ion288 said:
post #6494689 looks petite to me.
agreed
Blank_User said:
Got a few more borderline ones here:
post #5973326
post #6164409 / post #6169002
post #6191828
post #6434122 / post #6454857
i also think the same as ion288
Posted under General
ion288 said:
post #6494689 looks petite to me.
agreed
Blank_User said:
Got a few more borderline ones here:
post #5973326
post #6164409 / post #6169002
post #6191828
post #6434122 / post #6454857
i also think the same as ion288
ion288 said:
I would say loli on the first four and not on the last two.
I wasn't sure about the firs one because I know breasts don't automatically disqualify a character being tagged as loli, but I thought she looked just old enough (just barely) to not count.
Regarding the last two, do you think they don't count as loli because the character doesn't look young enough, or because it's not suggestive enough? Note that the viewpoint character has a visible bulge, presumably in reaction to Miyu's appearance.
post #6505477 Looks like Loli to me. Do you agree?
Drimacus said:
post #6505477 Looks like Loli to me. Do you agree?
yup.
post #6511175
Another borderline case. On the one hand, she looks young enough and is in her underwear with her entire midriff showing. On the other hand, the image seems pretty innocent overall (neutral pose, no focus on sensitive areas, slightly cartoony, etc.). Should this stay in loli?
Edit: Would also like a check on post #6520608.
Updated
hdk5 said:
I don't think they're young-looking enough for loli.
Never thought I'd use this thread, but ah well...
I don't think these page qualifies for the loli tag (considering the pantyshot and nudity sans panties respectively are in a nonsexual situation and the situation itself is meant to be disturbing from the looks of it), but I'd like to err on the side of caution here and ask.
Updated
Maiden_in_Orange said:
Never thought I'd use this thread, but ah well...
I don't think these page qualifies for the loli tag (considering the pantyshot and nudity sans panties respectively are in a nonsexual situation and the situation itself is meant to be disturbing from the looks of it), but I'd like to err on the side of caution here and ask.
Yeah i don't think those need to be tagged as loli either
Maiden_in_Orange said:
Never thought I'd use this thread, but ah well...
I don't think these page qualifies for the loli tag (considering the pantyshot and nudity sans panties respectively are in a nonsexual situation and the situation itself is meant to be disturbing from the looks of it), but I'd like to err on the side of caution here and ask.
I agree with Mayhem-chan, though the only thing I'm not sure of is whether female child should be tagged for the latter post. There have been previous forum topics discussing why it is important to keep child and its variants off of NSFW (sexual) posts. Granted, it is a nonsexual situation as you said, but it's important to consider how an outside party (such as a payment processor) may view a post like this, and we can't always assume they have the best judgment. You can read topic #22736 and topic #23538 for more information on this.
Loli or not, I also think the rating should be Q instead of S because of the character's bare chest and visible nipples.
NNT has said before that female child is strictly rating:g posts only (for obvious reasons). Also, loli is applicable to rating:s too.
Blank_User said:
I agree with Mayhem-chan, though the only thing I'm not sure of is whether female child should be tagged for the latter post. There have been previous forum topics discussing why it is important to keep child and its variants off of NSFW (sexual) posts. Granted, it is a nonsexual situation as you said, but it's important to consider how an outside party (such as a payment processor) may view a post like this, and we can't always assume they have the best judgment. You can read topic #22736 and topic #23538 for more information on this.
That's fair. But I just wonder then: what tag should I use instead of female child on that one then? Loli is inapplicable here, and if female child is too, what would be the best tag for a child character who would normally qualify for the loli or shota tags in this sort of nonsexual situation?
Loli or not, I also think the rating should be Q instead of S because of the character's bare chest and visible nipples.
I agree on second thought. This comic has so much disturbing imagery in this chapter alone (most of which I rated a hesitant S) that one of the easiest instances of a Q-rated post slipped by me. Whoops! I'll go rerate that then.
BobTheBuilder_v1 said:
NNT has said before that female child is strictly rating:g posts only (for obvious reasons). Also, loli is applicable to rating:s too.
I am not surprised by that latter part. I probably would not be in this thread if that tag wasn't possibly applicable here. My only question is what tag to use instead on a lot of the S posts here involving Yuma (the child in question outside these pages), mainly because of the violence and disturbing imagery than anything that would normally qualify for loli.
But that's probably a question for the tagging thread and not the loli/shota check thread.
Updated
Maiden_in_Orange said:
That's fair. But I just wonder then: what tag should I use instead of female child on that one then? Loli is inapplicable here, and if female child is too, what would be the best tag for a child character who would normally qualify for the loli or shota tags in this sort of nonsexual situation?
I forgot to mention topic #21641, in which evazion (the current owner of the site) addresses this point (forum #216609).
evazion said:
Ideally the child tag would be 100% safe. I'm talking safe enough to show your mother. This does leave a gap where something might not be suggestive enough for loli, but too suggestive for child. I have no solution for this other than to say: don't go around tagging child on everything and forcing my hand.
Basically, if you think it falls in the gap, you don't need to tag it with anything. In this situation, we're sacrificing searchability to reduce the amount of content we'll have to restrict to basic members.
