Should post #953158 be tagged with cameltoe and rated Q?
Posted under General
Should post #953158 be tagged with cameltoe and rated Q?
Slightly off-topic, perhaps, but...
I've been thinking about Danbooru rating system lately. Sometimes I get a feeling that "Q" rating is a little too ambiguous. It would be nice to split it into 2 different rating types instead. First of these could be closer to "S", while the second closer to "E"; with 4 rating types total.
Just my two cents.
Part of the reason Q needs to straddle the middle is because it is the default that unrated posts go to. By having an even number of ratings, one would be forced to push it one way or the other without reason.
Also 5 (to get an unbiased middle), and even 4 rating classifications seems a bit too fine grained. Especially since it's often not clear which of the three existing ratings a post should be classified as.
Shinjidude said:
... Especially since it's often not clear which of the three existing ratings a post should be classified as.
Cannot disagree here. As of late, I often stumble across the posts that are (IMO) OBVIOUSLY Questionable but rated Safe instead (like aforementioned post). The fun thing is, people who rate them this way often have positive records for "good and diligent tagging" etc. *coughSchrobbycough* (just example, nothing personal).
As for 5 rating types, the "middle" (default) one could be "Not Rated" or something like this. But, indeed, it would probably be an overkill.
I've said it before, (probably in this thread). The old system wasn't perfect, but it was mechanical and pretty much unambiguous.
It may have also caused some of the questionable "safe"s you saw, since if breasts, genitalia, pubic hair, and body fluids were not overtly visible and there was no obvious innuendo, it was always categorized "safe".
On the other hand with the new system I believe, unexplicit artistic nudity (as you'd see in a public statue or museum) could also be rated "safe".
In any case, without a specific algorithm to follow, there are going to be uncertain cases, and with one you may not actually be following "common sense" or every person's personal definition for each of the ratings.
Rated as explicit due to a bit daring IMHO depiction of her crotch, but if you think so you can change it back to Questionable.
Updated
post #853156
If not for what the artist said you wouldn't be able to tell if it's cum or not, and our default thinking is "it is".
Cases that provide no visual element to assume otherwise (post #443851) should get rating:e imo (and I'm also saying this for the 17 pages of cum -rating:e we currently have).
Updated
^ Explicit? Looks safe to me.
Aristocrat said:
post #41775^ Explicit? Looks safe to me.
Yeah, I've seen a lot of the stuff from that long ago is misrated. I think it was a glitch in the rating code or something.
Should this go back to questionable?
On the other hand:
At the very least, it needs a +areolae unless I'm wrong and the R-18 on Pixiv has mislead me, and it's really a sakura petal, depression, or lipstick.. Confirmation?
--So, for future reference--
Given the rating guidelines, exposure isn't enough, but is this enough 'non innocent intent'?
As an example, clearly, post #890273 made it onto safebooru, and is pretty much devoid of anything 'sexually' suggestive (only embarrassment). (also, above ex. needs +areolae, too?) And I've seen slips where the characters are standing provocatively, which are likely rightfully 'safe' by definition. (provocative does not imply sexual nature)
However, as another example, post #905868 is considered a 'safe' slip, though one might argue otherwise given the face and action. Maybe I've answered my question given the last example, but I wanted to check-in since these two are both undressing, but in the image in question, naruko knows about the exposure, but only partially covers up, and was clearly undressing. (but maybe for a tasteful nude shot..)
I'd prefer to lean back toward questionable, but it's easily borderline given the rules since: It's not exactly 'heavily' sexually charged, but it's not exactly 'lacking sexual intent'. Though, I'm guessing a character's intent (if unclear), and background (stereotypical) actions aren't enough to influence the decision. (Remi isn't always plotting to kill us, right?) Thus, some feedback for my reference, and reassurance that it's properly rated might be helpful. Thanks
Updated
kenshiro99 said: post #504178
Should this go back to questionable?
While it's tame, I agree on Questionable.
post #251233 shows the guy with an erection but the rest of the picture is all very casual about it. What was our decision on rating where everything is covered with pixelated censoring?
I guess it deserves questionable rating (no bra), but on the other hand it isn't the main focus of this pic. Just to be sure.
Ive been changing questionable to safe a lot lately, mostly stuff like post #123431 and post #283011. I'm assuming that erect_nipples are not questionable any more.
I did find some posts where I became uncertain though, please give me some input.
1: post #467933
2: post #480931
3: post #690225
4: post #494072 (due to the popsicle)
5: post #203864 (do we have a tag for those kinds of deformed, rubbery breasts?)
Not sure if this should get rating:q or rating:e. Putting it on e for now.
picnic said:
post #980221Not sure if this should get rating:q or rating:e. Putting it on e for now.
I'd go with questionable. She's naked but what's being shown doesn't look sexual in any way. kind of just randomly naked.
kenshiro99 said:
it's also Rated an R-18 on Pixiv.
Just a tip: Pixiv seems to put R-18 on anything that isn't completely safe. Even showing one nipple gets R-18: http://www.pixiv.net/member_illust.php?mode=medium&illust_id=2547505