I'm not saying I necessarily disagree with the new rating, I just want to know where the line is.
If even swimsuits and cleavage are too risque for G, then sure, I can roll with it.
Posted under General
kittey said:
Danbooru is an American-run website and American morals apply to it. Going by the usual movie ratings in America, any kind of violence is okay for the general audience but showing any kind of skin is not. So for a general rating, the image can contain as much violence as you want, as long as all body parts – including severed ones – are sufficiently covered. ;)
What? kek
but violence and sexuality is both considered when we're talking about ratings.
For example, cartoony violence get PG-13 but violence with blood gets an R.
Number of swear words in a movie etc.
But you know American TV ratings were even more complicated back in the day
TV-Y for Children 7 (due to no violence)
TV-Y7 for Children 7 and Older (due to comedic and fantasy violence)
TV-G all ages (mild language?) What the fuck is mild language? ah hell, moving on...
btw interesting to note to get a PG-13 rating you can only use the "F-bomb" once in movies?
TV-PG inappropritate for young children ... how young? Doesn't say but had suggestive dialogue or moderate violence
TV-14 unsuitable for children under 14 (due to coarse language and intense violence and intense sexual situations)
TV-MA (explicit sexual activity and graphic violence)
according to the wiki/TV_Parental_Guidelines
I know that's probably more then anybody wanted but just wanted to give the full story on how violence is taken into account in the good old U.S of A
evazion said:
Here are some examples of what I have in mind for the new ratings:
- These would be rated G: favgroup:14537
- These would be rated S: favgroup:14538
There still might be a lot of times where you're not sure whether it's G or S. When in doubt, default to S. It's okay to err on the side of rating things too high. It's not okay to rate things too low. Treat G as the "I'm 100% sure this is safe for work" rating and S as the default "I'm not sure" rating.
As I said, I would rate the ass focus images in that as q, really.
Otherwise it seems easy enough to distinguish g and s, but the issue of q and s remains.
evazion said:
- These would be rated G: favgroup:14537
I ran some searches under that group. Some tags have either been excluded from the group or will be added later.
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Added current ratings for a comparison with the reference group.
Updated
Do crop tops and/or miniskirts automatically get the S rating or is it just coincidence that there are 0 crop top pictures in favgroup 14537 and everything with the miniskirt tag in there feels like it shouldn't have the tag? If the latter then I assume that post #5365852 and its child get into S rather than G because of the ridiculously low waistlines?
Like, would post #5356057 get a G or S rating? Because my instinct would definitely be to give it a G.
evazion said:
Here are some examples of what I have in mind for the new ratings:
- These would be rated G: favgroup:14537
- These would be rated S: favgroup:14538
There still might be a lot of times where you're not sure whether it's G or S. When in doubt, default to S. It's okay to err on the side of rating things too high. It's not okay to rate things too low. Treat G as the "I'm 100% sure this is safe for work" rating and S as the default "I'm not sure" rating.
Yeah, that feels about right as to what I had in mind myself so I agree with this kind of split. If only rating:g appeared when going to safebooru for example then I would have no problem browsing that anywhere, unlike the way it currently is.
rating:G
rating:S
rating:Q
?
Updated
I was already sorta using the numbers already in this thread since we're unsure about S's new name, but I wonder if a simple numeration would work? So G would be 1, "S" would be 2, Q would be 3 and E would be 4. Gradually higher number, like with age ratings, except without the implications of, well, age ratings. Severity is also commonly measured like that in medicine (cancer stages, burn degrees) and safety (Beaufort's scale). Would also make some searches easier, like instead of "rating:g rating:s" it'd easily be something like "rating:<3" (even without the is:nsfw/sfw).
evazion said:
Safebooru will default to the new rating:g. There will probably be an account option to let you set your max rating on regular Danbooru, but Safebooru itself should be absolutely SFW.
Totally cool with that, I use safe mode on standard danbooru 95% of the time so being able to have G and S as an option sounds perfect. Also agree on Safebooru being locked to G
evazion said:
Safebooru will default to the new rating:g. There will probably be an account option to let you set your max rating on regular Danbooru, but Safebooru itself should be absolutely SFW.
[…]
The new rating is so that it's possible for Safebooru to be a truly safe experience.
If Safebooru won’t have any content actually rated “safe”, will it be renamed “Generalbooru”, though?
Safebooru will be rebranded to https://www.donmai.moe. This is to avoid confusion with https://safebooru.org, and to make the site safer to share by putting it on a separate domain (for example, to avoid people going to https://donmai.us instead of https://safebooru.donmai.us and being redirected to Danbooru).
Deployed the new rating system. In summary:
Examples of rating:g content:
Examples of rating:s content:
Now comes the hard part of re-rating posts. I would ask that people focus first on content that is unquestionably safe for work. Things like no humans posts, scenery, fully clothed non-sexualized characters, etc. If you have any doubt, just skip it and leave it rating:s. It's very important that we establish a good baseline for rating:g before people start trying to push the boundaries of it.
I guess it would make sense for me to go through all of my previous uploads, so I'll start on that.
Should profanity count against G? for example post #4917278
And again, what's the official consensus on violence? And horror?
"Violence" only counts if it's obvious non-safe for work violence. Think "severed head" or "pile of corpses", not "chibi getting beaten up" or "comical nosebleed".
Profanity should not be enough to affect rating, otherwise every single site on the internet would be nsfw.
Updated
Wouldn't nudity imply exposed genitals?
post #5239598 for example.
nonamethanks said:
"Violence" only counts as s if it's borderline guro or obvious non-safe for work violence. Think "severed head" or "pile of corpses", not "chibi getting beaten up" or "comical nosebleed".
The updated howto:rate disagrees:
- Cartoon violence.
- Mild violence (minor blood or injury).
- Graphic violence (death, major blood, major injury).
- Guro, scat, extremely graphic violence (gore, dismemberment, etc), and NSFL content.
Jigsy said:
- rating:questionable - Softcore erotica. Simple nudity or near-nudity, but no explicit sex or exposed genitals.
- rating:explicit - Hardcore erotica. Explicit sex acts, exposed genitals, and bodily fluids.
Wouldn't nudity imply exposed genitals?
Not sure where you copied that from, but howto:rate explains it better, IMO.
kittey said:
Not sure where you copied that from, but howto:rate explains it better, IMO.
That was from the howto:rate page.