About the New Forum Rules

[Susie]

Keep certain sexual things away, some older members don't get to do everything they want and have to keep that to themselves/other sites

 

This is really what we should be doing, keep certain things away that are more in depth and gratuitous (porn, extreme fetish discussion, sexual poses, nudity) but leave sheet that isnt going to harm anyone alone (male chests, bikinis, seductive posing, flirting). We dont need to let everyone do whatever they want, but we dont need to be so broad about the subject, broken record I know, but really thats all that everybody is saying and it would help lead people posting harmless material not getting punished.

[Aix]

Do we really need to post panty shots and striptease?

[Bellringer Angel]

I'm not sure if these new rules regarding sexual contents are even necessary. The old rules are completely fine imo.

 

Do we really need to post panty shots and striptease?

Yes.

[Susie]

Do we really need to post panty shots and striptease?

No and thats not what were asking for. Panty shots would be too offensive for sure and striptease to me would depend on the context (pornographic definitely, but a crudely drawn comedy scene probably not). Were just asking for inoffensive material to be more of a suggestion. Bringing back the example of my own sig there is nothing offensive about it, any male can rip off their shirt and run down the streets if they wanna and the posing is light to the point of where im quite sure that anyone whos 13 has already seen similar being referenced in a kids show or on a billboard or cologne commercial. There might not be a need for it but wheres the logic and sense in questioning things that werent ever a big enough problem. I can get wanting to get rid of crazy fetish talk and anime girl panties but the rules right now are broad enough to question material that easily could fit under the PG-13 umbrella that YCM has established. Also theres the point of how the broad questioning of the rules allows multiple interpretations from different mods so the whole thing will be a clusterfuck of what actually is appropriate and what isnt.

[宇佐見 蓮子@C94]

i would normally just say "anything inappropriate is anything you wouldnt want to be caught reading or seeing in public" but seeing ycm's demographic i doubt that's a competent enough litmus test.

 

like, personally, if i wanna be caught looking at explicit or fetishized content, i'd rather it be on an actual pr0n site cuz then the responsibility of getting caught opening pr0n on public falls on me entirely. but if, like, explicit pictures and fetishized content is allowed to be displayed publicly on this site, such as in avis or sigs and stuff, it's really just not comfortable to be seeing that kinda stuff where they dont belong. it's more about just keeping the site classy, at least for me.

 

that said, i'm a-ok with explicit material if they are spoilered. saves bandwith too.

[Azuriena]

This is really what we should be doing, keep certain things away that are more in depth and gratuitous (porn, extreme fetish discussion, sexual poses, nudity) but leave s*** that isnt going to harm anyone alone (male chests, bikinis, seductive posing, flirting). We dont need to let everyone do whatever they want, but we dont need to be so broad about the subject, broken record I know, but really thats all that everybody is saying and it would help lead people posting harmless material not getting punished.

If the rules were amended to allow "seductive posing," I wouldn't mind your sig being allowed. Right now I'd say it falls under provocative/suggestive posing. Without question.

 

In the case that seductive posing is allowed, would Moogy's siggy still be allowed if it depicted a female rather than a male?

 

I honestly don't understand what is so much more offending about boobies as opposed to a bare male chest, but like Fáfnir said, we could talk about that all day. I still don't agree with it at all.

 

Mr Sakura gave me the example earlier that an image of a shirtless surfer dude in board shorts should have no problem being posted on YCM. What about a shirtless surfer dudette in board shorts then? I don't find it that hard to believe that it would be allowed (I hope it is), but certainly not if the same deal was applied to Moogy's siggy? If so, then isn't Moog's sig just too lewd to begin with imo? I don't mind how the rules turn out regarding images and seductive positions as long as it's FAIR.

 

And Mr Sakura, about your response to point 3, I was more asking "how big is too big," and that you should be more specific about that in the rules. And as for point 6, would a post like this be offending under the new rules?

