Posts

@Princess Luna  
I think distinguishing between “saliva in food context” and “saliva in sex context” or “chocker as a part of clothing” and “chocker as part of a bdsm costume” is not really all that ambugious. I agree about “comical” part, but it’s not something I invented here. It’s an ambiguity that we have to deal with anyway, I just explicitly stated that it does exist.  
But, I think we should get off of the topic of my mockup, because this train isn’t going anywhere anyway.
 
Back to the nudity though. Based on the current rules and the way you’ve explained it, most of those examples from earlier should be suggestive (except for ones with naked butts, cause that’s not “mostly-bare”, it’s full-on bare). But based on your explanation of “suggestive” tag “what you can get away with in public” - those should all be questionable. Cause you can’t really get away with being topless or bottomless in public (unless you are a shirtless guy). And I hope you didn’t ment “get away with if you’re fast/sneaky enough about it”, because then you can get away with showing genitalia and literal sex.
 
I think that what people are taking away from current guidelines is not “mostly-bare breasts/buttcheeks/crotch on those that normally wear clothes”, but “no nipples please”. And that creates a problem where rules say one thing, but people read something different. Because currently guidelines are saying something like “we kinda let nudity in suggestive, but don’t put too much”, but people are reading it as “everything except nipples”, and I think to solve this problem we need to explicitly say where the nudity should go, specifically topless/bottomless (except topless guys). And if you’re about to say that if we state it explicitly people will take it even further - they are already taking it as far as possible. So we either say explicitly that we put it all in suggestive (except nipples), which doesn’t seems right to me, because suggestive is part of a default filter and also historically wasn’t ment for erotica, or we put it in questionable and make exceptions in some cases, when it’s topless but from the back or it’s just bare shoulders, implying that it’s topless and so on. And don’t jump at this as being “too vague”, I’m just trying to figure out where the nudity should go, not how it should be worded.

@DarklordYuri  
I NEED HEALING

@Ack_Attack  
Back in my day we’d have this payload delivered already.

@Princess Luna  
Looks more like a shadow to me. (If you look at the guys artwork, usually when he adds nipples he makes them easy to notice)
 
But hey, I’m not going to argue.

@TheMultiBrony21  
The very first one has a bit of the nipple area showing, it actually should be Questionable.

@Background Pony #2FF6  
I fixed it.
 
Now all the ones labeled as “questionable” are labeled as “suggestive”.
 
Since none of them showed nipples or cameltoes, they are therefore suggestive.

@ILoveMyoozik  
Back in my days, tv didn’t exist.

@DarklordYuri  
When we get enough support my beloved comrade!
 
@NeoEnvy
 
@Dirty Bit
 
@Ack_Attack
 
@Zaknel  
Back in my days, rap music was created just to sell ringtones and Cartoon Network had live action shows.

Back in my day, we went to school and were taught things. Who else remembers that?

@ILoveMyoozik  
Second Revolution when?

@Background Pony #2FF6  
There is a problem, the guidelines are often not read (which is why I added another link to them up in the navbar) and when they are, people don’t immediately get it (which has been a problem since forever).
 
Your solution even in the full table had multiple areas where “in sexual context” pushed things to another rating, but without any clear way to establish that context; it also preserved the “comical” insertions ambiguity. I do see some improvement with relying more on content in your solution, but ultimately I don’t think it’s worth it to have the full table (and the more condensed forms suffer from extreme ambiguity).

@Dirty Bit  
back in my day, gas was discovered to be a liquid

@NeoEnvy
 
Back in my day, gas was 2 dollars less

@ILoveMyoozik  
back in my day girls were into winx club

I miss the days when our Overlord ruled this site. But those days are long over…

@Roblox lottery248  
Done

The Power of Love for Hyperstorm_h ?

@Absol95  
It’s been out since February. Go get it if you can.

Let’s ng back this thread to life ^-

But I’m not trying to defend by system here and change your mind about it. I’ve already moved on. I just don’t take accusations of ambiguity lightly :3

@Princess Luna  

Excuse me, it didn’t hit me right away what you ment.
 
What my table introduces isn’t ambiguity, but a level of error. Explicitly stated level of error. Because, yes, if you just blindly apply ratings accordingly to the table of points of interest, some images will end up having a rating they don’t deserve. I understand that and I understand that that’s a problem, but it’s not an ambiguity. It’s as unambiguous as you can get (has X on the image, gets Y rating). And I know that it’s a little extreme in it’s own way, but leaving things to interpretation like in current guidelines also creates errors, and it’s up to debate which system would’ve created less.

@Princess Luna  
Okay. Well, if you think that current guidelines work in this regard then could you please explain this:
 
Suggestive: Questionable:  
>>1847348 >>1854900  
>>1849354 >>1854965  
>>1847418 >>1853521  
>>1849354 >>1853871  
>>1858306 >>1839626  
>>1737703 >>1822322  
>>1845257 >>1807761  
>>1838796 >>1567152  
>>1837903 >>1704595  
>>1828097 >>1785274  
>>1816903 >>1814623  
>>1828097 >>1785274  
I can keep going. And keep going for awhile. All of this is only from a couple of last months.
 
And you’re gonna tell me that there’s no problem and everyone gets what current guidelines mean about nudity. Really?

@Background Pony #2FF6  
It means over 50% of the surface area of that section of the body (on either side) is not covered by clothing. As for that kind of nudity and Questionable, a nipple has to be appearing to put it into Questionable, at least for boobs; for down below the waist, it actually goes into Questionable as soon as things get very close to the genitals or anus, which is where things can really screw up with trying to rate consistently.  
Old policy, however, was Suggestive for topless (without nipples) and Questionable for bottomless (so the last image of that set would be Questionable, the rest Suggestive, which is…shall we say a little odd).
 
In regards to ambiguity, I think the design/structure of the rating guidelines and how they’re currently and in the past delineated automatically generates it in these areas. We can further specify lines where things cross from one rating to the other to patch out the ambiguity, which is what your point-of-interest thing tried to do, but it itself added heaps of ambiguity in the process.

@Princess Luna  
Well, I understand “too complex” and that being a concern (I can crunch through tables no problem, but if it’s too hard for others, I’m not gonna force them to do that). But I don’t get “too much based on the existing ratings” part. I didn’t want to change the ratings, just to make them less ambugious and possibly solve problem that other people have brought up that guidelines are too vague, and also solve my own problem that I don’t get why I can’t tag this questionable. The specification on nudity in the current guideline is very much up to interpretation, and it’s up to mods interpretations not mine, I can’t even get how I should be interpreting it. “Mostly-bare breasts/buttcheeks/crotch on those that normally wear clothes” - is vague and subjective as to what “mostly-bare” means. For me this goes beyond that and should be questionable (and there are other examples, I’m just trying to focus here). But apperantly it’s not. But it also used to be. Or did it. It feels like question of nudity has always been a mess and I don’t get why it isn’t being solved, since it’s what most people are going to be dealing with on this site. I sometimes get a feeling that mods are too concerned with properly tagging fetishes (which are about 4% of total images), while fine leaving nudity up in the air (which is about a quarter of total images). And like a third of my table is about nudity. I think that’s different enough.

@Background Pony #2FF6  
Ultimately, semantics and related subjectivity make ratings hard. I think your approach was too complex and too much based on the existing ratings.