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 episodic work isn't finished yet. Shouldn't we wait for the ending before discussing it?
A. No. If released instalments may violate the content policy, we want to take action as soon as that's established — we don't need to wait for the ending. We can always revisit a decision to cut or keep once the work is over, but that point might still be years or decades away.
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 Mrph1 on May 5th 2024 at 6:00:30 PM
Nothing special, really
It's a fact that those who don't want to read about Popotan, Kodomo no Jikan or any other show they're creeped out by can read about something else. Their presence is of course a problem if these people (including Eddie and his peers) think that alone is causing them discomfort, but that says more about them than me.
If Eddie cares more about pleasing the majority than letting people in general discuss whatever subjects want, fine. I'm not going to force him into thinking otherwise. But given that his ideas of what's fair are no less subjective than mine, I thought I could at least try to present my own opinion. I didn't expect anyone to agree with me, I just wanted to understand your mindset.
This has nothing to do with what I'm personally comfortable or disgusted with, it's about what I think is fair. Yes, my idea of fairness is different from Eddie's and yours, that's been firmly established. I'm not demanding anything, I'm explaining my opinion, just like Eddie has. I've also long accepted that he has the final say.
In any case, I came here to get some questions answered and express my thoughts. Mission complete.
edited 4th Nov '12 10:24:07 AM by Lindaeus
Listen to others, think for yourself.
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
So... anyone got any actually new arguments that they would like to present? 'Cause, really, I'd rather just forget about Popotan and move on from that.
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
The only one I can think of here (forgive me if it was already brought up) - in porn works, woudl the problems they constitute be fixed alone by locking instead of cutlocking?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
No longer a forum herald
It probably would, but it would create the problem of the moderators having to approve edits to the page. Since being able to do so would require them to at least have some familiarity with the work...well, I don't think they want to have to watch porn to do their jobs, and I can't really blame them.
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)
^That would only require to keep creepy edits out. I don't see what would require knolwedge of the work.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
No longer a forum herald
Knowing whether an example was valid or not? Content policy or no content policy, having provably false examples on our pages is very bad for business.
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)
^That is an issue on any locked page, mate. Not a specific issue with porn works. And it would occur even on open pages.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
That's probably a better question since the other point in contention at the moment doesn't seem as though it's going to go anywhere. So far as I can tell, the P5 themselves are probably not overly concerned over whether a page is locked or cut unless it's a particularly glaring case, so I assume they're working under the impression that if something is objectionable it simply has to go. Personally, that's the way I would read our current guidelines as well whether I agree or not.
With that summation out of the way, the question then becomes whether we should read our guidelines in that manner and, if we are reading them correctly, whether they ought to be like that or not. I have to raise the question of how many works could be saved in this manner, however. For example, the worst thing I can really remember offhand is Tokyo Akazukin or whatever it was called. Even if you chopped out any creepy edits, locked the page etc. it still wouldn't pass. Where is the line between cutting and locking and can the moderation responsible for inputting new edits catch all those creepy edits without familiarity with the work in question?
Edit: Bah, took too long to write this out. Anyway, I think we need to know what Fast Eddie and the moderation think of said proposal before any arguments either for or against this can be made.
edited 4th Nov '12 10:43:47 AM by Arha
R.I.P 2 My Youth
The line between cutting and locking is wherever Komodin, Meeble, Discar, and I agree it is. It's a judgment call. While moderators are perfectly capable of making the call about creepy edits regardless of their knowledge of the material, the policy applies first.
"Polite life will fill you full of cancer." - Iggy Pop "I've seen the future, brother, it is murder." -Leonard Cohen
I don't think I said that very well. I simply meant that you're reading the policy to say a certain thing and that I agree with the way you're reading it. Arguments about whether all pages need to be cut instead of simply locked depend on possible alterations or reinterpretations.
Of course, it's possible that even taking that into account you still stand entirely behind the decision you have made. Which is what your post implies.
Am I correct in assuming that a page is cut if it violates the policy and locked if it dose not but attracts or may attract creepy edits?
R.I.P 2 My Youth
That's been how I have been interpreting things. Can't speak for the others, though.
"Polite life will fill you full of cancer." - Iggy Pop "I've seen the future, brother, it is murder." -Leonard Cohen
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
That's what we were thinking when we wrote it...
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
The issue with that is that as far as I can tell, there is no page on the wiki which did consist of nothing but creepy content. Emphasis on "nothing", here.
Also, I've heard that some pages got cut (or to be precise: Got devilheads and then a cut disposition) for having too much porn, not "nothing but porn".
edited 4th Nov '12 11:34:49 AM by SeptimusHeap
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Well, then policy has been correctly interpreted. Judging by the response of Best Of and Lu (at other times) I think it's safe to say there's no intention of changing it, correct? Do you have anything to counter this appraisal Septimus? In the case of works younote feel were unfairly judged I think you'll simply have to individually petition them for a lighter sentencing. For example, Kiss X Sis was brought up. If you felt it deserved to come back you would need to indicate why it is was not in fact porn and how locking it to prevent creepy edits would instead be a preferable solution.
As for me, I think pages usually aren't reported when they're creepy edit magnets. That sort of thing either goes unreported or people fix it by themselves.
No longer a forum herald
As has been explained, it's because these pages get stuck in a vicious cycle of no Wiki Magic, due to mostly being works that only appeal to a select few, and thus only have a few editors (who, likely being the ones who made the creepy edits, wouldn't report themselves).
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Well, for one, that you didn't address @540.
Citation?
I felt I did though. Well, whatever. Anyway, the edits are what caused a page to be locked, not the actual story contents. When there is too much porn something is deemed to be unfit for the wiki. When a story is otherwise okay but attracts bad edits the policy is to clean and lock it. Unfortunately, Gor is the only example of that I can recall offhand and I don't know how problematic the actual content of the story is. Presumably it had creepy examples or was deemed likely to attract them in the future.
edited 4th Nov '12 12:54:56 PM by Arha
Ok, a bit clearer: I've seen several pages beign cut for being "too much porn", implying that they weren't all porn, thus not useless to have around even when locked.
Now, the reason why I brought up this topic is that there are two main arguments for the "no porn" policy: #1, that they attract creepy edits and 2# that there isn't anything tropeworthy about these. Problem is, #1 does not justify cutting a page (it only justifies locking it, but that's it) and while #2 is a valid argument to make, it only works if the works are truly nothing but porn at all, and I've seen works that were cut for having "too much porn", which isn't the same as "only porn".
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Can you bring up a specific work so we have something to discuss apart from hypotheticals? We could use that to explore the situation more fully.
edited 4th Nov '12 1:00:33 PM by Arha
I remember that the Nozoki Ana and Velvet Kiss or whatever it was called discussion was at first about "too much" porn.
edited 4th Nov '12 1:23:14 PM by SeptimusHeap
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
Say, aren't we still missing at least one P5 member for a few months now? Catalogue, wasn't it?
edited 4th Nov '12 1:20:12 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
I think the moderation team is discussing what to do about Catalogue's situation.
☆♥☆
Yeah, Catalogue hasn't posted in 5 months now.
Umm, the point of the lock? It's not gonna stop them from coming back right after it expires.
If the discussion is judged as pointless then a modhatted declaration should suffice in that without the need for locking up the thread from potential other, actually useful discussion.
edited 4th Nov '12 10:18:27 AM by Adannor