Forums / Maintenance / Suggest Ideas

Redirecting from here.
Hopefully this will stay on track. Various important points seems to be completely looked over just to be brought up again like it was a new idea, and derailing as a whole. Please keep posts about the actual topic of the material on the site.

This is NOT a thread for discussing NSFW content as whole on the site. We can have that discussion in another thread. This is specifically for things that might pass the NSFW rules without factoring in age.

River's Original Post:
A small debate has sprung up recently regarding loli art that is sexualized. A few of our mods have been considering allowing less of that, as sexualized art for prepubescent characters tends to cast a bad light on any site. Others have argued that loli art is okay on the site, for one reason for another – whether it's because "It's not really bad" or "there's not a good way to stop it that I see", there have been arguments made.

Eglamore said this on the issue:

On a second note, and I wish to direct this at all users, since this is the “Report Problems” forum: the word “lolicon” is wasei-eigo (Japanese portmanteaus made from English words) for “Lolita Complex”. This has no other meaning than being a """polite""" term for one who is attracted to strongly childlike physicality i.e. a paedophile. Although it is euphemism, it still carries this meaning and this meaning alone. Any notion that it is “just an artstyle” is apologism and should be ignored. There is no “less bad” loli art. Attempting to quantify it is again, apologism.

I think we should ban all such art from the galleries, with zero exceptions. People like Miyazaki have spoken at length about this shit. We have an entry that describes what it is and its presence on the internet. That is all that is required here on this site. There are other places you could go on the net if you really needed to see such things. The End.

Mameme, in response, had this to say:

Ok but where should we make it not be Lolicon? The age of consent in the USA and UK which are the countries that have the most people around here (I’m assuming, if someone from the Mod team could correct me) has the age of consent of 16 to 18. So 16 up fictional characters allowed?
The only problem I see with this is stuff like Yoko Littner which is stated to be 14 and is already sexualized by the show itself.

So, what do the rest of you think? I want to hear what the userbase thinks we should do.

Relevant highlights from previous thread

Jacob wrote:

So, one point that was brought up in mod chat which I want to point out is, “looks under aged”. If they look less than twelve, but are really a legal loli who is 900 years old, then it still qualifies as lolicon, even if they are are “Legal Lolis” in source material. Same goes for older characters (say like, Lusamine who is listed on Bulbapedia as being 41+) who are drawn to look under aged.

Yuko Littner is an interesting case because she’s not drawn like a loli, and Mameme does bring up a point that depending on which part of the series it’s in, her and the rest of the cast are 7 years older, despite looking nearly the same. There are other characters in other things who could fit this definition of looking older than they really are and still being under aged, but this one is probably one of the more notable ones.

I’m inclined to say that characters who are made to look like adults (there are plenty of both fanart and in canon examples of both characters who are adults drawn to look young, and young characters drawn to look old) and it’s obvious, then it should fall under the regular NSFW rules. However, many of the images were are talking about are already on pretty thin ice as is even without factoring in age. Either way, there are still plenty of Yuko images that I would say would still be fine even under the most extreme interpretation of rules (and yes, those include those of her standard outfit in the desert).

So what would be the standard used, given age or visual age?

Farm Zombie wrote

I’m just going to peek my head in and voice my support for allowing mods discretion at removing sexually suggestive art if it meets the following criteria:
1. The sexualized character appear to be pre-pubescent (Yoko is safe, Lucky Star is not).
2. The sexualization is not relevant to the documentation (Boku no Pico remains).

xTSGx wrote:

you need to define “sexualization.” Is blushing sexual? What about a suggestive screenshot from a G-rated program? What about clothing? Again, you have the objectivity problem. The standard NSFW “summer day” definition doesn’t work too well since loli is very rarely blatant CP, but you still run into complicated issues about canon depictions of characters.

The age thing is inherently going to be subjective. Because KYM is viewed by people in many different countries, I'm leaning towards the upper end of the spectrum (18+ appearance). Obviously, in real life and in fiction, there are people who look much older or younger than they really are. Still, as I said in the first thread, and reposted above, if it is something that gives all appearance as being lolicon, despite "canon" stating otherwise, or visa versa, In 99% of cases, it's going to be decided on appearance.

Personally I'm against trying to put up real hard rules that are clearly defined because, in my personal experience it ends up just being a way for users to find creative work arounds that first the letter of the rule but any one with any basic common sense should know the spirit of the rule should cover it. This goes especially true for something such as this, as any definition that is made will have exceptions of both being okay and not being okay, but not covered by it. General rule of thumb I would use if it was me would be, if one seriously has to think about if a mod would consider this lolicon material, then it should probably not be uploaded. However, I also fully understand that rules that are not spelled out are inherently open to different interpretations, which will always cause problems.

as for "what defines sexualization" while it does fall under reasoning above (in that a concrete rule will be exploited) there are a few cases in the past that really come to mind. One was a humanized Applebloom who was clearly very young lifin up her skirt to the viewer saying "You're sure this will help me get my cutie mark?" There are also multiple instances of Pokemon characters wearing extremely limited clothing, or none at all clothing, but hidden slight behind something (basically just enough to cover the naughty bits). Also characters in swimwear/underwear that are drawn extremely detailed.

I think it should be up to 16+ because the age of consent in most of USA and through all of UK which I think is where most of the population comes from is all 16. Lolicon would have to be 16 and below. Sexualization would be stuff like skimpy clothing, bigger bust sizes and stuff. There's also vague ages where we don't know the age of the character and I'll use this example again Lisia looks like a 10 year old in the overworld of Pokemon ORAS but she looks 16 in the official artwork.
Legal Loli is interesting as well because technically you're not a pedophile looking at sexual images of Nowi who's a 1000 year old girl despite only looking 10 and she already wears skimpy clothing.
Also does it just go to flat chested characters that are short to look like someone under age like Tatsumaki?

