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

A query on adaptation tropes, following up on an offsite mod conversation —

There was a content policy decision to cut the light novel Literature.Redo Of Healer, but to keep the Anime and Manga version.

Looking at Anime.Redo Of Healer and its subpages, we've now got a bunch of dubious Adaptation and Bowdlerize trope examples referencing the light novel (e.g. mentioning that a rape scene where the protagonist "ends up using the fire poker anyway once he's had his fun" is watered down in adaptations).

Given that we've removed the light novel due to its content, this feels like it's weaselling around that decision.

Do we have a precedent for handling this — should some or all adaptation examples be banned for scenarios where the adapted work was cut due to content policy?

(Personally, I'd lean towards cutting all of them regardless of the nature of the difference and/or how explicit they are about the original work, just because we don't want the original work on the wiki at all, and it's a lot easier than drawing a line case-by-case. But that's just my personal view, and mod hat very firmly off)

Edited by Mrph1 on Mar 26th 2024 at 1:38:36 PM

Personally I would say keep the adaptation tropes (they're describing how the work we're actually troping is less graphic, after all, so they don't implicate us in hosting a work that is graphic in a particular way) but dial back on unnecessary detail when needed.

I agree with Mrph 1, personally. The first rule of cut adaptations is, you do not talk about cut adaptations.

Edited by Ramidel on Mar 26th 2024 at 6:06:57 AM

Minimize the mentions of the adapted work in a way that it's still mentioned, but does not go in further detail.

Depends on CV forum's interests

• Treating the original novel as it never existed
• Acknowledging the novel but forbidding describing its content

Latter makes more sense, because we can already trope P5 works in on-page examples so long as we don't talk about the offending content and don't redlink.

Edited by Malady on Mar 26th 2024 at 8:45:08 AM

Agreed. We can acknowledge its existence but no more than that.

Yes, we can mention the original. In the recent case of Nekopara, the decision was to only describe all-ages versions and the anime, but in the description it's still mentioned to be an eroge and is listed on the H-Game index. We just removed details from the H-scenes themselves.

During the P5's heyday, F.A.T.A.L. and A Serbian Film were stubbified to acknowledge that they exist but locked to prevent people from adding trope examples due to how infamous they are for their content. Similarly, the director's cut of Caligula could've gotten this treatment, but was cut instead to prevent setting a precedent where works that are nearly pure porn without a less NSFW edit were kept solely because of their notability.

None of those are precedent anymore. The ruling on Caligula was expressly against the rules and reversed as soon as Fast Eddie was out of the picture. A Serbian Film and FATAL have been destubified because we no longer allow locked stubs.

"The P5's heyday" (specifically the original council) was a shitshow in a lot of ways, and besides that, the forum's attitude has changed significantly. I personally wouldn't cite precedents from then to guide what we do now.

I have a quick question. If I come across a fanfic rec that violates the policy, do I report it or just remove it from the page?

What is the Fanfic Recs/ page the rec in question is listed on?

Edited by JHD0919 on Mar 29th 2024 at 2:26:51 PM

It's just a hypothetical question I had

Report it first because it's not always obvious what counts.

Edited by Amonimus on Mar 29th 2024 at 11:35:33 AM

More specifically, report the Fanfic Recs/ page the rec in question is on and talk about what disqualifies the fic being rec'd. Do I have that right?

I mean, clearly if there's an issue, the conversation can't start until it's pinpointed.

Edited by Amonimus on Mar 29th 2024 at 11:37:06 AM

I've seen people report Fanfic Recs to address a specific problem on the page before if it's more than just one fic that violates the rules; I think it's the right avenue, though sometimes it's decided there's not an issue with the fics in question.

Edited by mightymewtron on Mar 29th 2024 at 6:49:58 AM

ok

14860: Also, back in 2012, there were a lot more examples of stuff we really didn't want, mostly brought over by hentai fans who saw that we didn't have much in the way of standards then, and I think the sheer amount of ick broke some people's brains (which led to a lot of bitter arguments and Eddie fiats).

Well, originally there was no such thing as "a work we didn't want." The rule was "we can talk about the porn, we just can't be the porn." Of course, plenty of tropers wanted to luridly discuss all the details of Kodomo no Jikan, which was part of the reason why we got the rule we have now.

But yeah, there was a lot of fighting over the changes, a lot of people trying to impose their own standards of what counted as "ick" without consulting anyone else, and general animosity that didn't fully ease until the change in administration.

About a month before The Second Google Incident, Eddie started a purge on trope examples that made the wiki look like a group of pervs, so even if the incident hadn't happened, Eddie likely still would've come across tropers writing examples for Kodomo no Jikan that gushed over, well, that stuff.

Now that Baldr Sky and Hen have been unlocked, I'm making a list of the remainder of pages locked for Content Policy reasons:

• F.A.T.A.L.: How bad is the rape stuff here?
• Fifty Shades of Grey: Maybe the gushing fanbase isn't a problem in this current year.
• Gor: Not sure about this one.
• Lolita: Quite controversial, should be kept locked.
• Lychee Light Club: Seems like the problematic content is gore, which isn't covered by the Policy. Could be unlocked.
• Playboy: No tropeworthy content, keep locked.
• Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom: An exploitation film with torture.
• A Serbian Film: A disturbing ExploitationFilm, but not porn.
• The Song of Saya: Already unlocked.
• Vase de Noces: Simulated beastiality makes me doubtful about unlocking this one.
• The World's Breast Tropes: An index of valid fanservice tropes doesn't have troubles with content policy and it feels like a Double Standard that there's also the unlocked Phallic Index. If we unlock it, we should add a Don't change the pic notice to the image though.

Edited by animuacid on Apr 18th 2024 at 8:54:42 PM

I've read a few of the Gor books. The sex scenes aren't that explicit despite the fetish worldbuilding, and the plot-to-porn ratio tips in favor of plot. I'd argue that the page should be unlocked, especially since we have pages for works that are much more explicit and are unlocked.

Edited by BlueXIII on Apr 11th 2024 at 6:28:02 AM

The issue with Serbian Film is that the plot completely revolves around sex, snuff, and rape. It isn't porn, but what else do you talk about in it?

Has Literature.Harem In The Labyrinth Of Another World been discussed before? Looking at the page I get the feeling it might be a possible content violation, but I can't find if there's been previous discussions about it