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

New work under review: The Lord Of The G Strings. According to IMDB, it's R-rated.

The simple fact that it's an erotic spoof of a "real" movie is a strike against it, R-rated or not. Claiming parody on it is a little bit of a stretch.

It is a parody. We MYS Ted it once at a party. There's no real sex and it's more along the lines of something like Scary Movie than actual porn. It's just a dirty parody.

edited 31st Jan '14 1:05:36 PM by shimaspawn

I'm tired and have no idea what said work is being discussed,but didn't we have a rule that if it was had an official MPAA rating of "R" or lower it's exempt for being reviewed or cut?

edited 31st Jan '14 8:47:44 PM by shoboni

It's "You have to have a really good reason for suggesting it," not that it's flat-out immune. "Sounds like a porn version of Lord Of The Rings" is a pretty good reason.

I'll see if I can dig it up tomorrow.

In absence of info on that pony thing (and a dwindling supply of booze), I will refrain from deciding one way or the other on it for now. While Google was happy to provide me with what it is, any actual stories (or whatever it is) did not appear to turn up.

edited 31st Jan '14 9:13:31 PM by tdgoodrich1

Looking for the Fluffy Pony stuff?

http://www.fluffybooru.org/

There's the link. Fuck the world. You may see me again if I stumble across anything else horrible.

Also I do not hold responsibility for any loss of faith in humanity the internal workings of that link may cause to its followers.

edited 1st Feb '14 11:46:12 AM by GameChainsaw

(O hey, GC, long time no see)

And yes, that is the link to the dark side of the fandom. I've browsed some random pages of scribbles^note Most does not deserve to be called art. on it and the stuff there fits with the abuse and classifications and other stuff added in December.

edited 1st Feb '14 11:52:18 AM by Adannor

... the hell is wrong with kids these days? Not porn-porn, just occasional torture-porn. Bad day to be out of cigarettes.

Those sticks will kill you, man. Slowly and horribly so, I might add.

That said, I think we need a "corollary" of sorts for Rule 34, because from what I have seen in the deeper recesses of the Internet, I think that for every fandom, there's a 3 out of 4 chance that there's guro-porn for it somewhere, even if it's a very tiny circle of "fans" making their own... pieces.

edited 1st Feb '14 2:03:00 PM by MarqFJA

No faster or more horribly than this job.

//Only sorta kidding

"Porn" can't really be rated R(because if someone bothered to get porn rated it would probably get an NC-17) so I would be inclined to consider that an exaggeration pending someone digging it up and it actually turning out to be that bad.

Oh, and on the Fluffy ponies we have this(and it a huge following all the way up to animated versions of the strips on Youtube) so there must be a lighter side to the fanbase:

http://askflufflepuff.tumblr.com/

edited 1st Feb '14 2:51:14 PM by shoboni

Isn't the R rating supposedly more restrictive than our guidelines?

Yes. Hence the "damn good reason" requirement.

There's also been a few where a work had two different ratings, with the lower rating because of heavy editing. In that case, both versions have been reviewed to see if only the higher rating needed to be nuked.

There's also that sometimes an independent work will get a higher rating then a more explicit work from one of the big name studios (the creators of South Park are very familiar with this), so an "R" rating alone doesn't necessarily protect a work if it seems otherwise sketchy.

That's why the "damn good reason" corollary is there. Because it can happen.

Lord of the G Strings is not a big budget work. It's not from a big studio. It's a tiny low budget film that got it's costumes from Party City. It's mostly just silly.

VisualNovel.School Days has been flagged...again. Should I just zap it or wait for the mods to see who it is this time?

Wait and ask.

I could have sworn we already whacked the stuff the flagger mentioned.

Now that I look at it - we never reviewed anything called "Shiny Days". You did look at "Summer Days", though.

I can't speak for the others, but I think included that in the last general School Days review. I at the least remember discussing it. That said, if need be, we can remove the Shiny Days related material.

It was me, since I think I found new evidence, and the stuff in question is pretty -redacted- disgusting. The content in question is in spoilers for the sanity of readers. IIRC, the current ruling only mentions stuff about Summer Days.

Forced oral involving a 13 girl. Two people are involved in this rape Makoto included.

I believe there is a precedent for action (VN version only, not anime or manga versions as noted in the flag) based on a similar multi-rape scene of a minor in the Rance series (not to mention this isn't the only inappropiate action against minors in School Days).

edited 7th Feb '14 3:42:06 PM by magnum12

A little research on VNDB pointed out that Shiny Days is an alternative version of Summer Days. Would y'all be okay with Shiny Days inheriting the ruling on Summer Days content?

That's my vote.

I'll note that there is a new article on the CVR: ''Neko No Fuguri'.