The Place for Purging Porn and Pedo-Pandering (AKA P5 flag evaluations)

I'm more worried about honestly forgetting a previous decision. Even something as simple as a history of the previous votes would be helpful. Then we can look over at the decisions thread to be reminded of what happened.

Stare Decisis seems relevant here.

edited 29th Apr '12 2:57:51 PM by TheyCallMeTomu

There is a locked thread in this forum which ccoa is editing that contains that information.

NVM, misread Discar's post.

edited 29th Apr '12 3:09:43 PM by TheOneWhoTropes

Keeper of The Celestial Flame

There is the potential for significant Genre Shift in either direction though. With that said, if a decision is reached one way or the other, there should be some amount of time before such a decision can be changed.

Surprised at how fast Kiss Players got axed. It's dreadful, to be sure, but it's also part of a franchise we have pages on every other incarnation of, and there's notably a dispute over whether it's intended to be pedobait or if it's an epically-failed attempt to make a Transformers Shoujo. Admittedly, the general consensus trends toward "pedobait."

Well there's your answer.

@779: That is stare decisis

I went to law school*

, I know what it means. If something is flagged again that has actually changed that's a reason to look at it again. Otherwise the decision should stand.

edited 29th Apr '12 3:37:14 PM by HersheleOstropoler

The child is father to the man —Oedipus

My fault for the Gratuitous Latin

edited 29th Apr '12 3:25:06 PM by TheyCallMeTomu

Well, I've accidentally reported a page when I meant to give it a page type. Maybe a confirmation notice would work out for it?

I now go by Graf von Tirol.

I'd rather there was a field to add a reason, and that putting something there was required.

Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.

Me too. It would help a lot to know why, say, Ai No Kusabi got flagged.

edited 29th Apr '12 4:04:27 PM by lebrel

Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.

At the very least. (Since we know that the actual reason is usually "because troll.")

It's hard having a site with so many different fan conventions. Like since I'm from the country that invented Monster High , I didn't know people didn't know about Cute monster girls

edited 29th Apr '12 5:09:39 PM by animeg3282

So, how soon can we get a new P5 member?

Lu(one of the mods) says they're working hard.

I flagged Ai No Kusabi in part because of some of the example writeups sounded rather porny. It may be fine, but it needs some touch-up.

This seems like the best place to ask. If something is deleted and not coming back (such as Chub Pan, going by the P5 Decisions thread), would it be fine to delete any mentions of them too? I read Fast Eddie's stance on all of this, but am double checking.

I think we had sort of planned a special efforts project for that, so I'd say yes. You should probably wait for someone with more authority before going ahead with that one, though.

I was under the impression we could keep them, just as long as the wicks were regarding the non-porn stuff (and there's no link). But again, wait for a mod.

While keeping up with the Lotte No Omocha review thread, I've noticed that some members of P5 have no intention of doing anything more than minimal research on any given work. Considering that the only issue the downvoting members have with the work in this case is the Audience-Alienating Premise, I really think they should actually read/watch the series. I can understand having no intention of reading/watching a work for which the upvotes are more along the lines of "it isn't that bad" (because making people watch/read porn when they don't want to is unethical), but that's not the case at all here; here it's more like "it isn't bad at all".

And really, would they not have agreed to proper research on the works they decide upon when they agreed to be a part of what is now known as P5?

Mod request: When compiling the decision report list, could you note whether a work was cut/restore petition denied because of a Fast Eddie override (NOT a tiebreaker)?

I'm not happy that panel evaluation may be preempted by veto, although most of the things I was concerned for are now protected by the prior rating exemption. I have no familiarity with any of the currently-controversial works. But I would like that statistic to be on the record, and let the record show what it will.

edited 29th Apr '12 6:50:47 PM by Elle

I'm with Elle and Sabbo. I know nothing about the works currently under review, but in general principle I don't want to see things judged solely by the cover without reading any of it the actual content, especially when the panel members themselves disagree with each other over it. I mean, even if a cover (or premise, or whatever) sucks, it may be misleading. *shrug*

Also, I thought Fast Eddie was only voting for tiebreaking, not just overriding the entire council whenever.

edited 29th Apr '12 9:32:41 PM by ArcadesSabboth

Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.

It's an unwritten rule that Fast Eddie has final veto over anything on the site, whether or not it's in line with the rest of the rules.

I can understand an automatic override for Kodomo no Jikan since it does have undeniably questionable premise and execution.

But the execution of Lotte No Omocha really isn't very questionable -_-. Despite the Audience-Alienating Premise, it's honestly a heartwarming story with themes of family with some perverse jokes here or there. The humor and art is only Disgaea level at most, so it's a bit silly to cut it out for that. Two council members already vouched for it, so it at least merits a closer look.

edited 29th Apr '12 7:03:10 PM by encrypted12345

Full Battle Mode

@Sabbo: Skipping over Eddie for a moment, I do agree that Martello has been openly ignoring the guidelines that were established for What Is Porn.

I doubt anyone will do anything about it, though.

edited 29th Apr '12 7:42:09 PM by Ramidel