Welcome to the Content Violations Discussion forum, where we discuss whether a work violates The Content Policy.
Remember that the forum rules apply here
, plus the following:
- You don't PM moderators about stuff pertaining to the policies, except for thread reasons;
- We tolerate links to scanlation sites unlike in the rest of the site due to its purpose, although it's preferred to remove them when they have done their jobs;
- The forum is not a soapbox for your own views on the policy or on morality. Please leave them at the door.
Violations of these rules can result in a ban from the subforum, or from the entire forum.
Otherwise:
Also, keep in mind that there are works that we don't want flagged without a really good reason as they are not likely in violation of policy:
- Is a film rated below "R" for U.S. distribution.
- Is a show that can be aired on prime time television.
- Is a video game that is rated below "M" by the ESRB.
- Is a written work that is sold in major bookstores without an "adult" or "mature" label.
- Is an anime/manga/etc. that is approved for U.S. import as a non-adult work.
- Is read/shown/taught in high school or below.
- Is in another format and meets equivalent criteria.
What we're looking for:
- Pure porn, or porn with an Excuse Plot only,
- Anything that has explicit underage sex,
- Implied sex of preteens or younger, and
- Fanservice intended to cater to pedophiles (lolicon and shotacon fanservice can count).
A couple of guidelines so the procedure can move smoothly:
- Do not list whole indexes or works just because they are on a certain index or have lolicon, H-Game or shotacon on their trope list.
- Do not list works you know nothing about without at least reading the trope page.
- Do not list works that you know are G-rated but you find creepy.
- If it's paedophile-pandering approximately how old are the characters involved? What happens? Is it graphic? Is it merely implied?
- List what objectionable content there is, and how much of the work consists of that.
- If it's entirely sex, say so. People have different ideas of what porn is. We all have the same idea of what a work being entirely sex scenes is.
- If you're not sure about a work, say so, or ask someone who does know that work. But don't make blanket accusations. Post here: "I don't know about this work, but the page says X".
- Google and Wikipedia are your friendsnote . Do a little digging on works you aren't sure about.
Also, in the case of H Games, there is this questioning to fill up:
- When are the sex scenes located?
- Are they spread out over the game?
- How much gameplay is there between sex scenes?
- Are they only at the endings?
- How hard do you have to work to get an ending?
- Are they in every ending? Every good ending?
- Are the sex scenes optional via a choice in the menu?
- Would the story make sense without them with minimal or no rewriting?
- Are the scenes made up of stills, or are they animated?
- How explicit are the sex scenes?
- This isn't a headcount. Your opinion is only considered if it explains in at least some detail how you came to the conclusion that the work is/isn't porn/paedopandering.
- When a moderator determines that the discussion has yielded a consensus, they can enact its conclusion/ask a moderator to enact the conclusion.
- The discussion is only about whether the work qualifies as porn or as paedopandering. We don't assess anything else in this process.
.
Q: Why is this happening?
A: Concerning the porn, it tends to attract creepy edits that have brought us into issues with the adservers while not significantly contributing to our core purpose - tropology. Concerning paedophilia-pandering, such works are just plain creepy to have pages about.
Q: What can I do to help clean the site?
A: You can flag content as unsuitable using the flag tool, which is located in the Tools menu to the right of each article, keeping the criteria in mind. Also, you can help enforce No Lewdness, No Prudishness across the wiki, possibly though cleaning pages listed in this Long Term Projects thread.
Q: This work is not actually/primarily pornographic. Why was it cut?
A: This could be for a number of different reasons. If the work was deemed to be paedopandering, for example, it will be cut whether or not it's actually sexually explicit. Being pro-paedophilia or pandering to paedophiles is bad enough, even if the work is nominally anti-paedophilia. Of course, it's possible that there was a mistake and then you should appeal it - please check the reasons first, however.
Q: This work is being/has been cut, but it is not a violation of the Content Policy. How do I make an appeal?
A: Flag the work page using the button in the sidebar and state your reasons for restoration.
Q: This work is pretty much pure porn, but it's really good porn. Can an exception be made?
A: Nope, sorry. If it's mainly porn, it goes.
Q: Why would you cut this? In [culture x], it is totally acceptable.
A: The vast majority of our readers come from the Americas or Western Europe, so we will be adhering to what could broadly be termed "Western" standards. This means we will not be permitting works which sexualize 12 year olds, and nor will we be demanding that every picture of a woman on the site must wear a burqa.
Q: How can you possibly claim to know authorial intent? (Roland Barthes is my co-pilot.)
A: It is not important what the authorial intent was, only the outcome.
Q: Wikipedia have articles on all kinds of awful stuff. Why can't we do the same?
A: Wikipedia is a strictly academic site. They have to cite sources and a "no censorship rule". They also do not aim to be Family Friendly, and are not reliant upon third party ads for funding. Conversely, one of our stated aims is to celebrate fiction, and our generally light, non-negative tone is a reflection of this, which has led to much more gushing about inappropiate content.
Q: So should I take every article here as an endorsement of whatever it describes?