Why don't we make 3 guidelines (keep the rules as they are, remove lolicon based on visual age and remove all unnecesary NSFW content) and let the userbase decide? If we can put to a vote the meme of the year we should be able to do the same for certain things that would affect the community (new rules, layout changes, changes proposed on Rivers user surveys and that the admins and mods find interesting and possible…).
As for myself, I think the same as Farm Zombie, if she looks underage it doesn't matter what the age stated on the source material is, the same if she looks legal, after all legal loli is just a technicism that lolicons use to justify that they find (fictional) children sexually appealing.

I like that idea. Also what should we define as Loli. For example many people will argue that Tatsumaki is just a midget that has smaller breasts similar to Nonon Jakuzure and Lusamine (Who IMO Lusamine still looks over 16 and over 18). Should both of them get banned if the art has sexual stuff about it? Would that count as Legal Loli? We might need a group of users (Maybe some Scrapbookers) to get rights to delete images that contain strong Lolicon for this site that isn't blatant porn.

This image in particular is a bit iffy. It's the same bikini put in the anime for starters and that's not NSFW and it's also surrounded by lots of SFW art of Lillie in the gallery, it's not that bad in comparison to other stuff we have. There's not really much focus on her butt and we can see that most of it is covered up.
It's tough and we need blatant guidelines that should be followed. Personally I understand why Lolicon should be gotten rid of but we would need a lot of tough rules that might cause complication. I don't mind getting rid of pedophiles though.

EDIT: If we put it as 18 instead of 16 then we basically get rid of Ryuko Matoi. I don't think anyone sees Matoi as being underage due to how she's meant to be sexy to begin with (And it's part of the actual story)

An scrapbooker with the right to delete images is basically a Media Moderator.
I'd suggest a more efficient way of reporting images, comments and so without having to go through the forums (maybe a report button or a shortcut that takes directly to the reporting threads from anywhere in knowyourmeme). It would make reporting problems easier, moderation more efficient and users who don't use the forums at all would be able to help keep the galleries clean aswell.

[checks back the following morning]
[sees we're still at it]

Alright this will be the final post I make for the case of the ban, for now.

Frankly I fiind it extremely embarrassing and cringe-inducing that we even need to have this discussion or that it's gone on this long. Cringe-inducing in the real sense and not the meme sense. RandomMan echoed a similar sentiment a while back with some rule changes. The idea of in-depth definitions is just users attempting to draw out the discussion to delay the inevitable of their dumps getting deleted and their upboats going to waste.

Basically at this point I'm still concerned that people are confusing my stance of "better off banning it" for "ban it from the whole internet". Which is not what I'm saying; I'm just saying ban it from this site. Can't view such content here? Fine, all you have to do is move your mouse up to the address bar and type in a different site for which the URL does not include "www.knowyourmeme.com" and press Enter. There we go, problem solved.

Some people say "the userbase will decline if you do that". My response is that does not matter to me in the slightest.

It's extremely hard for me to show other people IRL the entries I've written when the site in the first place is filled with carcinogenic ads and content they will find objectionable, which we already know to be partially the cause of said ads. But sadly a lot of gallery-onlys have no appreciation for or understanding of this, or of the fact that this site is not primarily for dumping of their awful fetishes. Gallery-only users just don't understand, and a tougher line needs to be taken in order to change the site's and the userbase's culture. Many gallery-onlys are also far too concerned with getting their uploads (i.e. art they did not create) to have upvotes so they may receive fake gratification for someone else's work. Again, this is a problem with site culture. Again I'm not saying ban it, I'm just saying show a little respect. But that's a discussion for another thread.

Ryumaru did raise some good points and I would like to answer them. They said this in the last thread:

The problem with “just leave it up to the mods” is everyone has subjective opinions on what counts and what doesn’t, which will inevitably end with mod v. uploader arguments. I’d at least try to make some guidelines so it’s clearer to the uploaders what the mods will allow.

Which I do understand and even agree with, but I think the solution lies not in headache-inducing and complicated rules, but in changing the site culture through tougher punishments and a harder line on removed content. This is how you make it clearer what is or isn't acceptable.

Ryumaru also said:

How do we avoid a “Australia bans porn of flat women due to looking like children” type of situation?

I agree entirely that such a view is not rational, which is why my suggestion is for the mods to get tougher on it and for this to be at the mods' discretion.

And several of the rules already are at the mods' discretion so unfortunately subjectivity will play a factor. But that's just too bad; in the vast majority of cases, the mods act in the way that is best for the site and not just best for the galleries. A ban is for the best for this website overall.

And yeah I know people have already said "you need to define this, you need to define that". I don't think you do at all actually. Ask yourself "would I get in trouble if my boss saw this in the office?" If it's anything close to a Yes, it shouldn't be on here, certain NSFW entries exempting. I think it should be the entry that is marked NSFW rather than specific items in galleries, because that's where this whole rigmarole begins – gallery-onlys trying to find ways around the obvious acceptable line. All this discourse is clearly designed to draw out the debate and try and prolong the fight against banning such content.

I think that a rule against this kind of content does actually need to be rather general, and has to have some element of mods' discretion. If a mod thinks certain content is going too far, it gets removed. The discussion should be over at that point. Already we are supposed to have the general guideline against content that is "too porny". Kinda general, but the expression works and only a person who is deliberately trying to get around this asks for it to be clarified. However, it's not being followed. Harder stance against this is also required IMO.