Blank_User said:
Basically, if you think it falls in the gap, you don't need to tag it with anything. In this situation, we're sacrificing searchability to reduce the amount of content we'll have to restrict to basic members.
Alright, that sounds good to me. I'll go back and clean out the female child tag on the S posts in this comic in order to comply with the general stance Danbooru has taken here. Looks like my current plan to avoid using that tag on S and above posts in it moving forward was a wise decision to make.
Personally, I wish we didn't have to sacrifice searchability, but honestly, this looks like such a big can of worms that I'd rather not reopen the dreaded discussion today. Or ever really. If it's the best we got right now, it's the best we've got. Thanks for your help!
Updated
Maiden_in_Orange said:
Alright, that sounds good to me. I'll go back and clean out the female child tag on the S posts in this comic in order to comply with the general stance Danbooru has taken here. Looks like my current plan to avoid using that tag on S and above posts in it moving forward was a wise decision to make.
Personally, I wish we didn't have to sacrifice searchability, but honestly, this looks like such a big can of worms that I'd rather not reopen the dreaded discussion today. Or ever really. If it's the best we got right now, it's the best we've got. Thanks for your help!
Just keep in mind that the context of those threads was sexualization of those characters. Unless I'm missing something, I don't believe evazion was talking about non-sexual violent or disturbing content. For example, post #6530811 can still have the tag because the factor that would lead to a higher rating is the pile of skeletons. Also, the G rating is very strict; largely innocuous images such as post #6237310 can be rated S merely for showing cleavage or an exposed midriff. Since these apply to the older character in the image and not the younger character, the female child tag can probably stay despite not being rated G. I think you could probably use the female child tag on most of the posts you recently removed it from.
To sum things up, when deciding where a post falls on the child-loli/shota continuum, ask yourself "Do any child characters appear sexualized?" and "Are any child characters doing anything sexual?".
BobTheBuilder_v1 said:
NNT has said before that [female child] is strictly rating:g posts only (for obvious reasons). Also, [loli] is applicable to rating:s too.
When did he say that? The only thing I can find that's close to that is in forum #228498:
nonamethanks said:
The logical basis to deny this implication is that female_child is:nsfw and male_child is:nsfw have hundreds of loli/shota results and other posts that should never be tagged with child, and our users cannot be trusted with accurately tagging this. Just look at the kind of stuff that gets routinely mistagged with these tags.
This is particularly concerning from a site operational standpoint. It's unacceptable to have this kind of content be anywhere near a tag called "child", both for payment processors (if we had any right now) and hosting providers.It was already bad enough with child, now we have three different tags acting as landmines that need to be routinely cleaned.
It sounds to me like he's saying child tags should usually be in is:sfw, which includes both rating:g and rating:s. Note that like evazion, the context is about sexualized child characters, not violence, sexualized adults, or other factors that could increase the rating. As I mentioned in my reply to Maiden in Orange above, there are plenty of S-rated posts with non-sexualized children that should be appropriate for the child tags.
Blank_User said:
When did he say that? The only thing I can find that's close to that is in forum #228498:
BobTheBuilder_v1 said:
I should have specified that I was asking only about the first part. I do know about loli and shota extending into rating:s. I apologize in advance if you were only trying to prove the extension.
There are two separate statements in the image you linked. The first statement "s does not exclude loli" affirms the expansion of loli and shota ratings. The second statement "you should not tag child on anything remotely sexual or skimpy" is not the same as saying "female child is strictly rating:g posts only" since there are other reasons a post could be rated S or above. I'm also certain he is talking specifically about sexualized young-looking characters. I don't think he's talking about images like post #6532264, for example.
I'm sure most users understand the difference, but I feel this should be stated explicitly for those who don't.
So basically, the child tags are okay to use on images rated above G as long as the child character in question isn't sexualized? That sounds good to me! I'll just use my best judgement on this comic then when it comes to the use of the female child tag (as what bumps up the rating is just as likely to be gore or disturbing imagery as sexualization, but there's still a decent amount in there for the older characters that aren't candidates for this thread).
To be honest, this comic has been a bit of a rating nightmare for me in general, but that's for a different thread. I just wanted to check to make sure a couple pages did not qualify for the loli tag since I know Danbooru tends to be pretty strict about these sorts of things (and for damn good reason), and learned a few more detail about the child tags in the process. Thanks again!
Blank_User said:
I should have specified that I was asking only about the first part. I do know about loli and shota extending into rating:s. I apologize in advance if you were only trying to prove the extension.
There are two separate statements in the image you linked. The first statement "s does not exclude loli" affirms the expansion of loli and shota ratings. The second statement "you should not tag child on anything remotely sexual or skimpy" is not the same as saying "female child is strictly rating:g posts only" since there are other reasons a post could be rated S or above. I'm also certain he is talking specifically about sexualized young-looking characters. I don't think he's talking about images like post #6532264, for example.
I'm sure most users understand the difference, but I feel this should be stated explicitly for those who don't.
Let's not start to tag child/female child on S posts just because of an assumption based on a perceived ambiguity. Just be content with not tagging anything in those edge cases, it's fine, no reason to insist on tagging those when they are such contentious tags already (not to mention most people already voted in favor of getting rid of them). Caution is much better, let's not worsen the mess