 

As for the rest of the points, thank you for taking the time to answer them. Generally, I'm just mentioning what should already be in the rules.

[~~~~]

Keep it PG-16 and you're fine.

 

If you have any doubts about a picture or thread content breaking the PG-13 threshold, please PM a moderator beforehand.

 

Can this inconsistency be cleared up?

 

7. We'll need to talk about it amongst each other (referring to mod discussions), but male nipples should be fine.

 

...

 

10. Images of males can be bare-chested / wear tank tops but otherwise should be wearing shorts (speedos are fine). Female ones are slightly more difficult, but bikini girls are generally fine. At a minimum, the genital area needs to be covered. 

 

Why be sexist? Please, if we're going to have rules, can they at least be applied equally? #FreeTheNipple

[Jord200]

And I was thinking of reviving my old Yandere set too.....

 

 

Wait, so

 

Also "abnormally large breasts" well okay what size makes it abnormally large? Like what if its not lewd like I mean some characters in general are drawn with huge breast sizes from certain shows and such? Does this mean that I cant put said person as my avi?

 

It seems like the mods are trying to go for getting rid of PG-13 sexual material with how the rules are being layed out in this broad of a manner, even though were a site that allows material to go up to PG-13.

 

 

Yeah, I mean if it is like the breasts are the size of a freaking fridge or something, I get that, but some breasts are just big. Though I assume it means that they can't be along the lines of where the are just outright massive.

 

Plus, since when has this place ever been PG 13?

[Trebuchet MS]

The inconsistency in the rule will be cleared up once all the amendments are finalized.

 

As for female vs male vs androgynous nipples... (sigh) It's some bizarre double standard that we can't shake off.

[Jord200]

 

----

We're not being North Korea and censoring everything inappropriate for small children / punishing you harder, but we need to keep this site age-appropriate and amiable for all members (some of us do not want to read explicit statuses/posts about sex). 

 

Basically, would you be fine viewing this site publicly?

 

 

I can agree with that.

 

EDIT - this was meant to be part of the other post I made, sooooo yeah......

 

 

 

So would I have to remove the Neptunia pic from my sig?

[Susie]

The inconsistency in the rule will be cleared up once all the amendments are finalized.

 

As for female vs male vs androgynous nipples... (sigh) It's some bizarre double standard that we can't shake off.

 

Glad to hear about the inconsistency being taken care of.

 

And on the nipple thing I hope this means that the double standard is being considered much better now since there really is nothing harmful about a male/androgynous nipple regardless of what pose (which is why I fail to see the logic behind getting rid of any seductive pose regardless of how acceptable it would be to the mainstream society) because I have offended nobody with my sig and the fact that material which is completely acceptable by the majority is being under question/possibly punishworthy and treated under the same standard as a female groping her own breasts seems ridiculous if you ask me.

[Aerion Brightflame]

So on the matters of violence - Does this mean discussion of violent topics that could be considered above PG-13 aren't allowed? Discussions on sexuality? Discussions of movies beyond PG-13? What about games, or TV shows? Are we not allowed to talk about GoT anymore because it has Nudity and graphic violence? How about discussions of anime that violate these rules? Would the rules still apply in debates, a section that (apparently) can't have any spilling outwards towards other sections of the site and hence would be self contained. 

 

Because if you are arbitrarily constraining content for the reasons of it being too mature, you technically have to constrain everything or else the rules are pointless. And the amount of content that you have to constrain to meet this aim makes the idea sound f***ing absurd.

 

If you have an issue with individual topics or avi's being too lewd for the site, that's fine, lock those topics or discuss it with those members.I.E. allow the mods to exercise discretion. Don't try to make this site something it isn't and hasn't been for years under the pretence of potential legal action. Because unless you purge everything from the entire history of the site, the possibility for legal action will still exist. 

[Jord200]

Yeah, and know that I think about it, what about the anime and manga section? What, are we only going to be able to talk about stuff like Card Captor Sakura and Nichijou?

