Posted under General
Blank_User said:
post #8602349
This was changed from G to S, presumably because of the covered navel. It makes sense for the regular non-chibi version of the character, but I don't think it's really necessary for something as heavily stylized as this. Does anyone else agree?
100% agree yeah.
santander said:
The only thing I see that might bump it up to S is the book title in the lower right corner ("Sexual Des..."), but I'm not sure if that's enough on it's own.
Uh...What the hell is the rating on this? Like, I'm 99% sure the censored thing there is a dick, but it's so heavily censored that I'm honestly not sure if this should be Q instead. I'm assuming the fact that it looks like a footjob is enough to keep it in E, right?
Knowledge_Seeker said:
Uh...What the hell is the rating on this? Like, I'm 99% sure the censored thing there is a dick, but it's so heavily censored that I'm honestly not sure if this should be Q instead. I'm assuming the fact that it looks like a footjob is enough to keep it in E, right?
That is not a penis. It is a Manjuu sitting on her tail and holding a black sheet, most likely to cover her crotch (which was visible in the image posted before yours). Just because her feet happen to be obscured doesn't mean she is performing a footjob. And even if that were a valid interpretation of the image, it would only be implied at best, putting it in Q at most. It might even be borderline S considering there doesn't seem to be any visible areolae, but I'll let someone else determine that.
Blank_User said:
That is not a penis. It is a Manjuu sitting on her tail and holding a black sheet, most likely to cover her crotch (which was visible in the image posted before yours). Just because her feet happen to be obscured doesn't mean she is performing a footjob. And even if that were a valid interpretation of the image, it would only be implied at best, putting it in Q (which I think is reasonable since you can see a bit of areola if you look closely.
Ah. Sorry, I didn't realized that was a manjuu. Just wanted to be safe than sorry.
s or q for both
c_spl said:
s or q for both
Not sure about the second one, but I think there's enough skin showing in the first for Q.
I think it could just be S idk
@NerveControl stated in a recent feedback that this post should not be rated Q. However, I looked everywhere for something warranting an E rating and couldn't find anything. All elements I saw (breast grab, nipples, subtle vulva) are listed under Q. Posting it here in case I missed something, but if I didn't, then I think that line should be removed from the feedback.
Compare with post #8731402, in which the vulva is fully visible and more in focus. Some might argue this should be Q because it's only full-frontal nudity, but I think E is fine considering it's more in focus here. It's still somewhat borderline, so I wouldn't be too critical of users rating posts like this as Q.
Edit: I didn’t mean the entire feedback should be removed. Repeat offenses are a valid reason for a negative.
Updated
Visible genitals are rating E and there are visible genitals in that post. The rating wiki is pretty clear about that. Is that feedbackable though? Frankly, no, I think it's overkill to declare that in a feedback unless they've already been told more than one time and still continue to misrate. Some users are evidently still working off of potentially old standards for how ratings are treated, like how @WinDGo is mass-misrating posts with visible pussy to Q (and hasn't responded to a DM they've been sent before - I'm waiting to hear back on that, and/or this ping, before I do anything about that).
WRS said:
Visible genitals are rating E and there are visible genitals in that post. The rating wiki is pretty clear about that.
That’s cherry-picking. All guidelines in howto:rate should be taken into account. Exposed genitals are listed under E, but the second item under Q is:
Visible vulva or pubic hair, if subtle and not blatantly exposed, such as in standing full-frontal nudity. "Blatantly exposed" means spread legs, spread pussy, presenting, anything focused on the crotch, and anything where the pussy is fully visible.
Taken together, this means that pussy is not an automatic E, just like how covered nipples is not an automatic Q and how cleavage is not an automatic S. Yes, in most cases, those ratings would be appropriate, but there are plenty of cases where it isn’t so black and white. The specific post I brought up is one of them. Yes, there is a pussy, but you can barely see it. It’s not focused on at all. It shouldn’t be enough on its own to disqualify it from a Q rating.
WRS said:
Some users are evidently still working off of potentially old standards for how ratings are treated, like how @WinDGo is mass-misrating posts with visible pussy to Q (and hasn't responded to a DM they've been sent before - I'm waiting to hear back on that, and/or this ping, before I do anything about that).
