Death of the Author
is a concept from literary criticism which is being thoroughly abused here, and which is in any case not the point because we are trying to enforce the rules, not deconstruct them, thank you very much. This is not about pissing about with "I'm too incapable of critical reading to understand what the author was getting at", nor with "by my supercreative reading of Paedoshit no Fapfapfap
it's neither pornographic nor sexual", it's about actually getting shit done.
All of this is entirely irrelevant to the policy, which is not
to prohibit every work that depicting a child beauty pageant, and you knew damn well that the intent was not to prohibit every work depicting a child beauty pageant. The only point in suggesting that non-problematic series might be removed per these rules is to undermine the policy and derail the thread, because you don't actually expect us to cut any of these things. Cut it out or get suspended.
The other thing you are doing when you very pointedly misunderstand the policy is demonstrating that you do, in fact, understand the policy. Yes, we probably are deleting the article on your favourite porn. If you don't think it's porn, that's what the council exists to check.
The reason we didn't put up guidelines like ccoa's before is because we knew that you would look for holes in them like this. The English language is always open to reinterpretation. Sit around saying "Define this, define that" and you'll never understand anything, and you'll never get anything done. We are trying to clear out pornography, we are trying to clear out child pornography, we are trying to clear out works that were written for paedophiles. These terms mean precisely what you think they mean, and nothing is happening to Brave New World
, Final Fantasy
or fucking Mister Rogers' Neighborhood
edited 17th Apr '12 5:07:24 PM by BobbyG