-Uzi_Man-: @Kazerad: Why are you posting on that /trash/ thread? Do you purposefully look for porn of your own webcomic to feel powerful because you created characters who have a big impact on people's minds and dicks?
-Uzi_Man-: @OppoQuinn: While insults are technically critiques by definition, they are made with the intention of disqualifying someone or someone's work, not help them see their own flaws and improve. These sort of remarks can be found in any sort of artwork, OC or not. Why should this be a special case?
-Uzi_Man-: Democracy isn't such a big deal in this case: just let the community as a whole do the tagging and it's all done. The only thing that needs to be re-defined is the questionability standards, so that they're more concrete and specific rather than merely "using our discretion", because that leaves it very open to interpretation. It would be helpful to establish a basis to which we can refer to when tagging pictures, unless you think that people enjoy arguing about these things, which so far has been shown to be quite the contrary.
The rules aren't "unfair", they simply could be done better in order to avoid unnecessary arguments. I'm just making the suggestion, and if people want to argue endlessly about the questionability of all the pics that are about to come in the future, then why bother, but it would be pretty fucking stupid to not prefer a one-time immediate solution that will help us put an end to these discussions.
-Uzi_Man-: @bluedraggy: No, that's oligarchy. What if a mod marks something as questionable but nobody else thinks it is? It wouldn't be fair, so it's better to leave the tagging to the whole community.
The problem is that the concept of "questionable" is ambiguous as hell because everyone is going to have different understandings of it and how it applies to different pics. That's why there should be a better, clearer, more concrete definition / rule about questionability so that there's no room for ambiguity or "muh opinions".
I know that this entire topic is so utterly unimportant that it literally hurts the soul to argue about it, but if we leave it unsolved, it's going to bring up even more arguments in the long run, and nobody wants that.
-Uzi_Man-: @Tahrey: You wrote a lot of vague / pointless text, so I'm only going to highlight your main points.
There's nothing at all in that picture to suggest that, whether or not it's happening is entirely down to your own imagination.
They are very close to each other. It's impossible for their bodies to not have physical contact other than their arms. Just look at the size of Katia's butt and how close the red cat's front is to her back. Unless the pic has bad proportions, the only logical conclusion is that his crotch is, indeed, rubbing on her butt.
Your photo example doesn't work, because the woman is completely clothed. If she was in a bikini (which in addition doesn't cover much more than her private parts), then it would be questionable.
Bullshit. His left forearm crooks around her left collar and his wrist is at her right upper arm.
There is still physical contact. It wouldn't be a big deal if Katia had clothes that cover up her chest, but she doesn't.
holy shit, dude, really? Can you tell me what date is on your calendar at the moment? Does the year start with a 1? What's the third number in it?
What are you even trying to say? That what's sexual or not is only determined by culture, which can change with the pass of time? Because you'd be wrong if you thought that: even if culture affects our sexual views / preferences, our human biology also makes us naturally sexually attracted to some things more than others. A woman with a big chest, thighs and overall body thickness are naturally attractive to most men. Taking this in consideration, you can establish an "objective" way to measure how sexual a picture is. If you want to doubt this, you're just being delusional.
Hence the use of "normal". Is there emphasis on the size of Rajirra's chest, thighs and belly (or overall thickness) on this pic? No, they're average. Is there emphasis on Katia's on the other pic? Yup.
My own contrasting opinion here is that they were trying for artistic and sexy.
I never said that they couldn't be both, I only stated that the artist of this pic wanted to focus on giving this pic an artistic vibe rather than a sexual one, unlike the other pic. It can have both, but one can be more present than the other.
Right, so, long hair being flicked backwards, stereotypical glamour pose including a strangely ecstatic expression, bare breasts, most of a flat crotch, pronounced hips, hourglass figure, petite shoulder shape, femme facial features (at least as much as you can point to in an anthropomorphic feline), nicely toned stomach... slender fingers and well defined collar, even. But no, as she's of average weight, isn't wearing underwear (or indeed anything at all), and hasn't had her gender-specific fat deposition exaggerated in a prehistoric-fertility-doll caricature fashion, we're not showing off or focussing any attention on her feminine features.
