It seems to me that getting rid of one bad thing (scammy slimming ads) can be positive - without them needing to be 100% consistent all the time or policing every possible bad thing. Claims to the contrary seem like the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
I think what vkou is sharing is the core of a very common dilemma.
You can allow "any legal ads" and you'll be derided as mercenary but at least you'll be entirely consistent.
Or you can try to set out _some_ kind of boundaries about ads on your platform and get enmeshed in endless debate over whether a) which boundaries should exist b) how far out they should be drawn c) what side of that boundary a given data point is on d) whether boundary enforcement is subject to some kind of internal conspiracy or moral corruption.
There's no winning move, because this is the Internet and you can't please everyone.
I think what vkou is sharing is the core of a very common dilemma.
You can allow "any legal ads" and you'll be derided as mercenary but at least you'll be entirely consistent.
Or you can try to set out _some_ kind of boundaries about ads on your platform and get enmeshed in endless debate over whether a) which boundaries should exist b) how far out they should be drawn c) what side of that boundary a given data point is on d) whether boundary enforcement is subject to some kind of internal conspiracy or moral corruption.
There's no winning move, because this is the Internet and you can't please everyone.