Viewing last 25 versions of post by Princess Luna in topic Rating tags general

"[@Background Pony #57E4":](/tagging/rating-tags-general/post/4540653#post_4540653
)  
A while back, the guidelines had "Genitals that are _*almost_* visible or visible as _*vague_* outlines through clothing".
 
The second part was for cameltoe, while the first covered cases like these, where we could _*almost_* see the pussy, but either there was a tiny little censor or the body itself blocked the view; in practice, I remember also considering anuses for almost visible, even though it wasn't what the guidelines said, which usually meant bare asses were Questionable, even though in a way-previous update, when it was pointed out that a bare ass would become Suggestive, it wasn't considered a problem (in general, buttcheeks alone aren't considered as pornographic as nipples).


 
The problem with this clause was that to rate an ass, you had to go through this process:
 
1 Is there a genital or detailed anus showing? If yes, Explicit and done.
 
2 Is there a moderately-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Questionable and skip to 9.
 
3 Is there a prominent non-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Suggestive and skip to 8.
 
4 Are we seeing the genital/anus area, but completely bare? If yes, skip to 9.
 
5 Is this a show species or dog or something where we don't expect genitals/anus if we could see there? If yes, skip to 9.
 
6 Is it more than half uncovered? If yes, at least Suggestive.
 
7 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals/anus? If yes, at least Questionable.
 
8 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals? If yes, at least Questionable.
 
9 Consider other matters.


 
7 and 8 are by far the most subjective parts, and worse, lead to Questionable in cases where you could have actually put a simple x or nothing being shown to get Suggestive instead (so a lower rating from showing _*more_* between the cheeks)! A bit over a year ago, as part of an effort to _*simplify_* the guidelines, the clause was pulled, so that there's only Suggestive transition for lack of clothing at half, and then Questionable/Explicit get triggered by things actually being there or not.


 
With the clause removed, this is the process:
 
1 Is there a genital or detailed anus showing? If yes, Explicit and done.
 
2 Is there a moderately-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Questionable and skip to 7.
 
3 Is there a prominent non-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Suggestive and skip to 7.
 
4 Are we seeing the genital/anus area, but completely bare? If yes, skip to 7.
 
5 Is this a show species or dog or something where we don't expect genitals/anus if we could see there? If yes, skip to 7.
 
6 Is it more than half uncovered? If yes, at least Suggestive.
 
7 Consider other matters.


 
I should further note that the 9-step process is actually so complicated, I'm pretty sure I've still got it incorrect due to interplay between the genital area and anus area (does a featureless crotch mean no anus? What about the reverse? These are questions we shouldn't even really _*have_* to answer, is the point).
 
Anyways, I'm fairly confident the first image is Suggestive, and less so on the second being Safe (Suggestive for it would be based on the expression alone; the towel is covering up everything).

"@Background Pony #57E4":/tagging/rating-tags-general/post/4540653#post_4540653
A while back, the guidelines had "Genitals that are _almost_ visible or visible as _vague_ outlines through clothing".
The second part was for cameltoe, while the first covered cases like these, where we could _almost_ see the pussy, but either there was a tiny little censor or the body itself blocked the view; in practice, I remember also considering anuses for almost visible, even though it wasn't what the guidelines said, which usually meant bare asses were Questionable, even though in a way-previous update, when it was pointed out that a bare ass would become Suggestive, it wasn't considered a problem (in general, buttcheeks alone aren't considered as pornographic as nipples).

The problem with this clause was that to rate an ass, you had to go through this process:
1 Is there a genital or detailed anus showing? If yes, Explicit and done.
2 Is there a moderately-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Questionable and skip to 9.
3 Is there a prominent non-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Suggestive and skip to 8.
4 Are we seeing the genital/anus area, but completely bare? If yes, skip to 9.
5 Is this a show species or dog or something where we don't expect genitals/anus if we could see there? If yes, skip to 9.
6 Is it more than half uncovered? If yes, at least Suggestive.
7 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals/anus? If yes, at least Questionable.
8 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals? If yes, at least Questionable.
9 Consider other matters.