There is no emphasis in any of those things, though. They're all average-sized. What there is emphasis on is in trying to show Rajirra's feminity as a whole, but there's no particular focus on any of her body parts, unlike the other pic.
If someone's got their clothes off and you can see the parts that would normally be concealed, then it gets a NSFW warning
By that logic, this picture should have a questionable tag as well, as it shows Katia naked. http://www.prequeladventure.com/fanartbooru/post/view/999#search=tutorial. Do you see anyone who cares about it?
Also, sure, you may be able to get away with certain nude images without the tag, and enough non-nude ones that are highly suggestive, explicit, or otherwise rude and unsuitable for mixed company may still get tagged, but that doesn't work here, because each one is far enough inside or outside of the boundary line for there not to be any uncertainty over it. Hence why the mods tagged them that way.
To tag both pictures as "questionable" would be exaggerated. This one because there is nothing inherently "rude" on it: it's something you see in a french commercial, and even then it's pretty soft compared to what they often produce. The other pic because the sexual innuendos are just details. Hence why I'm proposing to leave them both untagged.
Man, you really need to calm down and stop using derogatory sarcasm. It doesn't contribute anything to the discussion, nor it adds strength to your arguments. The only reason I can think of why you're taking such an aggressive stance is that you have weight problems and my remarks make you feel attacked.
In the other pic, the red cat is positioned very close to Katia's back (his crotch is probably rubbing on her butt), his arm has a physical contact with her boobs, and Katia is showing a lot of her body attributes, on which there's emphasis on her thighs, chest and belly, parts that can be considered of sexual nature.
While this picture shows Rajirra with normal body attributes, no emphasis on her "sexual" parts, and even if she's nude, the artist clearly wanted to focus on giving the picture an artistic look rather than a sexy one.
So let's summarize our points. According to you, this pic is questionable because it shows nudity, while the other isn't because there's nothing inherently sexual on it.
And my point is that this picture is not questionable because regardless of nudity, there's no visible emphasis on Rajirra's feminine features, but rather a more artistic one, while in the other picture, even if Katia is clothed, the pic itself has more sexual connotations than this one.
So let's be honest here. If nudity equals sexual (this pic), but sexual does not equal nudity (the other pic), then both pictures should have a questionable tag. It doesn't have to do anything with "anti-chubby agendas". Do you agree?
-Uzi_Man-: @Tahrey: Nudity doesn't necessarily determines if a pic is more sexual than other pic. Take a look at Katia's boobs and thighs, she's really showing off quite a lot, especially due to her fatness (no offense to fat people). While this pic just shows Rajirra sideways with no curves or anything: there is no emphasis on her body‘s details
So yep, let's be fair. If you still think this should have a questionable tag, so should the other pic.
-Uzi_Man-: @Tahrey: to be honest, I find this pic to be far more deserving of a questionable tag, and it doesn't have one: http://www.prequeladventure.com/fanartbooru/post/view/2886
-Uzi_Man-: @Adroma: With all due respect, I thnk that you're exaggerating a bit. It's fine to feel attached to a cartoon character, but really: everything you can think of can be someone's fetish, and there's no escape from that, so it's best to not give it much importance. Besides, Katia is naked on this picture so there is more invitation for, uh, a few sexual remarks.
But anyway, like @AMKitsune: said, I'll try to choose my words more carefully. I come from 4chan anyway, so I'm... sort of used to read (and make) these type of comments.
Dramatic Descriptions
I wouldn't blame you, though.
+90 if it's both good and lewd
+10 points if its lewd
The rules aren't "unfair", they simply could be done better in order to avoid unnecessary arguments. I'm just making the suggestion, and if people want to argue endlessly about the questionability of all the pics that are about to come in the future, then why bother, but it would be pretty fucking stupid to not prefer a one-time immediate solution that will help us put an end to these discussions.
