Posted under General
CasualStan said:
I've actually have seen the post in question before you added the tag, and I understand why this picture is visually speaking a bit of an edge case. But I agree with Blank User in that I'm leaning towards "not loli".
I'm just glad people seem to be a bit understanding. I guess in my haste to try and make a good impression with contributions I can maybe be a bit short-sighted in what needs to be discussed or done, but that's all part of the learning journey I guess ^^
shemingwan wen said: post #8394670 ?
I would argue definitely loli, the characters close to the bottom are way too young-looking for this not to be.
EvergreenNights said:
No.
These posts are a variant set.
post #5656380, post #5656381, and post #5656382
CasualStan said:
Quick question, since you only have a member account, same as me, how are you seeing this picture? :) Just wonder how you reach this conclusion.
The tag was added after that forum post was made.
DiscreteActor said:
These posts are a variant set.
post #5656380, post #5656381, and post #5656382
Not even close.
Blank_User said:
The tag was added after that forum post was made.
It seems the tag was removed again just around the time I saw it, according to the tag history.
I disagree with the decision to remove the tag, but I guess that makes this image one that needs more debate.
Also I guess for the sake of @CasualStan I want to contribute to helping decide whether stuff should have the tag *added*. I feel it's important to have this added as I know there are people on this site that do not wish to see that stuff for any particular reason (same obviously with shota, get that stuff tagged ye ye)
japooter said:
It seems the tag was removed again just around the time I saw it, according to the tag history.
I disagree with the decision to remove the tag, but I guess that makes this image one that needs more debate.
I readded it. Kisume is a borderline case, but Cirno is definitely loli in this one.
These two were removed by Hereinafter but they seemed pretty obvious to me... :ConfusedGura:
Trouble_Windows said:
These two were removed by Hereinafter but they seemed pretty obvious to me... :ConfusedGura:
The two girls in the second post look about the same age, and I wouldn’t consider the one on the right to be loli. The art style makes them look a bit young, but they’re not actually drawn to look like children.
The first post is a bit closer to borderline, but I don’t think it’s to the point that it would warrant the loli tag. Her position also makes it hard to determine her physical age.
post #8408600 - Piper in this one?
Is post #8411213 really loli?
teitoku_zeon said:
I feel like this is up in the air a bit...I want to say loli but it could be either way.
LightSolas said:
Is post #8411213 really loli?
I think these are two petite women, their proportions seem as much to me anyway.
Ars said:
As we all know, making sure an image is correctly tagged as loli or not is rather important, though it can be rather dubious at best. I'm starting this thread in hopes of getting a centralized point of checking.
If you're unsure whether or not a certain image or set of images warrants the loli tag, post it here (in "post #******" format, without the qoutes) and hopefully someone more knowledgeable will clear it up.
Let me start it off with post #594502 and post #584872
[mod edit: updated thread title to include shota - jxh2154]