7 and 8 are by far the most subjective parts, and worse, lead to Questionable in cases where you could have actually put a simple x or nothing being shown to get Suggestive instead (so a lower rating from showing _more_ between the cheeks)! A bit over a year ago, as part of an effort to _simplify_ the guidelines, the clause was pulled, so that there's only Suggestive transition for lack of clothing at half, and then Questionable/Explicit get triggered by things actually being there or not.

With the clause removed, this is the process:
1 Is there a genital or detailed anus showing? If yes, Explicit and done.
2 Is there a moderately-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Questionable and skip to 7.
3 Is there a prominent non-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Suggestive and skip to 7.
4 Are we seeing the genital/anus area, but completely bare? If yes, skip to 7.
5 Is this a show species or dog or something where we don't expect genitals/anus if we could see there? If yes, skip to 7.
6 Is it more than half uncovered? If yes, at least Suggestive.
7 Consider other matters.

I should further note that the 9-step process is actually so complicated, I'm pretty sure I've still got it incorrect due to interplay between the genital area and anus area (does a featureless crotch mean no anus? What about the reverse? These are questions we shouldn't even really _have_ to answer, is the point).

"@Background Pony #57E4":/tagging/rating-tags-general/post/4540653#post_4540653
A while back, the guidelines had "Genitals that are _almost_ visible or visible as _vague_ outlines through clothing".
The second part was for cameltoe, while the first covered cases like these, where we could _almost_ see the pussy, but either there was a tiny little censor or the body itself blocked the view; in practice, I remember also considering anuses for almost visible, even though it wasn't what the guidelines said, which usually meant bare asses were Questionable, even though in a way-previous update, when it was pointed out that a bare ass would become Suggestive, it wasn't considered a problem (in general, buttcheeks alone aren't considered as pornographic as nipples).

The problem with this clause was that to rate an ass, you had to go through this process:
1 Is there a genital or detailed anus showing? If yes, Explicit and done.
2 Is there a moderately-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Questionable and skip to 9.
3 Is there a prominent non-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Suggestive and skip to 8.
4 Are we seeing the genital/anus area, but completely bare? If yes, skip to 9.
5 Is this a show species or dog or something where we don't expect genitals/anus if we could see there? If yes, skip to 9.
6 Is it more than half uncovered? If yes, at least Suggestive.
7 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals/anus? If yes, at least Questionable.
8 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals? If yes, at least Questionable.
9 Consider other matters.

7 and 8 are by far the most subjective parts, and worse, lead to Questionable in cases where you could have actually put a simple x or nothing being shown to get Suggestive instead (so a lower rating from showing _more_ between the cheeks)! A bit over a year ago, as part of an effort to _simplify_ the guidelines, the clause was pulled, so that there's only Suggestive transition for lack of clothing at half, and then Questionable/Explicit get triggered by things actually being there or not.

With the clause removed, this is the process:
1 Is there a genital or detailed anus showing? If yes, Explicit and done.
2 Is there a moderately-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Questionable and skip to 7.
3 Is there a prominent non-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Suggestive and skip to 7.
4 Are we seeing the genital/anus area, but completely bare? If yes, skip to 7.
5 Is this a show species or dog or something where we don't expect genitals/anus if we could see there? If yes, skip to 7.
6 Is it more than half uncovered? If yes, at least Suggestive.
7 Consider other matters.

"@Background Pony #57E4":/tagging/rating-tags-general/post/4540653#post_4540653
A while back, the guidelines had "Genitals that are _almost_ visible or visible as _vague_ outlines through clothing".
The second part was for cameltoe, while the first covered cases like these, where we could _almost_ see the pussy, but either there was a tiny little censor or the body itself blocked the view; in practice, I remember also considering anuses for almost visible, even though it wasn't what the guidelines said, which usually meant bare asses were Questionable, even though in a way-previous update, when it was pointed out that a bare ass would become Suggestive, it wasn't considered a problem (in general, buttcheeks alone aren't considered as pornographic as nipples).

The problem with this clause was that to rate an ass, you had to go through this process:
1 Is there a genital or detailed anus showing? If yes, Explicit and done.
2 Is there a moderately-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Questionable.
3 Is there a prominent non-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Suggestive and skip to 8.
34 Are we seeing the genital/anus area, but completely bare? If yes, skip to 9.
45 Is this a show species or dog or something where we don't expect genitals/anus if we could see there? If yes, skip to 9.
56 Is it more than half uncovered? If yes, at least Suggestive.
6 Is there a moderately-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Questionable.
7 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals/anus? If yes, at least Questionable.
8 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals? If yes, at least Questionable.
9 Consider other matters.