Doesn't matter how specific you make it, people are gonna get creative and try to find ways around it. Some users turn the uploading of content into a game, this is an observed phenomenon. Get tougher in a general sense without having nailed-down concepts and people will begin to realise what the culture of this place is supposed to be.

I think the ultimate golden rules should be:

1) If you aren't sure, don't upload.
2) Ask a mod first.
3) Are you uploading to show documentation/spread, or for upvotes? If it's the latter, don't bother.
4) If you really need a fap, go somewhere else.

Reminder that this is still in The Rules:

The spirit of the law takes priority over the letter of the law. Finding loopholes in the wording when it’s known what is meant won’t be tolerated, and it won’t help you if you technically didn’t break any rules when it’s clear that what you posted should be against them.

TL;DR It doesn't belong here, and heady discussions on it are not required. The only loli on this site should be everyone's favourite former moderator.

What about characters like Lana who had a stripping scene in the beach episode itself and most of the fanart is just replacing that? Would that need to go as well? I'm all for getting rid of lolicon on this website as this isn't a place to fap to that shit (Real or not it's still fucked up) but then we get into problems such as Tatsumaki from One Punch Man who is just small and flat for a 28 year old but everything else is clearly an appearance from that age or Nonon Jakuzure who in her Nudist Beach outfit is made to be sexy and is of age but she's small and slightly flat.

Taking them away in certain sexy images might get rid of the whole character for example and that just seems really extreme. I mostly agree it should be gotten rid of on the website but there's certain characters that are quite problematic.

Ultimately a broken idea because the userbase isn't a constant. The exact reason why we are having this discussion now is because the acceptance and promoting of loli increased to a worrying level, where everyone speaking out concerns would be met with downvotes and replies trying to justify their pedo ways.

I can already predict how such a poll would end out in the current situation: Loli wins.

I think it should be up to 16+ because the age of consent in most of USA and through all of UK which I think is where most of the population comes from is all 16. Lolicon would have to be 16 and below.

Yes, that's the age of consent, but that doesn't mean it's legal. If the cops find me with skimpy irl pics of 16 year olds on my phone, I'm probably in deep trouble.

I’d suggest a more efficient way of reporting images, comments and so without having to go through the forums (maybe a report button or a shortcut that takes directly to the reporting threads from anywhere in knowyourmeme). It would make reporting problems easier, moderation more efficient and users who don’t use the forums at all would be able to help keep the galleries clean aswell.

I'm as much a fan of this idea as I'm not. While it would be very efficient, what folks report stuff for differs a lot. I get PMs at times requesting for bans for folks who post political propaganda.

What about characters like Lana who had a stripping scene in the beach episode itself and most of the fanart is just replacing that?

>She took of a shirt to reveal a bathing suit
>People edit it to make her strip naked instead

I don't know what's worse: People who feel the need to have a kid strip naked instead of into bathing suit, or the fact that you even question if it's fine.

Frankly I fiind it extremely embarrassing and cringe-inducing that we even need to have this discussion or that it’s gone on this long.

It's embaressing, and it appears 75% of the reason is that Mameme keeps trying to dodge that he's a lolicon and Meesh feeling the need to be unnecessarily abbrassive to people.

RandomMan echoed a similar sentiment a while back with some rule changes. The idea of in-depth definitions is just users attempting to draw out the discussion to delay the inevitable of their dumps getting deleted and their upboats going to waste.

And as such, odds are that's not the direction we're going. If it's a kid with kid physiques doing porny stuff → Go away you pedo. If it's a vague inbetween, up to viewer's discretion. Art has such a vague line with loli, legal loli, true loli, etc etc etc, that you can't ever properly define what's correct.

Mods have some background knowledge of the shows most of the time, so we know what can and can't pass with what characters. Likewise you also have to trust that mods know what's rational and what's not, so you won't get Australian flat-chest ban situations (DFC btw).

Some people say “the userbase will decline if you do that”. My response is that does not matter to me in the slightest.

This is ultimately a shit argument because we all know that the posting of loli is also gonna scare people off. If you ban loli, people uncomfortable with loli will return. And what do you rather have in your userbase: Lolicons or common sense?

One I never saw any images of that she was stripped naked. The only image that did that was stopping half way that made her show off her midriff which isn't that bad. It's not great but it's not awful. I wasn't around at the time of the purge. Only her bathing suit showed slightly more detail from the images I saw. (Some in terrible areas though that shouldn't of been allowed at all) Second I hate lolicon. I even state myself I'm mostly for getting rid of it. The only thing I have against it is characters with a vague age and all the different terms. I'm fine with getting rid of it if it means to get rid of pedophiles. I can just try and see 2 sides of the same coin here.
1st side. So many definitions and different types of lolicon cause problem and make the rules complicated.
2nd side. Getting rid of this will get rid of pedo's which is always a good thing and we'll get users who don't like Lolicon.
I want something like the 5P but I don't think we have enough of a userbase for that.
This is my overall opinion
The NSFW Lolicon guidelines will get complicated however people can go to other websites if they want to look at that stuff and we might get more users in response and pedophilia will not be as big as a thing here. I also think Yoko, Nonon, Tatsumaki, Lusamine and Ryuko should still be allowed because they look at least like an adult so you wouldn't get pedophilia from them anyway.

>NSFW Lolicon guidelines

See this is exactly why we need to stop this shit. Once people unironically start suggesting you need to make guidelines for pedos, you know it went wrong.

I just spend an entire post explaining that ultimately you can't write detailed guidelines because it's too complicated with art, the same post you even quoted. I also added in that you need to trust mods because we tend to have some background knowledge of shows and thus can tell what is fine with specific characters, and that we know what is rational and so won't become Australia. If you believe we went overboard somewhere, which will happen, bring it up and I'm certain we can find a solution.

