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

@ The One Who Tropes: Talk to the mods directly.

@ Septimus:

1. Can't remember if I voted on the lolicon/shotacon thing, but just in case I didn't, Arha's changes look fine to me.
2. Not sure what we're supposed to be looking for on Sandbox.Horny Devils 2. None of the works are ones that we voted cut.
3. Did HookerVerse have any vandalism problems or the like? If not, we can just unlock it and keep an eye on it.
4. Roleplay.Bete Noire has three devils, and just needs to be cut.
5. Manga.Chintsubu is done and marked as such.
6. Sandbox.Hive Fled and WebOriginal.Fluffy Pony still need to be cleaned; though I'm not seeing anything immediately problematic, I haven't taken a good look. Film.Child Bride is fine, though the others should probably give it a once-over just to be sure.

You didn't vote on the lolicon/shotacon thing, but it seems like we have enough agreement now (unless Komodin wants to file an objection) so I'll ask for it soon.

Regarding Horny Devils 2, I was asking because while I introduced a lot of Red Links to encourage people to make pages for them, on such a trope some works may not be content policy compliant and should thus be excluded.

Regarding Hooker Verse, can't find any problem material.

I have no objections with the lolicon/shotacon thing.

With Horny Devils 2, unless a majority of the entries on the page are from content-violating works, I don't mind just removing/excluding such things.

I listed some of the skeevy stuff on our Fluffy Pony page. I'd clean it up myself, but there's two problems - first, I lack much knowledge of the works (and the comics I've seen have convinced me that I never, ever want to expand said knowledge), and second, the page is chiefly bad in aggregate. Many of the entries are defensible on their own, but add up into something seriously horrible.

edited 30th Jul '14 12:57:28 PM by Iaculus

I went ahead and asked for the lolicon/shotacon changes so that we can get that out of the way. Regarding Horny Devils 2, I investigated each redlink individually and none of the current ones seem like they'd be making Content Policy problems if made a page for, and if nothing on there was 5P cut then I guess it's safe to put that sandbox into Horny Devils.

Not sure on how to fix the Fluffy Pony problem. There is no other solution really than to remove one-handed (?) writing and dilute the more sexuality-themed examples with non-sexuality-themed examples.

edited 30th Jul '14 3:12:00 PM by SeptimusHeap

Not seeing any issues with the Horny Devils sandbox apart from those already mentioned or Film.Child Bride.

edited 30th Jul '14 4:22:08 PM by tdgoodrich1

Speaking of Child Bride, I've looked through mainpage and subpages and it talks only about material that exists in the censored versions, so it can be marked as done.

New page up for vote: Main.Endless World. Without knowing anything about it, I can spot three problems: wrong namespace, ZCEs, and spoiler issues. That said, it ain't worth fixing any of that if it doesn't pass the vote here.

Any thoughts on unlocking HookerVerse?

edited 4th Aug '14 3:18:44 PM by tdgoodrich1

Found that Endless World manga over there.

It seems to mainly be about the drama with a sometimes explicit shot, rather than porn. Although the scene called out as shotacon is shown on-panel, so it's still a clause for the review.

edited 4th Aug '14 4:20:42 PM by Adannor

If anyone needs a reference, the shotacon bit is referring to the second half of chapter 2, where Ryuu is stated to be a middle-schooler (13-15) when he has sex with Toshimitsu. One scene, for drama, seems to suggest an abusive (?) / manipulative relationship rather than an intent to titillate.

In terms of explicit content, a number of penises are seen. A few female nipples, oddly enough. If there were explicit shots of anuses or vaginas, I must've missed them. One or two blowjobs, but penetration is not drawn in detail.

I'd probably consider this softcore / borderline, but I'm still divided as to which side of the line it falls on.

edited 4th Aug '14 6:05:34 PM by Pyrite

Oh boy. I found a work page that, due to its index placement, we somehow managed to miss until now: The Lord Of The G Strings, a porn parody of Lord of the Rings.

edited 5th Aug '14 4:44:43 PM by Komodin

Hmm. According to IM Db, there's an edited version of it. Maybe the article can be clean/lock?

edited 5th Aug '14 5:08:38 PM by Assassin-sensei

Our precedent for not including edited releases of hardcore porn or porn parodies would be Batman XXX. I don't know if we put it down explicitly.

