The Place for Purging Porn and Pedo-Pandering (AKA P5 flag evaluations)

• Roraborialis Leers at the keys*

So far up its a few pages back. I'm totally for the "No gushing + disclaimer banner" on works that are safe outside of a single fan-service incident/Have clean versions of the work out there. It would cut down the controversy aspect of the 5 P greatly, and it would make it easier for them to do their job as well, given that they will not end up in a situation where they have to deal with the dilemma of an otherwise intelligent work that is damned (Ehh, is that word ok around these parts?) by a single scene/instance.

Has Ghastlys Ghastly Comic been reviewed yet? or was it just cut and hasn't been reviewed?

I think it's the latter, but I could be wrong.

It was cut before the institution of the illustrious P5.

Sent a violation report, to make this truly official.

@P5: It appears someone misclicked on both Margaret Cho and Lindsay Lohan. Can one of you zap them?

edited 24th May '12 6:42:49 AM by tdgoodrich1

Done.

Misclicks or trolling/bluenosery? Especially Margaret Cho

I'd like to pretend Lindsay Lohan doesn't exist, either, but there's technically no reason for her to be on the queue.

Though it may be far too late for this, I wish to offer a correction to statements made earlier in this thread. The Supreme Court of the United States does not, in fact, use "we know porn when we see it" as its standard for obscenity. It uses a three-prong test: "(a) whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and ( c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." Source: Millar v. California, Via Volokh. I don't know how much this helps, but I thought it worth pointing out.

edited 24th May '12 9:16:50 AM by DarkSovereign

I came across Little Ego by accident, and according to the page, it's an erotic comic about a woman who has sex with everything. So I flagged it and did a quick look, and from what I saw, it defiantly is NSFW. I think it need to be cut.

Flagged Oruchuban Ebichu. Normally, comedies are pretty kosher, even the more transgressive ones like Panty And Stocking With Garterbelt and South Park, but given that this one was apparently designed to push the Japanese TV ratings system as far as it could go, it probably warrants a look just in case.

...?

-does search, sees first image showcasing a woman in said work being fucked by an alligator-

... Aw, hell naw!

Perhaps she was confused about the order of actions one is supposed to take in getting "fuck me" boots?

I came across it because I was looking up tropes related to Egos, and I was not expecting this.

It's so absurd that at one point tulips have sex with her. It's all supposed to be handwaved as All Just a Dream at the end of each comic, but this crosses the line a dozen times so cut it ASAP.

edited 24th May '12 10:17:37 AM by KrazyKopter

...It's apparently a parody of Little Nemo.

I don't remember ANYTHING like that in Little Nemo.

That's probably gotta go, unless someone has something convincing enough to defend it.

It may qualify as some kind of anthropological curiosity, but I don't think that'd save it.

It's basically Little Nemo, but instead of encountering with weird things, she has sex with them. It's a porn cover.

So... it's safe to axe?

Just woke up to notice Ghastly's Ghastly Comic has been cut,

If its worth anything I archive binged it a few months back and every last sex scene is a jokes,

I understand if its too much for the wiki just throwing it out there.

sounds like.

edited 24th May '12 10:40:25 AM by Shadis

I'd say Ebichu is probably deserving of a pass since it's comedy, and since the only pedo thing about it so far (I've seen eps one and two) is a Brick Joke about the "loser" guy sleeping with a high schooler and his 25 year old OL GF putting on her old high school uniform for him to try to keep him (though everything *except* her realizes what a stupid fuckhead he is).

As for the sex, yes, there are explicit sex scenes. Between adults, and so crudely drawn and unsexy that one would probably find the Victoria's Secret catalog better for wank material, unless your idea of a good masturbation session involves laughing your ass off and/or wanting to slap both of the people having sex and tell them they need psychological help rather than each other.

Don't know if it gets worse pedo-wise later or more hot and sexy porno than "omg I hate these people" later on - I'm not bothering with more of it.

edited 24th May '12 11:33:49 AM by AGroupie

I want to flag Ultimate Girls. Tvtropes page here, Wikipedia page here. Stumbled onto this stinker a while back, and, while I wouldn't call it porn (can't remember a sex scene, but I didn't get very far), I'd say it's sleazier than some of the other works that have been flagged (i.e. Kanokon, Strike Witches).

edited 24th May '12 12:52:59 PM by DarkSovereign

well if its not porn or pedo its not 5ps problem,

also just because something is flagged dose not mean much you can flag ANYTHING.

Strike witches they let stay so bad example,

don't remember abut Kanokon so I will let someone else comment on it.

I didn't flag it frivolously. The main heroines are given powers that cause their suits to disintegrate as they fight and one of the three could qualify as pedo-bait. I could barely make it through one episode before I felt a leaden taint fall upon my soul. It may not be porn, but if not it's damn near close.

edited 24th May '12 1:21:13 PM by DarkSovereign