The sub-forum is used for discussions that adjudicate possible violations of The Content Policy. Threads here can be created by flagging a page through the sidebar "report" button and toggling "The page may violate the Content Policy".
This thread is for general discussion of pages.
Edited by SeptimusHeap on Sep 10th 2022 at 11:50:32 AM
Technology Porn... meh. Food Porn is best porn.
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.Some cheeky monkey tried to "reinstate" the Kiss x Sis page by placing it under a ptitle. Of course, I had to doom it to the Cut List as soon as I saw it.
I have a feeling we're going to see more of this loophole exploitation now that someone else has figured out how to do it. Isn't the "Title Formatter" supposed to make the old ptitle system redundant anyway? How many of those do you think are still lingering around the site?
"It ain't about whether you win or lose, unless you got money on the game, because...damn. That's your money, son."The ability to create new ptitle articles should have been cut off. Hmm. We can deal with them as they are created, regardless.
edited 3rd Jan '13 5:24:15 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Just keep an eye on the new pages feed, I guess.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The imageboards article may need looking at for which boards and sections are listed. I can never remember which thread this sort of thing should go in, but — having never visited the sites — I'm dubious about the inclusion of /d/ and /hc/ in the 4chan section, and GUROchan and AnonTalk (neither of which have links) below it.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.For the first two, to quote from the website itself...
Both have very small subcommunities, and neither are representative of the site as a whole. They harm nothing by simply staying there, but don't really help either. Meh. Whatever they decide is best in this case. I can see the argument for removal.
And as far as Gurochan and AnonTalk go, Gurochan has by their own admittance more extreme content than 4chan, and Anontalk doesn't exist anymore. Again, whatever they think is best. Personally, I'd remove the mention of AnonTalk not because of the website's content, but because it's not even an imageboard now.
edited 5th Jan '13 7:38:15 AM by Raidouthe21st
We Are Our Avatars Forever (Now on Discord by invitation, PM)I don't think there's harm in listing what those two segments 4chan do. If we're going by the general porn guideline of "primarily porn", 4chan certainly wouldn't qualify.
The only change I feel we should make to that page is removing the anontalk entry, since it's a site that houses pedophilia related content according to our example. If that's the case, we don't want to advertise them in any way.
Visit my contributor page to assist with the "I Like The Cheeses" project!The Mystery of Urulgan has been flagged. What should we know about it?
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.The page mentions technology and scenery porn, but that's about as bad as it looks. Unless someone can locate it (and from the looks of things is fluent in Russian), I can see no reason to worry about it.
"Polite life will fill you full of cancer." - Iggy Pop "I've seen the future, brother, it is murder." -Leonard CohenConsidering that the author is cited as a beloved writer of children's SF in Russia (of which this book is apparently an example), I think that this was a mis-click...
I'll hide your name inside a word and paint your eyes with false perception.Can someone take a look at More Than Fifty-Four Negi and Chisame Threesomes and see if it revolves around Negi at canon age or not? If it does, it'll probably need to be zapped.
<sigh> Stand by, I'm going to bring this up with the author (he's is One Of Us), who should be able to inform you better.
But for the record, the fic is PG-13 safe (the M rating on FF.Net is merely a precautionary measure, IINM); "threesomes" is meant in the sense of of "three-way relationships" (i.e. One True Threesome).
edited 6th Jan '13 10:51:20 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.I hit a few chapters awhile back and there's no overtly sexual content in the the several I saw (plus the timeframe per snippet is all over the place and frequently not even possible to determine).
Actually, I find the fact that you apparently brought it up based on its title alone kind of disturbing. If that's the acceptable depth of research necessary to broach a topic in this thread, then we've fallen quite far.
edited 6th Jan '13 12:13:15 PM by Night
Nous restons ici.That "Look how far we've fallen" attitude is unhelpful and unappreciated. If someone feels (with good reason) that something may be in violation of the content policy, then they flag it and bring it up here so that we the jury of sorts can look at it. That's the way things work.
"Polite life will fill you full of cancer." - Iggy Pop "I've seen the future, brother, it is murder." -Leonard CohenWith good reason. A glance at a title is not a good reason. Such distinctions must be made, for administrative purposes to keep the workflow manageable if for no others.
People normally bring things to the attention of the P5 because they have actually watched or read the work in question and they have specific concerns about its presentation that they can usually articulate in some manner of detail.
edited 6th Jan '13 12:45:27 PM by Night
Nous restons ici.

Eh, I decided to go general. The author's appetites in regards to the military-industrial complex are broad and inclusive.
What's precedent ever done for us?