[cybrox]

I don't know (I don't browse Patreon but just back some creators individually) but what would be the issue about that? Patreon is a content distributor and payment router between fans and creators, I don't expect or want them to police what creators do with that service.

[KomoD]

> I don't expect or want them to police what creators do with that service.

Well, they do actually. They have a lot of restrictions on what 18+ content you can publish.

Like you can't publish "real" porn, or that's how I interpret this at least:

> Works depicting sexual activity between real, adult participants are not permitted.

https://www.patreon.com/policy/guidelines#adult-works

[cybrox]

Which is fair. If they state that clearly in their ToS, someone producing this kind of content knows, that this is not the right provider for them ahead of time.

Someone producing adult content within the boundaries of what the guidelines allow did pick the right provider, so I don't see a problem with them becoming a prominent creator on the platform.

I should have probably said I don't expect or want them to micromanage the prominence of creators on their platform that do act in accordance with their guidelines. If for some reason figurines became incredibly popular and someone would complain that Patreon is basically just a platform for figurine painters, so what?

[leni536]

Uh, is narrowing it to "adult" really necessary?

[cwmma]

They might not have a choice is the problem, there has been a pretty successful campaign to get credit card companies to cut off payments to anyone even remotely connected to this kind of stuff.