Reworking the rating system

I remember that this website includes some subdomains, I do use the "Safebooru" one so I can avoid the lewder content, but since the rating changes were announced, all the contents under the "sensitive" rating were later blacklisted there, difficulting a bit more my search results.

Isn't it better to make a "Sensbooru" variant to this safer mode or something like that which don't hide that? I say that as I like to search some content in a fanservice borderline sometimes, but nothing that exaggeratedly lewd.

I would also like to suggest this variant to Gelbooru (or the Safebooru that uses that website as basis), since I like more the mechanics of those websites in question).

I keep seeing people misusing this system, and it's to the point that it's nearly annoying. There will be pictures even showing the slightest amount of titty (even just slight cleavage) that will be tagged as "sensitive." Even when the cleavage is such a minor detail that most people wouldn't care.

I understand why this system was approved, but there are still a lot of flaws when it comes to this. If cleavage isn't even sexualized in the photo, shouldn't it just be tagged as "G"? And if people are really upset over seeing cleavage, for some reason, can't they just mute the tag or grow up a little? Tits are natural, if some people are that bothered by them then isn't that a them problem?

It would be beneficial to have some note on the rating guidelines stating that some cleavage is okay to rate as "G."

This is an anime imageboard site, no one is here to see modesty preached.

sadodere said:

I keep seeing people misusing this system, and it's to the point that it's nearly annoying. There will be pictures even showing the slightest amount of titty (even just slight cleavage) that will be tagged as "sensitive." Even when the cleavage is such a minor detail that most people wouldn't care.

I understand why this system was approved, but there are still a lot of flaws when it comes to this. If cleavage isn't even sexualized in the photo, shouldn't it just be tagged as "G"? And if people are really upset over seeing cleavage, for some reason, can't they just mute the tag or grow up a little? Tits are natural, if some people are that bothered by them then isn't that a them problem?

It would be beneficial to have some note on the rating guidelines stating that some cleavage is okay to rate as "G."

See forum #215101. cleavage should be automatic s most of the time.

nonamethanks said:

See forum #215101. cleavage should be automatic s most of the time.

How is this even fair? Again, this feels like some modesty stuff I'd hear from my extremely religious grandmother or an angry teacher scolding a student for wearing a tank top.

I understand why the system was implemented, but this is weird.

sadodere said:

How is this even fair? Again, this feels like some modesty stuff I'd hear from my extremely religious grandmother or an angry teacher scolding a student for wearing a tank top.

I understand why the system was implemented, but this is weird.

Take your complaints to the payment processors who ultimately forced this in the first place. You'd hear the same from them. That's the reality we live in.

Damian0358 said:

Take your complaints to the payment processors who ultimately forced this in the first place. You'd hear the same from them. That's the reality we live in.

Payment processors? Was this rule not implemented because of complaints from other users?

sadodere said:

Payment processors? Was this rule not implemented because of complaints from other users?

There's been musing and jokes about how rating:s encompassed everything from feet pics and pantyshots to food focus and scenery for ages, but it wasn't until the site lost its payment processor and had to get a new one that the rating system actually changed. It was 90% out of the site's hands.

Evazion's been wanting to do something about the mess the ratings are for a while, so something like this would've happened sooner or later. The payment processor just made it sooner rather than later.

Yes, this has been brewing for a long time. I've seen an increasing number of complaints about the "safe" rating over the last couple of years and I've wanted to reform it for a long time now. In fact, I first floated the idea over 10 years ago in topic #1524. It wasn't until recently though that we needed to bite the bullet and actually do it.

