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
I think we can safely say, that after over a month of not coming in after being called, tdgoodrich is just not active on TVTropes any more.
So, make a note that we need four new P5 members.
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)So Discar is the only currently available member?
Gah, this is not a good sign.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.I'll remind you that he had been completely absent for four months prior to me bringing this matter up back in May, so this (while unfortunate) is no real surprise.
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)Ugh. I'll make a note of this to the rest of the staff.
Any news on the selection front?
Nothing lately. I think we are waiting for some functionality to add new 5P members.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanI just have to ask, why was this considered a problem while the discussion started by this post was apparently allowed to continue?
I want to understand the logic being used here.
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.Several reasons:
- The latter discussion is in OTC, where people are more restrained and moderation is easier.
- A dedicated thread is much more likely to attract trouble than one where the problem topic is merely incidental.
- The politics of rape are a different kind of topic than a sex thread, the rules against the latter don't extend to the former.
Hm, I was assuming that the way the list of banned topics was referring to thread topics as opposed to discussions within pre-existing threads was just an odd way of phrasing things, and that this kind of Loophole Abuse (imho) was discouraged, but I stand corrected.
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.The banned topics list is very soft when it comes to discussions in established threads. The US Politics thread brings up abortion all the time, and unless the discussion turns into a hellthread, we just talk it out and move on.
Since OTC has a lot of active and vigilant moderators, paradoxically, there's more freedom to delve into potentially-Flame Bait topics.
It's more that we don't want a specific topic on Abortion, but if it comes up in a different topic overall, we can easily discuss it since, for instance, a Politician talked about it.
I'd like a bit of clarification on something - if a work has been deemed in violation of the content policy, are all references to that work on tropes pages banned (even without links)?
It has been established that examples that do not touch on any controversial aspects of the work may exist, as long as they don't attempt to link to the (nonexistent) article.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Depends on the specific example's content and the work. There are a small handful of works that can't have examples anywhere, because the content of those examples would automatically be too risque no matter what we did. However, most works can have some legitimately clean trope examples here and there.
Oh noes, a galaxy 'd me.
edited 10th Sep '16 6:18:49 PM by TotemicHero
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)I was referencing the Porn with Plot page. I saw a couple of examples of works I'm pretty sure have been cut.
I think that's pretty clearly against the spirit of the rules, but I could be mistaken.
edited 14th Sep '16 6:56:41 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Okay, there's about twelve threads to follow for this whole NSFW thing so I'm not 100% sure if I'm posting in the right place, but I have a question about a work that I want to add to the Fanfics section. This story is about 120,000 words long and contains only about 10,000 words of pornographic material, and the participants are all 16 or older. If my reading of the rules is correct it does not meet the purge criteria of "is mostly porn" or "is pedophilia" so I went ahead and got started drafting up a list of tropes it contains. What I can't seem to find is any ground rules for whether it's okay to provide links to the work in question because it's a fanfic. Is this against the rules?
Well, is the page you link to safe for work?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanChapter 1 is safe for work, yes.
I'm trying to decide if the Popotan entry on Bleached Underpants is a semi-veiled Take That! at the content policy. Any thoughts on if it needs changing?
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)It doesn't anymore.
Check out my fanfiction!Good edit.
You know, I'm fairly patient, but with the end of October here, the delay about getting the new P5 off the ground is getting a little ridiculous. Especially since the eight hundred pound gorilla of content decisions is stirring once more, and we have no one in place to contain it from rampaging across the forums yet again.
Or, to be more specific: Kodomo no Jikan is getting an official English release, currently scheduled for some time in 2017. (In case you don't believe me...) It's all but guaranteed someone is going to bring it up for re-review at that point (and it's not without reason, since we have no way of knowing what degree of censorship or changes will be implemented in this translation). Given the controversy over this, I'd think we want the P5 to be established and settled in before we get to that.
It's not a hard-set time limit, but between this and the growing backlog, this process needs to get moving.
edited 30th Oct '16 5:40:23 PM by TotemicHero
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)
I can see why "unwanted" would be preferred over "creepy".