A: No, of course not. We have pages on Greedy Jew, Adolf Hitler and Mein Kampf after all. However, if we choose to focus our attention on schoolgirls' thighs or porn, it does reflect very poorly on us. Fan Fic Recommendations are a slightly different issue. If a work is recommended there, this should be taken as an endorsement by the troper who wrote it.
Q: Are we allowed to make forum threads about works processed by the Content Violation Discussions forum?
A: If it was voted "clean and keep", a forum thread is relatively safe as long as it is restricted to talking about the clean parts. Anything with a stronger judgement is discouraged on the forums.
Q: Where can I find decisions regarding a work?
A: They are linked from the discussion page. Sometimes the old list of content reviews or the thread list in this forum can help as well.
Q: I still have some questions/concerns.
A: We will be happy to answer them. There is a thread for this.
- Guro: Violence played for titillation. (contrast Gorn)
- 5P or P5: The panel that administered the policy prior to the review system being overhauled in 2022. See 5P.
- P(a)edoshit: Older term for "P(a)edopandering", deprecated for being inflammatory.
- Porn: A work mostly concerned with sexual arousal. Having NSFW or explicit scenes doesn't automatically make a work porn — it's when showcasing explicit scenes is the entire point of the work.
Also, questions about the policy can be asked here. They will be added to this thread's FAQ section once answered.
Edited by SeptimusHeap on Apr 27th 2024 at 7:29:01 PM
Nothing special, really
Adannor: That's what I was thinking as well. Wouldn't viewership increase if we allowed certain topics to be covered?
Listen to others, think for yourself.
Actual numbers show an increase in viewship since we started cleaning things up. A lot of this is because there are places linking us now that would have been too ashamed to do so before.
edited 3rd Nov '12 11:36:50 AM by shimaspawn
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Nothing special, really
By how much?
Listen to others, think for yourself.
According to the last time Eddie mentioned it, it was a sizable increase of casual views. They're the ones that click the ads and keep the lights on.
edited 3rd Nov '12 11:38:01 AM by shimaspawn
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Nothing special, really
As in, the wiki could not have stayed up without it?
Listen to others, think for yourself.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
His question was about the changes induced by the content policy, not those by the No Lewdness initiative, methinks.
No, but "less viewers", while being better than "no viewers", is still bad.
edited 3rd Nov '12 11:39:35 AM by SeptimusHeap
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Well, if we'd lost Google, then yes, the wiki would not have been self supporting. The wiki barely keeps ends meeting. Making the wiki more access able to more people by cleaning up the creepy bits that alienate the mainstream makes it easier to keep the lights on.
The content policy is part of the lewd and creepy content clean-up.
edited 3rd Nov '12 11:42:49 AM by shimaspawn
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Nothing special, really
From my understanding, Google objected to specific Tropes, not specific shows.
Listen to others, think for yourself.
Google objected to a general trend in our content and specific pages were cited as a demonstration of this. Just because a specific page was not cited doesn't mean that keeping the same sort of thing on different pages would make us right with Google.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
We're going by the values of most of our userbase, not just what Eddie says. Eddie has the final word, but we do listen to user feedback. Incidentally, most of the feedback for this policy has been broadly positive.
We're not a neutral, primarily academic site like Wikipedia. This is a fan community. You cite a Swedish court's decision to illustrate that you're not alone in your position. We might do the same with Australian laws, which are more strict than those of the US. (The US is the home of most of our userbase and staff, which is why I mentioned it.) But that would be pointless; everyobody knows that people have differing opinions about controversial issues.
We've landed on a framework of what kind of works we want to have and what we don't want. Ultimately it's an admin fiat decision, but it's not as if we've never discussed these rules with the userbase. Most of our users seem to agree with the general terms of our rules. If you disagree with a rule, you can discuss it with the staff but you have to accept that you're not going to win every time. And neither are we going to continue arguing about things infinitely when there are better uses for our time.
I don't think I've actually seen you discredit any of our arguments, BTW. I've seen you declare that you don't accept them, but you haven't actually falsified them. If you want to register your disagreement with our policy, I think it's fair to say by now that it's been duly noted.
There are about 30 000 active editors of the Wiki and about 5 000 active Forum posters. The amount of activity on both corresponds to that number. For both, there are of course also lurkers. Still, we have issues on both the Wiki and the Forum. It means that not everyone is going to notice and repair or report every problem. We know that the Wiki will never be perfect; it's a Wiki. But if measures can be taken to avoid overworking the staff and userbase, we will seek to take those measures, assuming that the payoff in the quality of the Wiki and Forum is positive after we take into account the potential damage of the correcting action.
No one can moderate an entire Wiki. We must do the best we can with the resources we have. There are going to compromises; that's just a fact of life.
Besides, even if we could have a situation where none of the problematic pages were accumulating problematic edits, there are still the other reasons for cutting them, and no amount of moderation will change the nature of the work that the page is about.
Clean & Lock is one of the options that the P5 has when it's reviewing a page. That's done when a work doesn't violate policy but the page accumulates bad edits. For a page that violates the policy, this is not an option.
