The Place for Purging Porn and Pedo-Pandering (AKA P5 flag evaluations):
edited 12th Feb '13 2:10:16 PM by Fighteer
edited 8th May '12 8:43:17 PM by Shadis
edited 8th May '12 9:01:24 PM by Shadis
edited 8th May '12 9:29:18 PM by Pyrite
- No matter how disgusting the lyrics or visuals etcetera, that it IS a musical work fulfills the Porn with Plot criteria handily because pretty much any musical effort invested means that there is both a Bleached Underpants version (instrumental or radio edit or Walmart copy, as much as some of us hate the latter of those) and that even in the non- Bleached Underpants versions, there's something there besides "this is about getting people off," no matter what the lyrics are or what the visuals are.
- Many voiced concerns about panel size, accountability, and so varyingly on: I'd say it's already a good system, where even a closed verdict can be appealled, and the sharper criticisms are either (1) unaware of several looser aspects of the panel (e.g. appeals), or (2) lamenting about the humanly limits of democracy.
For the former, there should be a one-stop Wiki article where you can get all the details—something like the new Administrivia.Five P page. The latter should write a book.
- It's already been said, but the guidelines and criteria for the panel will have holes rules-lawyers can exploit. If it's not ambiguous there will be no need for a panel at all. For myself, I will try to be consistent and avoid being "Oh what about this mainstream series?"-ed. The rest of the panel, I believe, will do the same.
- Very important, so I risk being a broken record: target demographics are relevant. This is mostly true for fanservice-ish elements involving 14-16 years olds in media.
- Someone posted a very good summary of the moral judgement problem. In short, just because the work is rejected by the panel, it doesn't necessarily mean that enjoying it is wrong.
For this reason I will refrain from using terms like "paedoshit" unless it's extremely reprehensible, although I don't object if people want to use it themselves.
There's scandal about a year ago where a high-schooler submitted a racy picture of her for the yearbook. People talked about censorship or being patronising, but it's missing the point: there are standards of publications. There's a time and there's a place. Take it somewhere else.
- Can we have a search function for the CVR page?
- As it happened, I think I can still revive the Lotte no Omocha! issue. I don't advise the "keep" camp to hold their breath, but I'll have a look anyway.
- Someone referred to the "yea" vote as the Angel of Non-Porno. I think it's a magnificent name. We should name these guys.
- Like Meeble, I consider myself to be a person of high squick tolerance. Unlike alcohol. So, if you're afraid of treading the muddy tracks of entrails and human waste, I can help.
edited 9th May '12 3:56:04 AM by Catalogue