The problem is that the concept of "questionable" is ambiguous as hell because everyone is going to have different understandings of it and how it applies to different pics. That's why there should be a better, clearer, more concrete definition / rule about questionability so that there's no room for ambiguity or "muh opinions".
I know that this entire topic is so utterly unimportant that it literally hurts the soul to argue about it, but if we leave it unsolved, it's going to bring up even more arguments in the long run, and nobody wants that.
They are very close to each other. It's impossible for their bodies to not have physical contact other than their arms. Just look at the size of Katia's butt and how close the red cat's front is to her back. Unless the pic has bad proportions, the only logical conclusion is that his crotch is, indeed, rubbing on her butt.
Your photo example doesn't work, because the woman is completely clothed. If she was in a bikini (which in addition doesn't cover much more than her private parts), then it would be questionable.
There is still physical contact. It wouldn't be a big deal if Katia had clothes that cover up her chest, but she doesn't.
What are you even trying to say? That what's sexual or not is only determined by culture, which can change with the pass of time? Because you'd be wrong if you thought that: even if culture affects our sexual views / preferences, our human biology also makes us naturally sexually attracted to some things more than others. A woman with a big chest, thighs and overall body thickness are naturally attractive to most men. Taking this in consideration, you can establish an "objective" way to measure how sexual a picture is. If you want to doubt this, you're just being delusional.
Hence the use of "normal". Is there emphasis on the size of Rajirra's chest, thighs and belly (or overall thickness) on this pic? No, they're average. Is there emphasis on Katia's on the other pic? Yup.
I never said that they couldn't be both, I only stated that the artist of this pic wanted to focus on giving this pic an artistic vibe rather than a sexual one, unlike the other pic. It can have both, but one can be more present than the other.
There is no emphasis in any of those things, though. They're all average-sized. What there is emphasis on is in trying to show Rajirra's feminity as a whole, but there's no particular focus on any of her body parts, unlike the other pic.
By that logic, this picture should have a questionable tag as well, as it shows Katia naked. http://www.prequeladventure.com/fanartbooru/post/view/999#search=tutorial. Do you see anyone who cares about it?
To tag both pictures as "questionable" would be exaggerated. This one because there is nothing inherently "rude" on it: it's something you see in a french commercial, and even then it's pretty soft compared to what they often produce. The other pic because the sexual innuendos are just details. Hence why I'm proposing to leave them both untagged.
Man, you really need to calm down and stop using derogatory sarcasm. It doesn't contribute anything to the discussion, nor it adds strength to your arguments. The only reason I can think of why you're taking such an aggressive stance is that you have weight problems and my remarks make you feel attacked.
In the other pic, the red cat is positioned very close to Katia's back (his crotch is probably rubbing on her butt), his arm has a physical contact with her boobs, and Katia is showing a lot of her body attributes, on which there's emphasis on her thighs, chest and belly, parts that can be considered of sexual nature.
While this picture shows Rajirra with normal body attributes, no emphasis on her "sexual" parts, and even if she's nude, the artist clearly wanted to focus on giving the picture an artistic look rather than a sexy one.
So let's summarize our points. According to you, this pic is questionable because it shows nudity, while the other isn't because there's nothing inherently sexual on it.
And my point is that this picture is not questionable because regardless of nudity, there's no visible emphasis on Rajirra's feminine features, but rather a more artistic one, while in the other picture, even if Katia is clothed, the pic itself has more sexual connotations than this one.
So let's be honest here. If nudity equals sexual (this pic), but sexual does not equal nudity (the other pic), then both pictures should have a questionable tag. It doesn't have to do anything with "anti-chubby agendas". Do you agree?
So yep, let's be fair. If you still think this should have a questionable tag, so should the other pic.
fight me
Me no cyka blyat
Me like russian language, very interesting language
@BadReligion: I've always wondered how to post images in the comments.
But anyway, like @AMKitsune: said, I'll try to choose my words more carefully. I come from 4chan anyway, so I'm... sort of used to read (and make) these type of comments.