The sub-forum is used for discussions that adjudicate possible violations of The Content Policy. Threads here can be created by flagging a page through the sidebar "report" button and toggling "The page may violate the Content Policy".
This thread is for general discussion of pages.
Edited by SeptimusHeap on Sep 10th 2022 at 11:50:32 AM
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
Well, it clearly ain't porn-related, so I gave it an Angel of Non-Porno. I thought you had to provide an explanation for flagging a page...
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
No longer a forum herald
No, there is no "fill in a reason" thing currently implemented.
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)
There really should be one.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
I can attest to that. Otherwise, for Manyuu Hikenchou I would have put in B 000000000 BZ!!!
Or something.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
@Shima: Yes, and we asked for it many times. But nobody bothered considering it. -_-;
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
It was discussed. It's possible Fast Eddie doesn't know we requested it, is working on it or is too busy to work on it. The last explanation is that he hates us all and enjoys keeping nice things like that away from us. This seems unlikely.
edited 2nd May '12 7:24:30 PM by Arha
Technical work? FUCK DAT SHIT!
Eddie just came off a coding binge. He'll get around to it.
and we asked for it many times. But nobody bothered considering it
I could have sworn we were told there would be one. I'll be generous and just assume it was overlooked when the coding was done.
Oh hey, Moetan is flagged.
I've seen that one in case comments from the peanut gallery are required but ... I sincerely doubt it'll be necessary.
Sorry, I can't tell if the sarcasm is supposed to indicate the work should not be flagged and you are not surprised that someone is flagging innocent stuff, or that you are not surprised that something horrible was flagged.
edited 2nd May '12 7:29:46 PM by Catbert
I am not surprised that Moetan was flagged. It's, like, the definition of pedo-pandering. To the extent that at one point, the perverted duck laments that they're giving screenshots of a busty character and essentially says "Well... okay, see? We have something for everyone!"
Eh, Moetan is well known for being witty, but for the sake of policy consistency I'll understand it being flagged and all.
Now using Trivialis handle.
Well lets see Cthulhu tech was flagged and restored.
And some one has flagged the page on star fighters because of pedo porn.
That's right the page on x-wings got flagged because of pedo porn!
Cool Dude
...But...isn't the main point of Moetan to be edutainment for Japanese to learn English?
edited 2nd May '12 7:35:08 PM by Raidouthe21st
We Are Our Avatars Forever (Now on Discord by invitation, PM)
Oh, wait-I forgot that the MC of Moetan is actually a high schooler who constantly bemoans that she looks much younger than she actually is.
Though generally, that kind of thing tends to be a strike AGAINST a work, as I recall, not for it.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Come to think of it, the show does blatantly make fun of how much it's violating the source material... and the source material as I understand it IS legitimate (if absurd) edutainment, so you might have a point.
edited 2nd May '12 7:35:16 PM by TheyCallMeTomu
It's a comical study aid book that turned into an anime.
Now using Trivialis handle.
At the very least, I know some people from college that liked the series in large part due to its pedo pandering elements.
The original study materials are probably fine, but I suspect that the anime isn't really TV Tropes material.
edited 2nd May '12 7:37:41 PM by TheyCallMeTomu
Cool Dude
Merely having a young looking character doesn't make something pedo-pandering. Does it portray adult-child sex in a positive light? Does it depict preteen sex?
I'll go so far as to say one of them was an actual pedophile.
It makes a significant issue of the young looking character being a source of fanservice, and lampshades this fact routinely. To be fair, the anime does make fun of itself for being nothing but showing off the characters.
It has protagonists that get bloody noses looking at clothless transformation scenes, if I recall. Of the young looking characters.
edited 2nd May '12 7:40:44 PM by TheyCallMeTomu
^^^ Isn't that what we're doing now?*
^ Charming.
edited 2nd May '12 7:39:56 PM by Arha
That does concern me. Does pedo-pandering mean the whole work or something found in the work? I've been reading pages 37-38 about To Aru Majutsu no Index and some of the input noted pedo-pandering elements for that too. But serialization had that work exempted from review.
Now using Trivialis handle.
'I'll go so far as to say one of them was an actual pedophile
And how is it played? I mean, South Park as pedophiles. Family Guy has a pedophile.
Sorry I meant a troll has put Jesu Otaku page on the flag list.
The Crystal Caverns A bird's gotta sing.