?

For the same reason GitHub does? GitHub's AUP at https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/acceptable-use-polici... says:

"We do not allow content or activity on GitHub that: ... is sexually obscene or relates to sexual exploitation or abuse, including of minors".

Atlassian's AUP at https://www.atlassian.com/legal/acceptable-use-policy says "Inappropriate content" includes "Posting, uploading, sharing, submitting, or otherwise providing content that ... Is deceptive, fraudulent, illegal, obscene, defamatory, libelous, threatening, harmful to minors, pornographic (including child pornography, which we will remove and report to law enforcement, including the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children), indecent, harassing, hateful"?

GitLab's AUP at https://handbook.gitlab.com/handbook/legal/acceptable-use-po... says "unacceptable use of our services [which] applies to all users of all GitLab services including those on the Free, Premium, and Ultimate GitLab tiers" mean "you must not: Create, upload, submit, execute, transmit, or host anything that ... is vulgar, obscene, or pornographic, or gratuitously depicts or glorifies violence."

Now, there are differences between "explicit sexual content", "sexually obscene" and "pornographic", but if you are worried about possible further expansion, you shouldn't use any of these code hosting services.

[gray_-_wolf]

The reason does not seem to be stated at the provided link. If you know the reason (which your message seems to imply), could you please share it?

[eesmith]

I was conjecturing it was the same reason as the other hosting providers, not saying that was the same or that I had special insight.

Instead, I was pointing out that since all the providers I looked at have essentially the same restriction, you likely shouldn't use any of them. Certainly there are a lot of people who use GitHub despite having no guarantee the ToS won't be more restrictive in the future.

Sourcehut's ToS is certainly not exceptional in that regard, so really you are objecting to essentially every 3rd party code hosting provider, yes?

Or is there one you had in mind where you aren't concerned about further expansion?

[cornstalks]

It's hard to find a payment processor for pornographic providers. Existing payment processors are likely to stop supporting you if you become a porn provider. Additionally, there are branding risks in being associated with adult content. There's also more legal scrutiny involved, and it's outright illegal in some jurisdictions.

A simple Google search on the topic should be educational.