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

And that's why I voted devil.

A succubus is a demon that steals the souls of men by seducing them.

Septimus: Refer to Horny Devils for an overview.

EDIT: Gah. Ninjas! Everywhere!

edited 8th May '12 8:43:38 AM by Pyrite

Our Monsters Are Different so they can be anything from Rosario To Vampire 's Kurumu who feeds on men's desire to Lotte who drinks milk until she grows up to who knows what else.

Thanks. Well, seems clear-cut "kill it" stuff.

Yeah, my big experience with the work before this was just the images with the entries in Japanese. It seemed cute and harmless then, but the text is pretty damning.

... Yeah, I think the Monster Girl Encyclopedia needs to be re-looked into to see if there's any other suspect entries like the ones already provided.

I think Monster Girl Encyclopedia was resolved before I got my post here, but based on the pretty tame description it got in earlier discussions I probably would have voted angel as well.

Since this new information has come to light, I agree it's something that should be reviewed again.

Even one is one too many.

Well, the images we were able to dig up earlier didn't seem as bad as the ones that are coming up now.

@Martello: Well, if you want to condemn something and make sure it stays condemned, you might as well dig all the evidence you can find and make a list of them that gives a good (if not necessarily comprehensive) idea of how irredeemably condemnable it is so that nobody even bothers appealing for it in the future, right?

edited 8th May '12 8:56:02 AM by MarqFJA

This is why the system allows for re-reviews. Mistakes one way or another are bound to happen, but once that comes up the judges can take a second look with new information in mind.

edit: Also, welcome back Catalogue!

edited 8th May '12 9:00:24 AM by Meeble

Yes, please. Not everyone is an expert on such things and unexplained devils or angels are just controvery-bait.

By the way, would succubus be a good redirect to Horny Devil for this purpose?

edited 8th May '12 8:58:45 AM by SeptimusHeap

Wait, you mean that succubus wasn't a redirect to Horny Devils already?

edited 8th May '12 9:01:23 AM by MarqFJA

Of course. That's what succubi are, after all.

@Marq - there was never really a discussion for it and everybody voted how they voted.

They do note the Japanese use of them as a stock Cute Monster Girl i.e. not all succubi are going to get naked and suck out your life energy.

Explanation, not discussion. "Lotte No Paedoshit" gives absolutely no clue about what is bad there.

We're talking about Monster Girl Encyclopedia, Septimus. Not Lotta yes Pedoshit. That's gone already.

edited 8th May '12 9:21:17 AM by Martello

For anyone interested in the Lotte No Omocha decision, there is a P5 thread for it here, which may give you more information. Let's not derail this thread too much on that subject, unless it's absolutely necessary to bring it up again.

I don't much care for a re-review process. It sets the precedent that the P5 decisions are never final (which very much seems like a "what's the point?" sort of thing). I guess we're still working the kinks out, but I'd recommend coming up with a system for what will and won't get the work re-reviewed.

I mean, it's obvious that the crew wasn't fully informed about MGE's nature so they made the wrong ruling, but how much info needs to be submitted in order to get a re-review?

Could you not refer to things that some people are legitimately fans of for reasons that have nothing to do with pedophilia like that? It comes off as extremely inflammatory.

Yes Martello-as a member of the P5 council, I would ask that you conduct yourself in a respectful manner, even to people who disagree with you, and that means not taking the obvious potshot every time you're given the opportunity.

I agree that there should be some kind of double-jeopardy-esque rule for these things, if only to force P5 to consider their votes carefully the first time.

I'm fine with waiving the double jeopardy rule at first, just because I understand that the council is still in a lot of turmoil, but yeah-a for the long term rule to prevent works from being doubly reviewed (in large part just to save the staff the trouble) would be nice.