Posted under General
Jigsy said:
What do breast feeding without lacation classify as?
I'm assuming lactation is rating:e because of the body fluids but I'm not sure about the former if there is no milk.
Depending on how much is shown some depictions could fall under S. Example: post #5179966, post #3878504, post #532727
What is the ruling on 'Safe' pages of an otherwise clearly explicit comic? Take post #5375358 for example:
The image itself would fall into the general category, but having any pages of an explicit comic rated as general feels really weird and not appropriate. Should sensitive be the default for these sort of things?
Ardouru said:
What is the ruling on 'Safe' pages of an otherwise clearly explicit comic? Take post #5375358 for example:
The image itself would fall into the general category, but having any pages of an explicit comic rated as general feels really weird and not appropriate. Should sensitive be the default for these sort of things?
Images should be rated on their own context. If there is nothing explicit in the image, then it should be rated G/S, no matter how hardcore the rest of the comic is.
Nacha said:
Images should be rated on their own context. If there is nothing explicit in the image, then it should be rated G/S, no matter how hardcore the rest of the comic is.
Earlier a few points were made about sensitive dialogues being used in some of the posts, which are now considered "Sensitive". In hentai comics, arguably so, every piece of dialogue would lead to imminent sexual intercourse and in every single case you do not even need translation to understand where it's going. I feel like for that reason alone all hentai comics should be marked with "Sensitive" by default.
On a lesser important side-note, I would argue it might be a good way to introduce some clearer distinction between sexual and non-sexual doujins without having to go too deep.
m4rs said:
Is there some sort of auto-moderation system? I'm going through my uploads to change ratings, and some of them seem to have gotten marked as sensitive even when there no suggestive or violent content in it.
All the "Safe" posts defaulted to "Sensitive" when the system rolled out.
Are ALL forms of nudity disqualified from G, even when completely non-sexual/emphasized, not exposing any questionable areas, and in the context of an otherwise clear-cut innocent scene? E.g. I'd consider post #5337872 perfectly clean personally, although I can see why it'd be kept S on principle.
Diet_Soda said:
Are ALL forms of nudity disqualified from G, even when completely non-sexual/emphasized, not exposing any questionable areas, and in the context of an otherwise clear-cut innocent scene? E.g. I'd consider post #5337872 perfectly clean personally, although I can see why it'd be kept S on principle.
See forum #213328:
evazion said:
anything showing too much skin shouldn't be rated G.
I read that as “yes, no nudity of any kind in G”.
Updated
It seems that each person has a very different standard for 'too much skin'.
An example of applying S to Wiki also states that it is when the sexual part is focused, and when the image is in a sexual mood, but now it seems to simply apply S to all skin exposures, even though it is not that mood at all.
In the future, I think there will be no clothes allowed for rating:G but Hijab and Avaya.
kittey said:
See forum #213328:
I read that as “yes, no nudity of any kind in G”.
Since AFAIK "showing too much skin" is a set phrase to denote revealing, "sexy" clothing, I interpreted it as cleavage/breasts/thighs/anything that could be considered indecent or at least slightly awkward to be caught browsing on a train. There's a small subset of images which feature nothing of the sort despite technically falling under nudity. I felt this was worth asking because when going through my uploads to re-rate, the one I linked seemed like a no-brainer G to me (an innocent symbolic backdrop, with only the character's back exposed), but it got booted back to S in no time at all. I guess allowing certain cases to slip through in the name of "artistic nudity" is a can of worms we may not want opened this early in the tag's lifespan, though.
pronebone said:
Will suggestive dialogue or profanity be tagged as general, in instances where it's clearly not safe for work kind of dialogue.
For example, a safe post of two characters discussing getting fucked in the butt: post #5087944
Or some girl cheering on viewer's penis: post #1825168
This is difficult. On the one hand, it's not practical to have to read each and every comic in order to re-rate them, or to wait on translations in case they're not translated yet. On the other hand, people using safe mode to read safe comics in public probably don't want to be surprised by comics that turn out to be highly NSFW. There also the possibility of embedded notes (notes that show up without hovering, see embedded:true)), which could surprise people with NSFW text (for example: post #2339187).
So I'd say, posts can be rated as G without reading them if the image itself looks safe for work from the thumbnail, but if you have read it and know it's highly NSFW, then it can be rated sensitive.
For English text, simple profanity may be rated G (e.g. someone saying the word "fuck"), but sexualized text or situations should be rated S. Examples would include things like fuck-me shirts or comics like post #5351787.
Jigsy said:
What do breast feeding without lacation classify as?
I'm assuming lactation is rating:e because of the body fluids but I'm not sure about the former if there is no milk.
Breast sucking should be at minimum Q, although I'd normally rate it E. It's not as explicit as other sex acts, but it's more than the "mild sexual contact (groping and heavy kissing)" currently listed as Q.
Shinjidude said:
Where would we place canonical character designs that say feature midriffs and bare shoulders (e.g. Nadia la Arwall, or Yuffie Kisaragi)? I'm guessing S since their outfit tops show almost as much skin as a two-piece swimsuit top despite being outerwear? (even though the former was featured in public broadcasting aimed towards children).
Those are normally going to be S because they have the same coverage level as a bikini. Even if a character like Nadia la Arwall wasn't meant to be sexualized in the source material, in fanart she usually is.
There are going to be some characters where it's hard to find anything G-rated because of how lewd their default costume is. Azur Lane characters come to mind.
Benit149 said:
Do I need to go through my uploads and manually update posts to G if they meet the criteria?
It's not required, but it would be much appreciated if you want to help. The easiest way to re-rate posts is to pick a tag you like and go through it. Using your own uploads is a good place to start because you're already familiar with them.
iridescent_slime said:
Just so we're all on the same page, pubic hair is still Q, right? Or is it getting downgraded to S along with "subtle" cameltoes, and howto:rate just hasn't been updated yet?
To be clear, I'm not talking about blink-and-you-miss it stuff like post #887647, I'm talking about blatantly exposed pubes like post #3091703 and post #5208322. And yes, these are all posts that were long tagged as S even though according to the wiki they should have been Q.
Pubic hair should be Q at minimum, if not E. Most of the time it's rated E.
I wouldn't say cameltoes have been downgraded to S. The intent is to treat things like cameltoe, covered nipples, and bulges more consistently and acknowledge the reality that people don't always tag them as Q, even when the previous rules said they should.
