post #425520 - I thought it was nice
post #438660 - Part of a 3-comic series
Posted under General
This topic has been locked.
post #425520 - I thought it was nice
post #438660 - Part of a 3-comic series
Please reconsider the following:
post #453748
post #452141
post #454639
post #450942
post #454369
I really wish that last one wasn't cluttered with text, but whatever.
Appealing for those two.
post #455232
post #455224
Appealing it, because i uploaded 3 images of the game cg set, but only 1 ( post #455227) got aproved. Overall, they got the same tags, same quality ( i used the game snapshot function, not screenshooted it), same original dimension (640x480, didn't resize it at all). And there are a little more pics from the set, but i'm restraining myself from posting further more, since i should wait and see for the approval.
Anyhow, i'm not mad or bitching about it.
Thanks anyway.
i didn't upload it, but...
Please reconsider. I don't fully understand why it was deleted in the first place. "Gross" hardly seems like it considering the founder himself has posted guro..
Mightfox said: "Gross" hardly seems like it considering the founder himself has posted guro..
The last time albert posted anything of the really bad type of guro was a year ago. Posts that old aren't relevant given how much standards have changed. Sure, there's still guro being posted that I would never ever approve (i.e. 99.9% of the tag) but that doesn't have any bearing on the image you're appealing.
As for that image in question, I wouldn't approve it because I personally find it disgusting. The proportions in particular are bad, plus I don't go for the whole leash/bondage thing.
And before you object, yes, personal opinion does matter, and that's precisely why we have so many janitors and mods - so a post's fate is not decided by one person. Granted, in the case of the linked pic it seems like it was, but I have no objection to the deletion either.
http://danbooru.donmai.us/post/show/454884
Could this please be reconsidered? post #446371 was approved and it's the exact same image, but in preview size resolution - also uploaded by myself as well. Why would the full-size image be deleted? I was expecting the full-size one to be approved and then the smaller one deleted.
I'd like to see post #454809 reconsidered. I'm not sure why it didn't make the cut. I'd like to know, since I'm kind of new to uploading. I'd like to avoid accumulating too many deleted posts, cluttering Danbu with images it doesn't want. Although at least two people apparently liked it enough to favorite it.
I'll admit that I kind of goofed on the artist tag, but that has since been corrected by contributor EB. I also made sure to add the artist's pixiv name under aliases on his artist page so Danbu fetches his tag properly from uploads from his pixiv account. Presuming anyone decides to upload more of his work. Not that the rest of his work is all that great.
I also forgot to include the "censored" tag, but it's a loli image, so I can't correct that now.
葉月 said:
Basically, loli porn. That drastically cuts down the number of people who'd even consider approving it.
Fair enough. I guess I was sort of testing the limits of the "loli" tag. Can't really see what sorts of things end up in that category, but the fact that there's over 10,000 images in there leads me to believe at least some of it must classify as "loli porn."
But if it be the will of Danbooru, I will steer clear of such uploads in the future.
Danzaiver said:
Fair enough. I guess I was sort of testing the limits of the "loli" tag.
Negative. There's borderline loli, but your post isn't. It's absolutely non-disputable little girl banging. You could pretty much put it by the Wikipedia's definition of lolikon (not that you should try that :)
Can't really see what sorts of things end up in that category, but the fact that there's over 10,000 images in there leads me to believe at least some of it must classify as "loli porn."
loli does suffer inconsistencies, that's true. We do have some things that arguably aren't loli tagged as such, but overall, I'd say it's badly undertagged. And it's "loli porn" is when, well, it's clearly porn and loli at the same time, it's not some kinda magic concept :)
Fencedude said: My particular issue with that image is that it approaches (at least for me) the line between "lolicon" and "toddlercon"
The first I have no real issues with, the second I do.
Same feeling here. I like a lot of rating:questionable (and occasional explicit) art of characters that others might consider loli, I suppose, but if I see something and think "toddlercon" then we're talking about a whole different world, one I'm not into. And yes, it's fairly subjective, though I think that image is quite firmly on the toddlercon side.
It has a lot to do with body proportions and shape.
The difference between post #153160 (I'd forgotten that conversation...) and post #385000, is a good explanation.
It's a bit difficult to participate in this discussion without being able to view the evidence, but I get where you guys are coming from. I personally wouldn't call post #454809 "toddlerkon." Pretty sure she's more than 2 years old. But no matter how you slice it she's clearly on the younger side of loli, and she's clearly being drilled, and if that's not something Danbooru is down with, then I'm cool with that. In fact, I'm glad to have clarification on the matter.
葉月 said:
Negative. There's borderline loli, but your post isn't. It's absolutely non-disputable little girl banging. You could pretty much put it by the Wikipedia's definition of lolikon (not that you should try that :)
Right. By "testing the limits of loli," I meant that I was testing it for my own personal information, to see what the limits were. Not that I was trying to push any of Danbooru's envelopes or anything.