If there is going to be some sort of "guideline", imo it's one line to the existing one that reads "kiddies get you banned you pedo". The other rules already cover what you need to know, especially "the spirit of the law takes priority over the letter of the law".

(Or a line that reads something like "The spirit and contents of the show need to be taken into consideration, as such shows that are more NSFW in nature will have more looser rules while PG-12 origins isn't getting as much lenience")

Sure then fine. I don't have a problem with that as long as the mods respect why people would like these characters despite their age. If we get rid of pedo's I'm all for it.

I'd say remove based on visual age, but I think Farm Zombie's option would work well too.

Yeah because Yoko Littner looks like an adult so people wouldn't fap to her because of lolicon but because it's just like fapping to an actual adult. I think Farm Zombie's option is pretty good. As long as this can work well I would love to get rid of Lolicon. I don't upload it myself or at least I upload very little of it so I shouldn't have to worry too much.

I don't think you need to make the rules regarding loli complicated. Just make a line for sexualization and visual age.

Have the rule for NSFW pictures of under-aged characters go "Any picture that would be deemed NSFW by the NSFW guidelines for an older character is banned if the character is visually pre-pubescent/under the age of 16."

For determining what counts as "loli/shota", something along the lines of "The character will deemed underage if they have noticeably underdeveloped bodies and a child-like appearance (younger than age 16) when compared to characters from the same medium, (You can use an example here like comparing Lana to Mallow) or if said shows art.style makes all characters look explicitly child-like (example: Lucky Star)

Exceptions can be made for entries regarding pedophilia so long as they are for strict documentary purposes, and for characters that are sexualized within their own show so long as it doesn't cross the NSFW line/are more sexualized in the image than in the show (Example: Tatsumaki images will be allowed so long as the images aren't more risque then the show)

I think a more refined version of the above would be fine. It allows users to get a feel for what is allowed and what isn't. and allows for some mod freedom for when people inevitably try to skirt the line.

@Randoman I think you are too worried about pedoes tbh. I agree with getting softcore CP off the site, but I think you are under the impression anyone wanting to discuss the issue is defending loli/is a loli. The main reason I am arguing for guidelines is the fact that there is no clear line between "legal" and "loli" and the gray area, I believe, can take up more than people realize, and that implementing a ban when such a gray area exists without thinking it through first is just asking for trouble.

I see your point about how implementing complex rules just encourages people to loophole those rules, but we have the "spirit of the law" clause in the rules already and implementing just one rule of "would a mod allow this?" is equally as bad since some people might see very NSFW stuff here and think the mods are incredibly lenient, or might not give it two seconds of thought.

I trust the mods not to go all "Australia" on us, but I feel giving at least simple guidelines will help the mods and the user-base get on the same page regarding the issue, which would not only help the cause of getting pedophilia off the site, but make the transition go smoothly. Vague rules for anything and rules that say "The mods will determine what is allowed" just don't sit right for me.

Please don't just assume anyone arguing for guidelines is trying to save some of the loli, some of us would just want the mods to at least give the user-base a general idea where the line is.

Edit: Also maybe make a line in those guidelines saying aged-up art of normally younger characters are allowed so long as in said picture, they appear above the age of 16, and are not just claimed to be. Pictures of Lana that claim it's her as an adult but looks practically the same don't count.

Who cares if there's a backlash? The kind of people who will leave over a loli ban are the kind of people we don't want on the site in the first place.

Well, to be clear, I'm not really concerned about the initial backlash, people who would actually cause a shitstorm because we decided to ban loli are the people we kinda want gone. I'm more concerned about people uploading images of characters like Tatsumaki and Mallow after the ban getting into it with the mods because the "what will the mods allow" rule turning image uploading into a guessing game of people's subjective opinion.

I'm fully aware any change to the rules that bans anything is gonna cause a backlash, that's unavoidable, but that will quiet down in a week, and if people decide to leave because we decided to ban softcore CP, I don't see how that is a bad thing. Just make it so image uploaders have an easier time knowing what's allowed and what's not.

The first three things should make it fairly clear that it's a joke. That is also a role play account (who seems to have a near unhealthly positive attitude when I've talked with them) so I'd be hesitant to call this post a "backlash."

You can't tell sometimes on the internet but never mind I guess. I change my position. I guess backlash wouldn't be so bad because we would get rid of the people we don't want. I don't know why I made that post. Maybe just delete it.
EDIT: Slightly off topic but why do we have so many role-playing accounts anyway?

Ryumaru Borike said:

The main reason I am arguing for guidelines is the fact that there is no clear line between “legal” and “loli” and the gray area, I believe, can take up more than people realize, and that implementing a ban when such a gray area exists without thinking it through first is just asking for trouble.

This. Clearer, firmer rules help mods develop a consistently enforced policy rather than some mods letting stuff in, others not caring either way, and others strictly enforcing things. It has potential to greatly confuse users and create endless PM appeals and forum arguments. It, obviously, also gives users a clear idea of what's allowed and what isn't.

Magical Girl ☆ Egla Egla Eglamore~ said:

A ban is for the best for this website overall.

How? Being safer for work or more "family friendly" is pointless. You're probably going to get in trouble if your boss catches you here whether or not you're looking at young anime waifus and who really wants kids browsing this site when there's plenty of NSFW memes anyway.

As for ads, they're still shit after the new NSFW rules. That "images that need to be deleted" backlog the mods have will get an order of magnitude longer and only further push back the mythical porn/malware-free Adsense ads everyone yearns for.