EDIT: My mistake. It was Batman XXX, not Pirates XXX, although I seem to vaguely remember the latter being discussed - the latter was cut with a disposition of "porn".

edited 5th Aug '14 8:01:21 PM by Pyrite

It still appears to be more softcore then Pirates, since it was passed 18 in the UK uncut instead of R18, the rating for pornography that Pirates got.

And from what I've heard it seems to be more focused on comedy then sex. Plus it's available to purchase on You Tube, which are normally more strict about these things...still, I don't know if anyone's seen the film here who could testify to it (or has the guts to say that yes, they saw a movie called Lord of the G-strings).

edited 5th Aug '14 7:53:23 PM by Assassin-sensei

Well, I trawled our Reports list.

...For some odd reason, we voted to keep this. There's even a note from Sept in the Discussions page, which is pretty much giving it the all-clear. Now, if only we had some documentation as to how we arrived at this decision - instead, all I could find was this. *groan* Why didn't we keep better records?

edited 5th Aug '14 8:11:33 PM by Pyrite

There's very little in the way of anything like porn in Lord of The G-Strings, much to my disappointment at the time. Comparable to those teen comedies that are a 15 in the UK, that have a cover that imply you'd get to see more that what you actually do. There's a very short lesbian scene, that's it (which is the sort you'd get in a mainstream movie.) At least, in the version you can get from HMV.

So... There's more porn in American Beauty?

More than what? I think the daughter is briefly topless, but that's not porn. Unless there's a movie with negative amounts of porn it shouldn't have more than anything.

Sorry. I was asking whether American Beauty had more 'porn' than the work mentioned in the post above mine.

(That said, American Beauty also has a sex scene between the mother and some side character. (covered by sheets))

edited 6th Aug '14 2:20:31 AM by Sabbo

Back on topic: we're not discussing American Beauty here. Any 5P members remember voting on it, and on what grounds?

EDIT: ...And now I really want to know two things, having seen some clips: what were you guys thinking when you voted, and how'd the censors manage to trim it to an R-rating?

edited 6th Aug '14 4:37:44 AM by Pyrite

Uh, Pyrite, are you watching the right movie? (Lord of the G-strings, right?)

Because I skimmed through it out of boredom tonight. I can't even call this porn. There's a few sequences with topless girls, one five-second mild sex scene (so tame it'd be allowed on basic cable) played for laughs, and a one-minute sequence of two girls kissing and undressing.

I can't see this getting cut; this is even tamer then HBO's shows. This isn't even Plot With Porn; this is a mild R at best.

edited 6th Aug '14 8:27:36 PM by Assassin-sensei

American Beauty is fine. It's nowhere near what we'd classify as porn.

... Oh. Whoops. I completely forgot about that earlier judgment on Lord of the G-Strings—I was even the one who wrote the final disposition. Well, if it's that relatively inoffensive, then we can just drop the matter and move on.

Speaking of, we have a new flag: Hood Ornament Hottie.

Reason: I'm not sure if I'm doing this right, so hopefully I'm not off base. Anyways, while I don't want to make an image unavailable for the article, I think a new one is needed, as this image seems to cater to those or condone to having a race-fetish, which is obviously racist, or simply catering to rather bad stereotypes-

Going by the page's edit history, the user Jordan M is the one who flagged this, seeing as they tried to replace the image in question earlier today due to "Avoiding Race-Fetish pandering." This... is a rather huge stretch in logic there, to say the least.

edited 6th Aug '14 9:17:51 PM by Komodin

... Seriously? The image was changed on the basis of the race of the people it depicts?

Assassin: I'm pretty sure it's the same one as far as the article is concerned, but we might be watching different versions. Because when you say "a few scenes of topless women", I'm seeing "more than half the running time"; when you say that the sex scene is several seconds long, I'm clocking it at several minutes; and when you say that there's one scene of women kissing and undressing, I think I'm seeing it every 10-15 minutes.

(And, of course, there isn't much of a plot to speak of either.)

EDITED to consolidate main arguments. See next page.

(And for what it's worth, I didn't watch American Beauty. I'm terrible, I know.)

edited 8th Aug '14 3:25:49 AM by Pyrite