I've thumped the rest of the post because it was, well, let's say the thump message should tell you what you need to know. The part I picked out was the only one worth answering.
...
![[down]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_down.png "[down]"){kind=icon}
Seems that you wanted to answer some of them anyway.
edited 3rd Nov '12 3:18:36 PM by BestOf
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
Goddamnit, you're a ninja thumper!
The reasons have been stated loud and clear, in threads linked in the OP among other places. If you cannot see them, we can't help you.
No amount of cleaning will make Kodomo no Jikan's on-screen child masturbation and Ichinensei's 7 year olds in thongs clean enough.
We aren't here to host material designed to present children as acceptable sexual targets for people much older than them. We've had enough flame wars over it.
edited 3rd Nov '12 12:35:49 PM by lu127
"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
You may fight for an idea but if you don't backup your idea with something that really makes the other question his point of view, then your idea is invalid. That's what happens with those guys that (even though they were also against the current paedopandering rules) whose ideas I considered invalid.
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
Look, we've been talking about the reasons for the policy for pages now. If you still claim that we haven't given any reasons, all that you're telling us is that you're not even reading the discussion here, let alone the stuff linked in the OP.
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
I've read. And it is not clear. I accepted the porn part because... Let's face it. Porn is too poor toopewise there's no real variety, it's almost always about the same thing. That's not true for an acceptable amount of works classified as paedopandeing. To bring up the recent example I think that falls into that category: Popotan.
It was recently re-rejected. They did say they evaluated the story and evaluated it's content and rejected. According to my readings, if I understood it right, it was still rejected to be on the safe side. I'm ok with you cutting works that have no real value. Check kissxSis the manga and the OVA. That's not material with real trope value. There's no valuable story, it has about the same value as the Plot With Porn porn. But the tv series has some value and it was actually accepted during the discussions P5 had, according to what I read in this forum. Why was it still cut, anyway? I didn't understand the reason.
From this looks, the current paedopandering rules are too strict. They are forcing cutting decisions to works that deserve to be cut and works that deserve to stay. If I wanted to kill a fly, I wouldn't destroy the house. I'd use something that would keep the house as intact as possible, I'd use an insecticide, or something similar.
Edit:
edited 3rd Nov '12 12:31:13 PM by brunoais
You are confusing the two policies, mate. Popotan does have merit. The fact that it's paedopandering makes it unacceptable here.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanNobody accepted the Kiss X Sis tv series. They said it was lighter than the manga. But lighter than borederline porn manga does not automatically mean it's acceptable. It could still be over the line.
"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
Paedobait manga and TV series, lu. Not porn, I recall.
edited 3rd Nov '12 12:27:52 PM by SeptimusHeap
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanNot exactly, Septimus. The characters are 16-ish, but it's almost explicitly full of sexual situations and fanservice, without much else, apparently. I haven't read it, but think Eiken. Along with the fact that it's seinen, it went over the line.
edited 3rd Nov '12 12:31:30 PM by lu127
"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
Yeah... Kissx Sis manga&OVA is just almost porn. I'd categorize the Kx S manga and OVA as Plot With Porn. But not the tv series. The tv series is more a comedy with moderate (moderate is not the right word... maybe not-that-heavy?) amount of ecchi. But paedobait (the tv series, at least)? Not a chance.
edited 3rd Nov '12 12:42:00 PM by brunoais
This has been thumbed and I'm recovering back with permission as long as I had removed some parts.
If a leader is not safe in what he says by showing that he is actually right and the others are wrong, then the others will not accept him as the leader. [EDITED BY MOD]
If you are killing porn, then I accept that. If you are killing explicit paedophilia, I'll help you. If you are killing what may be subjectively, i.e. in a certain point of view, be morally objectionable because it uncertainly may pander pedophiles, then I won't accept unless you actually explain properly why you are plain removing from here.
edited 3rd Nov '12 1:39:01 PM by brunoais
Reposting an argument after it was removed is not going to endear you to anyone.
R.I.P 2 My Youth
@Lu, Septimus: For reference, Cat didn't voice an opinion on Kiss X Sis, Meeble, Martello, and Komodin voted pedopandering. While I wasn't P5 at the time, I recommended cutting it as softcore porn as did Pyrite.
Correction: Discar voted leniency. Should have read the first page of the thread instead of just the last.
edited 3rd Nov '12 1:27:03 PM by tdgoodrich1
"Polite life will fill you full of cancer." - Iggy Pop "I've seen the future, brother, it is murder." -Leonard Cohen
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
I allowed Brunoais to re-post parts of the original after we had a PM discussion about it.
Lu already pointed out that our standards cannot be objective.
Individual works are discussed in their own threads or the main flag evaluation thread, and possibly again in the restoration petition thread.
edited 3rd Nov '12 1:36:18 PM by BestOf
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
>Yes, inbound links. Page views from links on fap sites. We were paying for the bandwidth for folks to come here in search of jack-off material.
Although wouldn't they view the ads and thus cover the cost of them viewing the pages? :V