I'll also say from experience from other sites (TV Tropes, Fimfiction). The ad providers don't care if you get rid of loli if the site still has daily dose and meatspin on it. They want squeaky clean sites to sell McDonalds ads on and by the very nature of KYM's mission, it's never going to be clean enough for them.

All I see coming out of this is a reduced userbase, constant arguing and debates over the new rule (if there are no definitive rules put place), and the ads still triggering anti-virus software in a year.

Well, I read everything, I'm myself neutral in all this issue but leading to rules against loli posting… I would like to offer some ideas on this, I hope they do create a more balanced debate or at least make people change of mind respect to this stuff.

First: I would suggets a referendum, of course we know "pro-loli" side would win, but hear me out, you have made a lot of thing where users can participate, meme of the year, elections and stuff, since you have explained so well those, nothing is stopping you for explain well your points regarding this to them, in fact is possible to simply not make a referendum but turning this into an issue where they can give their point as well, I do believe this conversation is going to waste with 13 users talking here, trying in my point of view (I read all this in a hurry, sorry) to decide in the name of hundred if not thousand of users in this site, so the option of they giving their opinion to this issue should apply.

Second: in case of users participating in this stuff, we should mold some rules respect to Loli, in my country right now a peace treaty was firmed after 60 years of a civil war, many people said the treaty is kind of bias towards one side, but I'm optimistic of finally being able to breath in peace and not hide under my bed everynight with the fear of a bullet or a grenade exploding in your face while sleeping (sleeping in hard cold floor is not a good experience), the point is the treaty have both parts coming to an agreement of how start the peace with the people of my country, not only the politics, giving their ideas since they were the main victims of the conflict, in our case in this site, you have made your points, I agree with some up there and I don't with others, the userbase should do the same in the participation, they should see the rules we are talking about and see if they like it or not and if some modification can be done so some kind of agreement that benefit both sides can be agree upon.

Well that's all I wanted to put this here, the next thing might not help my argument but look there is true that there are characters that doesn't look their age and can be confused with being younger, case in point

Even in Idolm@ster they say that Anzu (the yellow haired one in the image) looks like a Ten years old, so this lead to the confusion you have used above about certain to young looking characters.

>referendum
>civil war
>peace treaty
>wut

This ain't about opinions or whatever. We are talking here about the depiction of UNDERAGE BOYS AND GIRLS, CHILDREN!!! CIVIL WAR MY ASS, DID THE SOUTHERN STATES GET A COMPROMISE WHEN THEY WANTED TO KEEP THEIR SLAVES?!

It doesn't matter if a character has "the right age". Suggestive images of persons who clearly look like minors are plain wrong. We are not talking about HOW they are depicted. Example:

This is fine:

This is NOT fine:

This is NOT FINE:

Likewise neither is this image

Like I said before, people uncomfortable with lolis will return if you get rid of lolis. Backlash will happen, but applause just the same for this topic. If the price for the return of common sense is paying out lolicons, then hand them over right now.

Ryumaru wrote:

don’t think you need to make the rules regarding loli complicated. Just make a line for sexualization and visual age.

xTSGx wrote:

This. Clearer, firmer rules help mods develop a consistently enforced policy rather than some mods letting stuff in, others not caring either way, and others strictly enforcing things. It has potential to greatly confuse users and create endless PM appeals and forum arguments. It, obviously, also gives users a clear idea of what’s allowed and what isn’t.

Except, ya know, shouldn't something like not masturbating to little cartoon minors, be, I dunno….. common sense?

My idea is that you don't have to make this complicated: A new line here, a bit of extra text there, done. So I agree with you. I just find the idea of complete guidelines laughable, because if you have to discuss a complete sub-set of guidelines for loli seperate from your regular guidelines you have reached a point you never should've reached. If someone has a suggestion for an easy way to add some sort of line or note in the rules, I'm all ears.

Which is why I suggested something like what I posted earlier: Take the spirit and contents of the show into consideration. For example, Illya Prisma is some Magical Girl animu which has lolis making out because plot reasons:

Now that is one of the milder examples, because if I have to believe dudes who watched it, they even pull that off in the shower in a later season. The idea is that in the "I Watch It For The Plot" entry and an entry for the show, that GIF would be fine because it's within the spirit of both; however if you have an edit of that GIF which has the same stuff happening between Mallow and Lana from Pokemon, you might consider dragging your ass over to the banned corner.

Darkhanov's image works the same in that regard, we know how much logic (read: none) is behind that age stuff and as such will judge both characters differently. If there's an easy way to add a line in the rules somewhere, bring up a suggestion. Farm Zombie's lines are a perfect example of how we can work it out.

@Randoman I think you are too worried about pedoes tbh. I agree with getting softcore CP off the site, but I think you are under the impression anyone wanting to discuss the issue is defending loli/is a loli. The main reason I am arguing for guidelines is the fact that there is no clear line between “legal” and “loli” and the gray area, I believe, can take up more than people realize, and that implementing a ban when such a gray area exists without thinking it through first is just asking for trouble.

I've been on the internet long enough to understand the difference between CP and lolis, and I know about the difference between how the legal lolis and true lolis go in the majority sense. Definitions differ, no problem. I'm merely using pedo as a method to imply how far this shit has been heading.

I'm sure you're the person who censored the image that showed the ass anyway because you're the mod who posted here now. Just a wonder, I thought the ass was allowed because it's allowed in TV-MA rated shows. Like I uploaded a picture of a characters full on butt in the Pokemon gallery but I asked Rivers and she said it was fine. There's very little difference between the two.
(Note I mean ass in general, not on Lolicon)

>She looks like she's 6
>Used as an example of what shouldn't be fine
>Then doesn't hide it behind a spoiler

I felt like it really ruined your point, and to play it save hid it behind a spoiler.