There are a number of reasons why it's useful to have absolutely safe rating:

• Danbooru is banned in multiple countries. Mostly because of lewd art of young-looking characters. It's also blocked by content filters in some schools and companies. It's useful to have a version of the site that's safe enough it won't get banned by various countries or organizations.
• People sometimes ask why we don't have a mobile app. Partly it's because app stores have policies against sexual content. It would be a waste to make an app then get banned because our "safe" rating wasn't safe enough. (Yes, there are third party booru apps, but usually they get around it by being generic booru apps that require you to manually add the boorus you want to use, rather than being specifically designed for Danbooru.)
• "Safe" Danbooru content often wasn't safe by the standards of other websites. It's difficult to share links to Danbooru because of this. For example, we often had problems in the Danbooru Discord with people posting NSFW content in SFW channels because it was rated safe on Danbooru, even though it wasn't safe by Discord standards.
• I think there's an untapped market of people who like anime fanart, but who don't want to look at porn or anything lewd. We try to say we're not a porn site, we're a site for high-quality anime fanart, but that's not true as long as the site is filled with lewd content and it's impossible to filter it out.

rating:g and safe mode are meant to be 100% safe even by the strictest of standards. If your personal standards aren't that strict, then you can use the blacklist system instead of safe mode to have more control over what content you see.

Currently there are a lot of old posts still rated rating:sensitive because they haven't been fixed yet. This is a manual process that will probably take months. You can help out by rerating posts as you see them (but please be mindful of the rating guidelines in howto:rate and don't just rate everything G, otherwise we'll be back to where we started).

^That certainly explains things in a more understandable way. Should put that in the top post, as well as the changes thread, so that others don't have to make an ass of themselves like me haha, sorry.

Like @sadodere said this looks weird, could I suggest to change the name of the category "sensitive", one might think of religious people, but it also looks a lot like the "woke" movement influence when you use that particular name for the rating. I hope it isn't the view of this site that the only acceptable female figure is a "flat-chested fat woman", that's what the "sensitive" name make it look like.

I guess the concern is that people will misunderstand the rating names and need a name that clearly communicates to them that the rating might not be safe to use, but isn't there a better name that can communicate that? rating:N(NSFW) NSFW is the new Normal so to speak, rating:N. Maybe I should shut up before someone comes up with a worse name like rating:Snowflake or YSBJ(You Shall Be Judged).

Doesn't work when we already have is:nsfw as a search option for E and Q posts and is:sfw for G and S. We'd then have Rating:NSFW under is:sfw, obviously very unintuitive.

Not only do I disagree with the sentiment on the term Sensitive, I don't understand why it even matters if people make the assumption that it's "woke" influence. It doesn't change what it's used for, and if someone misuses it, they'll get bonked. It's honestly their problem if "woke" lives so rent free in their head that that's the conclusion they come to.

Itamish said:

^That certainly explains things in a more understandable way. Should put that in the top post, as well as the changes thread, so that others don't have to make an ass of themselves like me haha, sorry.

Like @sadodere said this looks weird, could I suggest to change the name of the category "sensitive", one might think of religious people, but it also looks a lot like the "woke" movement influence when you use that particular name for the rating. I hope it isn't the view of this site that the only acceptable female figure is a "flat-chested fat woman", that's what the "sensitive" name make it look like.

I guess the concern is that people will misunderstand the rating names and need a name that clearly communicates to them that the rating might not be safe to use, but isn't there a better name that can communicate that? rating:N(NSFW) NSFW is the new Normal so to speak, rating:N. Maybe I should shut up before someone comes up with a worse name like rating:Snowflake or YSBJ(You Shall Be Judged).

I don't believe the "woke" movement is a thing - please don't misunderstand what I'm trying to say. Rather, I feel like a lot of this change is really weird in a much more misogynic way. As you agreed on, it seems very religion-based and that also upsets me, but I'm not going to argue against a change if people are so stubborn about it.

My problem more so lies in the idea that tits have to be "sensitive" or explicit. I think sensitive is a fine word in and of itself, it means.... "sensitive". Sensitive content. I'd say that it's basically the same thing as questionable at that point. In this context, sensitive is a fitting word - I have no problem with that either.

In my honest opinion, I feel like giving in to a bunch of old men whining about anime girls having a little cleavage showing is what makes this change so unwanted. If someone is so bothered by a little cleavage, they can mute the tag or whatever - because that's their problem if the sight of anime boobs is enough to make them throw a fit. If cleavage is automatically tagged as sensitive, so should "topless_male" (which may already be sensitive) and even "thighs" or whatever else. Same with "yuri" if "yaoi" has to be automatically sensitive for some stupid reason. Just make everything equal, I guess.