If the standards are outdated, then the wiki needs to be rewritten, because the ratings are still in line with the guidelines. I looked through WinDGo’s tag edits and agree some of them were misrated, but also agree with some of their edits. What’s probably happening is that they’re focusing too much on the guideline under Q, just as you and NerveControl are focusing too much on the guideline under E. The former is worse than the latter, but both should be avoided.
The main part of contention I have with the Q guideline is that it says anything “with the pussy fully visible” should be rated E. It would probably help if it were made clear what that means. Does it mean things like the clitoris are visible? Or simply that it would be really hard to miss (like a very noticeable cleft of venus)? Some might interpret that statement as contradicting the “standing full frontal nudity” part and that might be part of the reason some posts are misrated.
Blank_User said:
All guidelines in howto:rate should be taken into account.
Sure, but the first point of explicit is very clear about exposed genitals having to be rated explicit regardless of censorship. When in doubt you should fall on the side of err and if these posts are already rated correctly then mass-downgrading their rating for something that's meant to be taken with a nuanced approach for other types of cases is plain wrong. This isn't cherry-picking, the guidelines have never been more clear about it. Even if Q says this, ultimately, rating E's "any exposed genitals" line takes precedence.
That part of Q should get clarified or removed if its existence keeps being misused as an argument. Yes, in most cases the ratings aren't so black and white about their application, but genitals are one of the very few things that have a very clear hard line for their rating.
Blank_User said:
If the standards are outdated, then the wiki needs to be rewritten
There's been a bit of discussion about this part of the wiki in specific a lot because of this specific thing happening now which is using what should be a nuanced point to argue against what's otherwise clearly defined under the explicit rating. ETA: It was found via version history that rating E used to have "blatantly exposed" before being changed to what it reads to now, so it's likely that Q's line is an outdated holdover. That line was deliberately rewritten and put under E for any exposed genitals.
Updated
Blank_User said:
@NerveControl stated in a recent feedback that this post should not be rated Q. However, I looked everywhere for something warranting an E rating and couldn't find anything. All elements I saw (breast grab, nipples, subtle vulva) are listed under Q. Posting it here in case I missed something, but if I didn't, then I think that line should be removed from the feedback.
Compare with post #8731402, in which the vulva is fully visible and more in focus. Some might argue this should be Q because it's only full-frontal nudity, but I think E is fine considering it's more in focus here. It's still somewhat borderline, so I wouldn't be too critical of users rating posts like this as Q.
Related to the feedback
Blank_User said:
@NerveControl stated in a recent feedback that this post should not be rated Q. However, I looked everywhere for something warranting an E rating and couldn't find anything. All elements I saw (breast grab, nipples, subtle vulva) are listed under Q. Posting it here in case I missed something, but if I didn't, then I think that line should be removed from the feedback.
A bit related, I'm actually not so sure about post #8763938. Calling it an areola slip feels a bit generous when you have to basically squint to see any color difference, and that difference might as well be caused by normal techniques, and using it as an argument in a negative feedback feels a bit overkill.
WRS said:
Visible genitals are rating E and there are visible genitals in that post. The rating wiki is pretty clear about that. Is that feedbackable though? Frankly, no, I think it's overkill to declare that in a feedback unless they've already been told more than one time and still continue to misrate. Some users are evidently still working off of potentially old standards for how ratings are treated, like how @WinDGo is mass-misrating posts with visible pussy to Q (and hasn't responded to a DM they've been sent before - I'm waiting to hear back on that, and/or this ping, before I do anything about that).
Since it looks like now 3 people have DM'd him, 2 (myself and Farm) around 3 weeks ago, and the behavior has only continued, I left a feedback. Looks like none of us got a response to our DMs. We'll see if anything comes of that feedback or if it still continues. Given how effective detailed DMs were......
FubukiKai said:
Looks like none of us got a response to our DMs.
FWIW: I did, but I only got back a requoting of the bit under rating Q, while ignoring what's under rating E as the very first line, ergo why this needs to be clarified or worded in such a way that can't have its definition stretched to argue "well actually even if it's visible it can be Q" (no it can't).
Danbooru users are undoubtedly very clear about how to rate penis so I'm not sure what the deal is with stretching the rating definitions or otherwise when it comes to pussy. Even without editing it to clarify, Q does not contradict E in any way. This is not at all a comparable scenario to things like non-S cleavage.