Also I'm pretty certain there's a difference between that image and this image you uploaded, with the latter being much easier to allow.

I wasn't the person who uploaded that. I was just more curious about why it was put in a spoiler text.

@RandomMan

I was kinda lazy so excuse me for not doublechecking my post.

@RandomMan
Except, ya know, shouldn’t something like not masturbating to little cartoon minors, be, I dunno….. common sense?

You expect common sense from the internet? For shame Randomman.

because if you have to discuss a complete sub-set of guidelines for loli seperate from your regular guidelines you have reached a point you never should’ve reached.

We have reached a point where people come to the sight specifically to look for loli pictures We indeed have reached a point we shouldn't have reached.

It doesn't have to be completely separate, just add a paragraph to the NSFW section regarding the issue. The fact that there are real life CP laws shows that just trusting people to know what's OK and what's not doesn't work. It would be extremely nice if the only rules KYM needed was "be nice" and "use common sense when uploading" but unfortunately, the rules exist because, surprise surprise, you can't exactly expect a large group of random people on the internet to agree on what "common sense" means.

Yeah common sense isn't actually that common despite what it's called. Pretty big irony which is why we need guidelines.

Just ban all depictions of underage characters whether the image is questionable or not, except when said image is crucial for the research of a meme or trend (fetish entries don't count) Therefore we avoid wasting time about "drawing the line" and determining what crosses it or not.

Only with harsh measures we can settle up this situation.

^I wouldn't take it quite that far but I agree with the principle. We're a meme documentation site but I'd guess that most of the images that get uploaded here are entirely unnecessary for documentation. Now I'm not suggesting we go around closing galleries left and right but I do think mods should have pretty wide discretion on this. If you think an image is questionable and it's not necessary for documentation then take it down. The use of the image galleries is a privilege not a right, and if there's a problem with certain users then warn them or ban them.

We're not going to be banning all images of characters who appear to be young. There are way too many things that this is the focus on (imaging having to delete all Yatsubato images just because she's a young girl.)

Uploaded this today to help give an example:

The first image is roughly what the Kanmusu Hibiki looks like in source material. There is not "official" canon age for her, however, while the image implies she's 12, that would be at the high end of the spectrum for many fan works. DESTROYERS ARE NOT FOR LEWD.

The second image is clearly and "adult" version of the same character. Upload lewds of this version (that don't raise questions under normal NSFW rules) and it's not really a big deal.

RandomMan

people uncomfortable with lolis will return if you get rid of lolis.

How many users have actually deactivated/left because of loli? I've seen a lot of "I'm deactivating forever!" drama on the site and not once do I recall it being being because of someone getting traumatized over clicking on an NSFW image.

Except, ya know, shouldn’t something like not masturbating to little cartoon minors, be, I dunno….. common sense?

Gettin a bit strawmanny there. Take out "cartoon" and I'd agree completely, but there's actually quite a debate over simulated CP, one which this thread's not about.

The issue I have is you're taking a moral guardian approach to this (with no real benefit to the site save some some vague promises about ads and users returning from the wilderness)--people masturbate to all sorts of things and that's not limited to cartoon minors blushing or drooling suggestively.

To my knowledge, this image violates no KYM rule--there are no sexual organs or fluids present, no suggestive looks or blushing, no lewd posses. It also fits with the nature or canon of the source material. Yet it's implicit purpose is for people with that fetish to masturbate to it.

If the goal of this is to get people to go offsite to jack off, you're probably going to have to ban a hell of a lot more than just blushing flat chested anime characters in bikinis.

I just find the idea of complete guidelines laughable, because if you have to discuss a complete sub-set of guidelines for loli seperate from your regular guidelines you have reached a point you never should’ve reached.

Why? Why is having a firm, concrete rule users and mods can refer to when debating and thinking about two (artstyle and undefined age of characters) of the most subjective things on the planet laughable? I'm really baffled you don't think that's a good idea given leaving it up to mod discretion is only bound to create a massive amount of headaches for you guys, with endless PMs, appeals, forum arguments, etc.

Vague or open ended rules only lead to more headaches down the line. Cross the t's and dot the i's and get it polished up to a shine. Don't just slap "No loli. Mods will decide what's loli" in the rules and then complain about how hostile and shit the userbase is three months later when the bonfire keeps burning. There's no rush. You guys have thousands more now-NC images to clean out so the ads won't be changing anytime soon and the lost users will return once the new rule's implemented anyway.

As someone who has no horse in this race since I don't care about loli art, I will give my honest opinion:

Cartoon loli art is not child porn. Arguing otherwise is delusional and I'd say even disrespectful to real underage victims of child porn. Drawn depictions of something that would be considered illegal is NOT the same as the actual act. Otherwise you'd have to argue all images and GIFs of cartoon people being killed are literally murder, and that anyone that enjoys those things are murderers or murderers in waiting.

Arguing that it should be banned because "it casts a bad light on the site" is bad logic. Do you know how much digusting shit you can find on Facebook? On Twitter? On Tumblr? Does that mean that people have a bad opinion of those sites because you can find weird and disgusting shit on them? I have a bad opinion of those sites but it's not because of that, it's because of a million other things.

Arguing that old users will come back if you change it? First of all, assuming they DO come back, what about users that will leave because of it? If there are people petty enough to leave because there was loli art, there will be people petty enough to leave because there isn't anymore. If an increase in the userbase is your objective, this ain't gonna help.

And second, what makes you think that they will suddenly come back? That they will even be aware of the change at all? "Oh look, that website I once visited but I stopped because of loli no longer has loli! And I know this because magic!" If they are no longer coming to the website, then what makes you think they will come back without anything prompting them to do so?