At the end, I don't really care. If the site has a rule, no matter how much I disagree with it, I've learned that there's no point in arguing with it. All we can do is do as the admins say and tolerate the rules - either that, or just not post at all or even move to other websites.

However, I WILL argue that there need to be more clear rules on what is considered general and what is considered sensitive or even questionable. Q and S are basically the same thing from what I've seen.

sadodere said:

However, I WILL argue that there need to be more clear rules on what is considered general and what is considered sensitive or even questionable. Q and S are basically the same thing from what I've seen.

Does howto:rate not have enough examples?

kittey said:

Does howto:rate not have enough examples?

Q and S still are basically the same on there from the looks of it.

sadodere said:

In my honest opinion, I feel like giving in to a bunch of old men whining about anime girls having a little cleavage showing is what makes this change so unwanted. If someone is so bothered by a little cleavage, they can mute the tag or whatever - because that's their problem if the sight of anime boobs is enough to make them throw a fit. If cleavage is automatically tagged as sensitive, so should "topless_male" (which may already be sensitive) and even "thighs" or whatever else. Same with "yuri" if "yaoi" has to be automatically sensitive for some stupid reason. Just make everything equal, I guess.

I don't get your point, saying this is like saying "if you don't want to see sex then just blacklist that tag, there's no use in tagging them rating:explicit". The rating system focus primarily on the degree of sexual content, so if it makes enough people upset when they see cleavages in rating:g it's not their problem, that's exactly what the rating system is for.

You seem especially unhappy about the "cleavage = rating:s" thing, however there is actually more tolerance than you think. If it's a solo of a girl facing the viewer showing her cleavage, there's no doubt that it would be at least rating:s (e.g. post #5475223). But if it's, say, a single character with just slight cleavage standing in a 6+character environment, most people won't yell at you for rating that general (e.g. post #3467598).

Rating:Sensitive

• Ecchi, sexy, risqué, or suggestive content, even mildly so.
• Skimpy or revealing clothes, including swimsuits, lingerie, underwear, cleavage cutouts, playboy bunnysuits, skin tight or impossible clothes, etc.
• Anything focused on the ass, breasts, cleavage, underboob, sideboob, feet, armpits, lips, or other sexualized parts of the body.

And this is exactly what howto:rate says, rating:s is when cleavage is a focus/eye-catching part of the art, no line ever stated "cleavage should never be general or else you die". What people don't want isn't cleavage, what they don't want is when they're browsing in rating:g hoping to see some cute innocent art of a character, instead they find artist who draw the character in a sexy waifu manner. As I explained the rating system gives control on the degree of sexual content found in an art.

That said, don't start tagging cleavages general unless you're 100% sure, if you find yourself usually having a looser standard than others, just give up on it completely, as it's always less bad to rate something higher than it should and not lower than it should.

sadodere said:

In my honest opinion, I feel like giving in to a bunch of old men whining about anime girls having a little cleavage showing is what makes this change so unwanted. If someone is so bothered by a little cleavage, they can mute the tag or whatever - because that's their problem if the sight of anime boobs is enough to make them throw a fit. If cleavage is automatically tagged as sensitive, so should "topless_male" (which may already be sensitive) and even "thighs" or whatever else. Same with "yuri" if "yaoi" has to be automatically sensitive for some stupid reason. Just make everything equal, I gue

Was it not literally explained to you in this very thread why the change was ultimately made? It has less to do with people who actually use the site, and everything to do with the people in charge of our ability to earn money to maintain the site. Payment processors don't give a shit if you can blacklist the scary loli nipples.

And no, topless males shouldn't be Sensitive by default, that's not how things work irl. The world is made of double standards, and unfortunately we have to abide by them.

blindVigil said:

Was it not literally explained to you in this very thread why the change was ultimately made? It has less to do with people who actually use the site, and everything to do with the people in charge of our ability to earn money to maintain the site. Payment processors don't give a shit if you can blacklist the scary loli nipples.