7 and 8 are by far the most subjective parts, and worse, lead to Questionable in cases where you could have actually put a simple x or nothing being shown to get Suggestive instead (so a lower rating from showing _more_ between the cheeks)! A bit over a year ago, as part of an effort to _simplify_ the guidelines, the clause was pulled, so that there's only Suggestive transition for lack of clothing at half, and then Questionable/Explicit get triggered by things actually being there or not.

"@Background Pony #57E4":/tagging/rating-tags-general/post/4540653#post_4540653
A while back, the guidelines had "Genitals that are _almost_ visible or visible as _vague_ outlines through clothing".
The second part was for cameltoe, while the first covered cases like these, where we could _almost_ see the pussy, but either there was a tiny little censor or the body itself blocked the view; in practice, I remember also considering anuses for almost visible, even though it wasn't what the guidelines said, which usually meant bare asses were Questionable, even though in a way-previous update, when it was pointed out that a bare ass would become Suggestive, it wasn't considered a problem (in general, buttcheeks alone aren't considered as pornographic as nipples).

The problem with this clause was that to rate an ass, you had to go through this process:
1 Is there a genital or detailed anus showing? If yes, Explicit and done.
2 Is there a prominent non-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Suggestive and skip to 8.
3 Are we seeing the genital/anus area, but completely bare? If yes, skip to 9.
34 Is this a show species or dog or something where we don't expect genitals/anus if we could see there? If yes, skip to 9.
45 Is it more than half uncovered? If yes, at least Suggestive.
5 Is there a prominent non-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Suggestive and skip to 8.
6 Is there a moderately-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Questionable.
7 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals/anus? If yes, at least Questionable.
8 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals? If yes, at least Questionable.
9 Consider other matters.

7 and 8 are by far the most subjective parts, and worse, lead to Questionable in cases where you could have actually put a simple x or nothing being shown to get Suggestive instead (so a lower rating from showing _more_ between the cheeks)! A bit over a year ago, as part of an effort to _simplify_ the guidelines, the clause was pulled, so that there's only Suggestive transition for lack of clothing at half, and then Questionable/Explicit get triggered by things actually being there or not.

"@Background Pony #57E4":/tagging/rating-tags-general/post/4540653#post_4540653
A while back, the guidelines had "Genitals that are _almost_ visible or visible as _vague_ outlines through clothing".
The second part was for cameltoe, while the first covered cases like these, where we could _almost_ see the pussy, but either there was a tiny little censor or the body itself blocked the view; in practice, I remember also considering anuses for almost visible, even though it wasn't what the guidelines said, which usually meant bare asses were Questionable, even though in a way-previous update, when it was pointed out that a bare ass would become Suggestive, it wasn't considered a problem (in general, buttcheeks alone aren't considered as pornographic as nipples).

The problem with this clause was that to rate an ass, you had to go through this process:
1 Is there a genital or detailed anus showing? If yes, Explicit and done.
2 Are we seeing the genital/anus area, but completely bare? If yes, skip to 9.
3 Is this a show species or dog or something where we don't expect genitals/anus if we could see there? If yes, skip to 9.
4 Is it more than half uncovered? If yes, at least Suggestive.
5 Is there a prominent non-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Suggestive and skip to 8.
6 Is there a moderately-detailed anus showing? If yes, at least Questionable.
7 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals/anus? If yes, at least Questionable.
8 Is there only a "small" bit by a subjective measure preventing us seeing genitals? If yes, at least Questionable.
9 Consider other matters.

7 and 8 are by far the most subjective parts, and worse, lead to Questionable in cases where you could have actually put a simple x or nothing being shown to get Suggestive instead (so a lower rating from showing _more_ between the cheeks)! A bit over a year ago, as part of an effort to _simplify_ the guidelines, the clause was pulled, so that there's only Suggestive transition for lack of clothing at half, and then Questionable/Explicit get triggered by things actually being there or not.