As I said, don't care about loli so I won't care either way what you do, but I do hate hypocrisy, special treatment, double standards, and faulty logic, so I don't have to like something to defend it against unfairness.

xTSGx wrote:
"You guys have thousands more now-NC images to clean out."

Uh… unless you personally know of a lolicon stash on the site we are unaware of… There really are not that many images (to my knowledge at least) that would be affected. The majority of the images that I've seen that would be what I'd consider problematic were uploaded within the last 3 months, and even then, I think it was less than 100.

Again, any concrete rules have and will be used to exploit the rules to their exact lette, and will also have people try to apply them on images that almost everyone would think is 100% fine. While subjectivty is a problem, so is making rules that are able to balance brevity, intent, and limiting both accidentally banning things that are fine, and easily exploitable loopholes.

I'm not saying that we can't have some form of guide, but as someone who has helped to write and enforce some of the current rules, this is often futile, as it is frequently seen by some people as needing to cover things it was never intended to, as well as leaving exploitable areas.

Since this seems to be the biggest problem moving forward, here's a guideline I kinda worked up.

Avoid uploading Loilicon materials: this is mostly for under-18 apperaing very detailed images of characters drawn with underwear, swimwear, skin tight clothing, or clothing that leaves private areas of the body exposed or nearly so, and where a/the focus of the image is on these areas.

Guidelines are good, as they still have some leniency (no, well we have to remove this because rules say so even if it is clearly fine.) While we will still enforce guidelines, users generally don't receive disciplinary action until it's clear they choose to consistently ignore mod recommendations.

As you can probably tell, even this is not without subjectivity. What the hell does "very detailed" mean. If you guys have a better recommendation for a "harder rule" (or even better guidelines) feel free to post them.

To adresss some other specific points
Strate77 wrote
"Drawn depictions of something that would be considered illegal is NOT the same as the actual act. "

Don't get me wrong, this is an interesting topic to debate, and one could easily aruge that it is a victimless crime. However, viewing said material can sometimes be considered a crime in and of itself depending on where you are in the world.

@xTSGx
By the same token as what I said above (in terms of viewing said material could be considered a crime) would a "normal" person seeing that image think "this feels like kiddie porn" . While it certainly would be something I wouldn't want other people to look over my shoulder to see on my screen, it wouldn't get me worried the person who just did that is going to call the FBI on me.

I have to agree with TSG and Strate here. Really not a fan of the condescending moralization coming from some of you. I really don't think it's unreasonable to argue that banning something just because certain people are offended by it is a bad precedent to set.

Nothing wrong with discussing rules, but all this talk of a glorious rule change banishing the creeps and cretins to the island of misfit toys makes it sound like some of you have a personal dog in this fight. I don't think the site rules are the best place to morally preside over people.

If it gives us access to better ads, it may be worth looking into, but as stated by TSG, the threshold for getting the family friendly label you crave goes a bit further than banning loli. I would go as far as saying that it may even be a lost cause to try and get off of granny google's naughty list.

We should be careful not to go down that good-intentions laden path to ending up like so many other unfortunate Internet sites where subversive things and unpopular ideas are forcibly removed from the service, and "undesirables" are encouraged to take the next train outta dodge.

"However, viewing said material can sometimes be considered a crime in and of itself depending on where you are in the world."

I understand what you mean, and it is a valid point if you want to remove that content so that the entire site is not banned from those certain places of the world, but in my opinion? A site shouldn't conform to the backwards logic of other countries. If they want to waste time, resources and police force in making useless things illegal, that's on them, but I really believe it shouldn't affect other sites that aren't located in those countries.

In the end it would come down to business, obviously. If you believe limiting the site in order to make it accessible to those countries is worth it, then that's that. I do not believe that would be the right course of action, but that's just me.

Stop right there, how enforcing rules, "backwards and useless", just because you don't agree with them.

The problem sometimes isn't always the mods to the site, but the community itself. They can be negative to some changes, especially if it's for the right cause.

I'll try to reiterate my point here. It is counter-productive to de-sex KYM, but lolicon is too beyond the pale to allow indiscriminately. If you are going to moralize about anything, it may as well be something as near-universally accepted as "don't jack off to pictures of kids." The principle should be to allow only what is necessary for documentation purposes. We have a lolicon article and, obviously, examples of the artwork are needed to explain what the subject is about. We have enough. No more is needed. Meanwhile, Pokemon has nothing to do with the eroticization of childlike bodies. Remove on sight.

Backwards and useless in my opinion, obviously.

Your wording was vague, what do you mean with "especially if it's for the right cause"? Are you talking about the community being negative to some changes for the right cause, or that the changes themselves are for the right cause?

Regardless, it's kind of hypocritical to say something is "for the right cause" right after telling me that something isn't backwards and useless just because I don't agree with it. What is "the right cause" to you may not be "the right cause" for others, which is exactly why they would be negative to changes that they feel are unjustified.

Seems that the karmabombing has finally started…

What's the big deal with everyone here? The loli pics are here to stay, it's about the SEXUALLY depicted ones there's a problem. You just can't post NSFW loli pics here and expect everyone to be okay with it.

This is the pokémon gallery debate all over again.

@Jacob

Since this seems to be the biggest problem moving forward, here’s a guideline I kinda worked up.

Avoid uploading Loilicon materials: this is mostly for under-18 apperaing very detailed images of characters drawn with underwear, swimwear, skin tight clothing, or clothing that leaves private areas of the body exposed or nearly so, and where a/the focus of the image is on these areas.