And no, topless males shouldn't be Sensitive by default, that's not how things work irl. The world is made of double standards, and unfortunately we have to abide by them.

"Because old men who deal with money will be mad," basically. That's what I picked up from it.

And yes, topless males should be sensitive by default. Look here:

Rating:Sensitive
Ecchi, sexy, risqué, or suggestive content, even mildly so.
Skimpy or revealing clothes, including swimsuits, lingerie, underwear, cleavage cutouts, playboy bunnysuits, skin tight or impossible clothes, etc.
Anything focused on the ass, breasts, cleavage, underboob, sideboob, feet, armpits, lips, or other sexualized parts of the body.
Exposed groin area (hip lines) or dimples of venus.
Pantyshots, upskirts, and similar fanservice.
Thin, see-through, or wet clothes that reveal the underwear or body underneath.
Subtle cameltoes or covered nipples not blatant enough for rating:questionable.
Implied sexual situations (visible condoms, sex toys in the background, penetration gestures, etc)
Mildly disturbing violence (blood or injury that is not G-rated).
Depictions of thoughts of suicide or self-harm (including gun to head).
Hard or illegal drug use.
Anything not G-rated, not completely safe for work, or not completely safe to view in front of others.
Anything you're not sure is safe enough for rating:general. When in doubt, use rating:sensitive.

and also look here:

Rating:Questionable
Simple non-genital nudity, including nipples, areolae, and bare ass.

And so what if that's how "things are in real life"? Do you not see how these double standards are also going to make payment processors mad?

magcolo said:

I don't get your point, saying this is like saying "if you don't want to see sex then just blacklist that tag, there's no use in tagging them rating:explicit". The rating system focus primarily on the degree of sexual content, so if it makes enough people upset when they see cleavages in rating:g it's not their problem, that's exactly what the rating system is for.

You seem especially unhappy about the "cleavage = rating:s" thing, however there is actually more tolerance than you think. If it's a solo of a girl facing the viewer showing her cleavage, there's no doubt that it would be at least rating:s (e.g. post #5475223). But if it's, say, a single character with just slight cleavage standing in a 6+character environment, most people won't yell at you for rating that general (e.g. post #5342031, you won't even notice that the red hair with cat ears has cleavage until you try to look for it).

And this is exactly what howto:rate says, rating:s is when cleavage is a focus/eye-catching part of the art, no line ever stated "cleavage should never be general or else you die". What people don't want isn't cleavage, what they don't want is when they're browsing in rating:g hoping to see some cute innocent art of a character, instead they find artist who draw the character in a sexy waifu manner. As I explained the rating system gives control on the degree of sexual content found in an art.

That said, don't start tagging cleavages general unless you're 100% sure, if you find yourself usually having a looser standard than others, just give up on it completely, as it's always less bad to rate something higher than it should and not lower than it should.

Cleavage is tagged as sensitive by default.

Now, let's take a look at what's considered sensitive:

1) post #5475472 - Oh no, it's a crop top! Doubt payment processors will care in this example, right? I'll go further, then:

2) post #5475335 - How is this sensitive in any way? The focus isn't on the cleavage, right? It's a girl with twintails in a dress fully clothed winking. Is it the weapon she's holding?

3) post #5475160 - How is this sensitive either? Is it the dress? She's fully clothed, though...

Oh! And for some reason, I believe "yaoi" is also tagged as "sensitive"? For some posts it makes sense, but having it default to adding a sensitive tag?

4) post #5472128 - How is this sensitive at all? It's an innocent gesture, right? Nothing sexy here.

5) post #5468186 - And how is this sensitive? Is it crossdressing that's made the payment processors so pissy? They're fully clothed doing a normal gesture.

And looking into it, this also exists for yuri...

6) post #5474981

7) post #5471904

Now, again, I have no intention of arguing. This system still has many flaws that I hope to see improve over time. I know there's no point in trying to change people's minds because, at the end of the day, we all know that won't happen - but there are some flaws that need to be addressed here. I understand why the change was made, as I have said many times before, but there's something so weird about associating anime with modesty of all things.

FWIW I edited post #5474981 to rating:g