Full disclosure: I’ve been rerating these kind of posts to Q before this conversation based on my understanding of howto:rate, but I will stop doing so until this is resolved.
WRS said:
Sure, but the first point of explicit is very clear about exposed genitals having to be rated explicit regardless of censorship.
This isn’t about censorship. This is about the genitals being subtly depicted as opposed to being a prominent part of the image. There’s a big difference between the two.
When in doubt you should fall on the side of err and if these posts are already rated correctly then mass-downgrading their rating for something that's meant to be taken with a nuanced approach for other types of cases is plain wrong. This isn't cherry-picking, the guidelines have never been more clear about it. Even if Q says this, ultimately, rating E's "any exposed genitals" line takes precedence.
That part of Q should get clarified or removed if its existence keeps being misused as an argument. Yes, in most cases the ratings aren't so black and white about their application, but genitals are one of the very few things that have a very clear hard line for their rating.
It is natural to assume that the more specific guideline points out exceptions for the more general guideline. I brought up the covered nipples example because the relationship between those two statements is similar. It would’ve been so easy to add something saying something like “exposed genitals are E without exception,” but we get a statement in Q about “visible vulva, if subtle and not blatantly exposed” instead.
There's been a bit of discussion about this part of the wiki in specific a lot because of this specific thing happening now which is using what should be a nuanced point to argue against what's otherwise clearly defined under the explicit rating. ETA: It was found via version history that rating E used to have "blatantly exposed" before being changed to what it reads to now, so it's likely that Q's line is an outdated holdover. That line was deliberately rewritten and put under E for any exposed genitals.
The Q line can’t be an outdated holdover. It was added at the same time “blatantly” was removed from E (and added to Q). And it was evazion himself that made both changes.
WRS said:
Danbooru users are undoubtedly very clear about how to rate penis so I'm not sure what the deal is with stretching the rating definitions or otherwise when it comes to pussy.
I don’t remember where, but there have been discussions about penises being more visible by default and thus much less likely to be eligible for Q. But I have no evidence, so you can take it with a grain of salt.
Even without editing it to clarify, Q does not contradict E in any way. This is not at all a comparable scenario to things like non-S cleavage.
The statement specifically used “full-frontal nudity” as an example. How does that not contradict the idea of all pussies, including barely visible ones, being automatic Es?
I think we need input from @evazion for this, especially about his howto:rate edits. Also, he should check the most recent wiki edit. This wiki is far too important to leave unchecked by admins.
The intent was that cases where the vulva is barely visible and not the focus of the image aren't an automatic E. Examples would be post #4364459, post #6568826, or post #5697400. This is basically how it's always been rated and during the last rating rework I didn't want to change it too much. The current rules were just trying to put existing standards into writing, which, yes, are pretty hazy.
Currently about 10% of pussy is rating:q. I wouldn't mind if we were stricter about it because it does need frequent gardening to deal with people rating things like blatant spread pussy or blatant presenting pussy as Q. But I do think there are cases where the vulva is just a faint hint of a line and treating that as an automatic E would perhaps be too harsh, even if it would be easier to deal with.
The rules don't go into exhaustive detail about every corner case because they're meant to be easy to read by normal people and I don't want them to become overcomplicated by rules lawyers.
Sure, but the first point of explicit is very clear about exposed genitals having to be rated explicit regardless of censorship.
This means don't rate things like post #8192745 as Q even though the genitals are fully hidden by censorship. It doesn't become Q just because you can't technically see the genitals.
That sounds good and fair, and having this officially on record helps for rating gardening or reminding people how to treat this case. For sure there's a number of things that are really dependent on the context but even if you want to avoid rules lawyering, it's how it was worded that seemed to present itself as an override to the content of Q, yet also slightly fuzzy and weirdly contradictory at the same time. I can get behind not treating a faint line as E.
We were a bit divided in discussion off-platform and had a pretty fair half of builders who thought the same way and others another and it all came down to those two points colliding in the rating wiki.
Blank_User said:
This isn’t about censorship. This is about the genitals being subtly depicted as opposed to being a prominent part of the image
Although this is now resolved pending future revisiting, I should say that I wasn't just strictly talking about censorship, but used poor wording - because I was really talking about their presence at all.
