They're not underaged, but they're of the Older Than They Look variety. Aka "Apparent child", and the page should be cut from this wiki. As said before, Dive1 is hardly exempt from underaged-seeming sex scenes. Is there anyone in this thread who hasn't seen the CG sets yet?

edited 31st May '12 9:53:40 AM by Handlerofjustice

Well, the question there is whether there's wiggle room for characters at least not acting their apparent age. Katahane characters didn't, we got rid of it. Body Bags characters didn't look their age, so we kept it. It's a case by case process.

Well, I say they don't act like children. It's not a case of "oh it's a child but we SAY she's not so it's fine", they simply don't.

But I'm really more in favour of putting the case on hold until the translation is released, such that it's more than just one troper's word against another's.

edited 31st May '12 10:10:20 AM by SilverBeta

Well, I've said it once before, but it bears repeating.

A good rule of thumb seems to be the following:

Does the character appear to be underaged?
Does the character act as though he/she is underaged?
Is the character stated to be underaged?

If said character is sexualized, and the answer to at least two of those three questions is yes, then the work is probably getting cut. If the answer to only one of those questions is yes, then there's a decent chance of the work remaining, and if the answer to all the questions is no, then unless it's also porn, the work isn't going to be cut.

At least, most decisions I've observed have seemed to fit that general pattern.

edited 31st May '12 10:06:18 AM by DarkConfidant

Older Than They Look variety.

I'm not sure that really means anything.

That can can mean anything from a 21 year old that looks 18 to a 70 year old that took a potion to look 20. Heck, some people mistook me for a teenager until I was well into my late 20's. That doesn't mean that my girlfriend was a pedophile.

edited 31st May '12 10:11:43 AM by Catbert

At least two characters fit the first question, and a third is suspect. They act childish at times before the reveal that they're not underaged.

It's very easily solved if you just look at the C Gs.

edited 31st May '12 10:14:44 AM by Handlerofjustice

Specifically, it means stuff like ancient beings who are hundreds/thousands of years old, but take the form of 12-year-olds.

edited 31st May '12 10:14:22 AM by BadWolf21

You're thinking Really 700 Years Old, but this is getting really off topic now.

Let's go back to discussing the work at hand.

If what is correct and they appear to be and act underaged, then that's not boding favorably for the work at all. However, I have no actual relevant information that hasn't been already posted.

If, on the other hand, this is true, then that looks better for the work.

edited 31st May '12 10:19:11 AM by DarkConfidant

@206: I disagree, only one fits the first, and that same one does not fit the second or the third. The other two you seem to have in mind, in my opinion do not fit the second and definitely do not fit the third, and it can be argued not even the first (using the Saya no Uta case as precedent). It's not the "I thought you were a kid, but WAIT you're not!" scenario you appear to be trying to imply. As a reminder energetic/shy/etc. =/= childish, that's just moe as usual. You keep harping on about the C Gs, when it's already been established that there's more to the case than the depicted art alone. But at this point, as I said, it's one troper's word against another's, so it may be less confusing for all parties if we were to wait for it to be translated so that people like Arha can play it and pass judgment. At this rate, this is not really going anywhere.

edited 31st May '12 10:20:52 AM by SilverBeta

No, Noi and Makoto both easily fit the appearance criteria, don't kid yourself. It's clear that you've played the game, you really don't remember the multiple scenes with Noi acting like a child?

...No, it hasn't at all. It certainly isn't an issue of fanart.

edited 31st May '12 10:21:50 AM by Handlerofjustice

I remember Noi primarily acting like the grandma/old hag mad doctor that she is all the time. And as with Saya, a case can be made for Makoto not fitting the appearance criteria.

I would say actual general personality takes precedence over incidental acts. Does she suddenly act like a small child for H-scenes for the purpose of allowing the reader to experience sex with an actual small child? I believe that that no, she doesn't. And you can go through the Saya no Uta discussion for the "how so".

I'm not sure why you're so hellbent on having the page cut, but it seems that you're deliberately taking the extremist/gross exaggeration/confirmation bias route to try and push your own view. And the character's actual general personality is more important than occasional put-on behavior. And no, she's not childish in her H-scene.

Alright, H-"scenes", if you care about unlockable files segregated from the main game. And I suppose also the one that won't progress past the first viewing or two if you don't completely suck at the game. She's not acting like a little child in those either.

edited 31st May '12 11:29:05 AM by SilverBeta

Most of the time, but she did put those childish looks to use more than once.

How so?

I'd say you're wrong.

Yes, she does.

You're just in denial now. I don't know why you're so stubborn to keep this page on, but the acts are the biggest issue.

...Her h-"scene"? I'm suspecting that you never played the game. You're too defensive about this.

edited 31st May '12 10:46:15 AM by Handlerofjustice

Looking at Google Images without Safe Search, I couldn't find a single image that could look sexualized and wasn't either adult-looking or had breasts. So I'd say there is no paedo-bait there.

Also, this topic seems to go in circles again.

I don't know what your criteria is, but there's plenty there.

This is getting ridiculous. This discussion is officially suspended until people cool down and we get some completely trustworthy info.

Per discussion, this thread's back open for business.

In checking on the status of this, I noticed that it's actually been resolved in the queue with 3 angel votes. I'm not sure exactly when that happened, as it was unresolved at the time of my last post in here.

I hadn't made a final decision on this, but since it already has three keep votes, I guess all that's left to ask is would anything that has been discussed in the previous few pages change the minds of any panel members that did vote already? If not, then we may as well close up this thread.

edited 18th Jun '12 8:50:52 AM by Meeble

We're back to P5 only mode.

Since there wasn't a response to my question above, I'm going to assume that we're done here. Thanks for the feedback, everyone.

Locking as resolved.

Unlocking per request.

Thanks, Willbyr.

Regarding this work... yeah, this ain't gonna fly, fellas. (NSFW!)

I'm guessing the image you're referring to is the 5th row down, 4th across? I'm pretty sure that and worse was linked earlier.

I was holding off making a decision on this while trying to figure out if the "Dive 1" and "Dive 2" (where the apparently pedo-pandering images are, I'm told) were distinct games. Since I couldn't find anything conclusive to indicate that, however, I think this series has to be a devil-head for me.

That said, this currently had three angels last I checked, so unless someone is changing their vote this one is probably going to stay.

Correct.

Also, yeah, I'm gonna change my vote. That scene... yeah, I don't feel comfortable keeping a page for a work with something like that. Should I reflag it, or should I hold off for a bit?

edited 25th Jun '12 10:06:57 AM by Komodin

May as well. It won't hurt for it to sit for a while to give time for everyone to make their decision.