I actually think that is too much of a concrete rule open to the feared loophole abuses. Rather than state what can't be allowed when dealing with underaged characters, why not just have it as such:

Avoid uploading Lolicon materials, as in pictures of underaged appearing characters that would normally fall under the NSFW guidelines, as they might be deemed NC and removed.

This way, you can use the already existing NSFW guidelines as a standard for users to upload by while keeping it subjective enough for mods to be able to enforce it with common sense. We already have the guidelines determining NSFW and NC, why not just slide the cut off point for underaged characters? It avoids having to come up with new guidelines regarding loli, allows uploaders to know what's allowed and what's not and the mods to enforce the new rule the same as they do the old rules. Unless there is something flawed about this idea that I'm missing.

I still argue that something saying characters that are underaged appearing but canonically wear revealing clothes are allowed so long as they are not sexualized any more than the show they appear in, simply because characters like Tatsumaki exists.

@ryumaki

problem is: if you want to remove all swimwear-related ones you might as well remove half of ash's pics. There's plenty of examples that show swimware-related pics that are SFW.

Those don't fall under NSFW guidelines just because they are in a swimsuit. This and This are fine and get through under my suggested guideline, while This and This do not

Slighty off topic but this is happening in the thread at the moment so whatever. Can we deal with the karma downbombing from someone right now and remove it? Every comment is getting at least -2 to -3 downvotes thanks to Arcanine being a douchebag with his alts.

Apologies, my wording never come out clear.

All, I'm saying is that I think mod should be allowed lay some rules about the posting of the loli/shota problem. And I think it's not fair whenever this issue comes, some people do not think the mods know how to handle this and it should be handled by the community itself.

The mods are simply the ones that set, change, and enforce the rules. That doesn't make them factually or morally correct. I see no problem with users opposing a mod's opinion if they feel it is unjust, as long as they don't break the rules. I find the logic behind the proposed rule changes to be faulty, and I already explained why, so I oppose them.

I've been holding off giving my own thoughts until I believe I had a decent answer. So, here I am now.

I am a fan of the idea of making images that would normally fall under NSFW and are of characters that appear prepubescent against the rules.

I get concerns about "Australia bans porn of flat chested women" type things happening, but I believe this underplays the mod team, and the reasons we're thinking about this. We aren't machines, and the entire point of this (The Spirit Of The Law) is to get rid of loli lewd. We tend to know better than the vast majority of users why the rules are the way they are. For example, the cropped porn rule is there because people would upload cropped porn of things that are obviously porn just so they could go "Look, there's no secks in the image! It's not against the rules!" when it was pretty clear the whole purpose of uploading was because their dick commanded it. As such, we try to enforce this rule in this context, instead of clamping down on the exact letter and removing any and all images that are NC but cropped. So, I don't believe this'll lead to the death of images of flatchested adults.

"Legal loli" and the like should be included. Look, if you're uploading lewd of legal loli, it's pretty likely it's because you like lewd of loli. The "legal" part doesn't factor in. At best, it's probably an excuse. On the flipside, if you upload lewd of a character that is technically underaged but doesn't look it at all, I find it unlikely your reasoning is "man they look like an adult but the fact that they're young is so hot!"

There's concerns brought up over characters that are like that in the source material, in which case I will reiterate what others have said: typically we mods have decent knowledge on the background of a lot of subcultures. If we remove an image improperly, appeal it – images have come back up because of it. Remember, we are not emotionless prude machines. We are humans who fuck up at times. Also, as an additional consideration to our knowledge of subcultures, typically we go looser on galleries that are lewder. Senran Kagura, Hentai Quotes, etc (and to a lesser extent, galleries like Shantae and Cat Keyhole Lingerie as well).

Going off of concerns, and looking at specific proposals – no, let's not make specific guidelines. They get abused, all the time. I know the idea of putting more things to the mods might sound uncomfortable, but please try to understand: people abuse the exact guidelines all the time. That's why we had that recent change in the NSFW guidelines.

Why? Why is having a firm, concrete rule users and mods can refer to when debating and thinking about two (artstyle and undefined age of characters) of the most subjective things on the planet laughable? I’m really baffled you don’t think that’s a good idea given leaving it up to mod discretion is only bound to create a massive amount of headaches for you guys, with endless PMs, appeals, forum arguments, etc.

In my experience, if you're talking to people who really know a lot about an issue (e.g. RM and KYM rules) and you're baffled on their position, it's probably because you are missing a key piece of info, or made a faulty assumption. In this case, it's that not leaving it up to mod discretion does that anyways. We didn't reduce the details on the rules because lots of examples led to a world devoid of argument. That'd be stupid.

Arguing that it should be banned because “it casts a bad light on the site” is bad logic. Do you know how much digusting shit you can find on Facebook? On Twitter? On Tumblr? Does that mean that people have a bad opinion of those sites because you can find weird and disgusting shit on them? I have a bad opinion of those sites but it’s not because of that, it’s because of a million other things.

Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr are huge. KYM is relatively tiny and slow. On FB, Twitter, and Tumblr, you can customize what you see pretty well. On KYM? You get what you get. Because of this, we have much more motivation than FB, Twitter, or Tumblr to make the site more appealing on a broad level.

That's my take on the issue. Discuss. Let's see if we can reach some level of consensus.

Mfw we have a new user called Loli and Switch who did upload some Loli art of Lillie having cropped porn.
I think I'm now very happy we are having a talk about this.
Time to back off now when we've got stuff like that going on. I now want to vote for Loli being banned.

And now the he's kicked up his game a notch.

EDIT: Activating NSFW markers on the images until removal.

EDIT 2: Also, I feel this may be some form of willful protest.