 

EDIT- And I suppose TECHNICALLY the same logic could apply to the video game section. Sort of....In a way..... I mean I know we aren't exactly know for having topics on stuff like say, I don't know...Huniepop or something.

[Azuriena]

And on the nipple thing I hope this means that the double standard is being considered much better now since there really is nothing harmful about a male/androgynous nipple regardless of what pose (which is why I fail to see the logic behind getting rid of any seductive pose regardless of how acceptable it would be to the mainstream society) because I have offended nobody with my sig and the fact that material which is completely acceptable by the majority is being under question/possibly punishworthy and treated under the same standard as a female groping her own breasts seems ridiculous if you ask me.

 

It doesn't even have to be treated under the same standard as a female groping her own breasts. Just one in the same state of undress and position as your siggy already pushes it beyond borderline afaic.

 

There is nothing harmful about female nipples either, as long as it is not being "emphasised," or like you make the case of, the breasts being groped by the female. And if a male/androgynous nipple attached to a male is not offensive, then neither should one for a female. Otherwise, I can't accept the rules treating the male example as being not, or less, offensive.

 

On Mr Gadjiltron calling this a bizarre double standard that they can't shake off, and after reading the post below this one, I understand if it's not possible to show female nipples even if they're not offending in any way (regardless of them being attached to a body in a seductive pose). And it's not like I want to deny male nipples freedom just because female ones can't have it. That's not what I mean by fair. It's still dumb.

[Althemia]

I'm going to chime in here since I am the person who originally brought it up but always ignored regarding the topic anyway and communication with our members is important.

 

It originally started because of members posting images from known porn sites with very heavy implications of sex actually occuring. This occured a couple of times and the people involved obviously won't be mentioned. The kind of content that they were posting would have been the kind to get us in trouble should children be caught viewing it. And before any of you say "But muh Yugioh is an adults game!", that doesn't necessarily mean everyone on this site IS that age. I know several people on this site who are way below the age of consent and we need to keep this place safe to a degree where we can't have some kind of action taken against us for negligence because as far as the forum is concerned we're accepting of all age groups. This means that we have to pander to the lowest age demographic regardless of what happens.

 

Of course, the result of this is that we have to implement new rules into place because it was gradually growing to become a common theme to allow sexual promiscuity on the forum. It had to be stopped eventually, however I will say that I dislike how these rules were put in place with seemingly very little thought and discussion first. It seems that nobody even really took into consideration my suggestion of just making the entire forum PG13 (ToS etc) so that we didn't have to worry about an acceptance of all ages thing like we're suffering from now and are suffering backlash over.

 

As for discussions on violence and the such, they should be fine provided no actual images are posted directly to the site.

[Jord200]

I see. Well that for sure changes a thing or two and explains it. I'm with Koko on this.

[Slinky]

 

 

I have no problem with sexual images or content up to a certain point, but the other staff members will have their own definitions of what is acceptable. What one of us deems appropriate may not be to another. The same goes for the rule on swearing. 

 

 

This is the problem. There shouldn't be variation of what one deems acceptable or not. It should be blanket across the board. If one deems it acceptable, and one doesn't, which one do you listen to? This leads to inconsistent moderation, and mixed signals. It needs to be fixed.

[Susie]

I'm going to chime in here since I am the person who originally brought it up but always ignored regarding the topic anyway and communication with our members is important.

 

It originally started because of members posting images from known porn sites with very heavy implications of sex actually occuring. This occured a couple of times and the people involved obviously won't be mentioned. The kind of content that they were posting would have been the kind to get us in trouble should children be caught viewing it. And before any of you say "But muh Yugioh is an adults game!", that doesn't necessarily mean everyone on this site IS that age. I know several people on this site who are way below the age of consent and we need to keep this place safe to a degree where we can't have some kind of action taken against us for negligence because as far as the forum is concerned we're accepting of all age groups. This means that we have to pander to the lowest age demographic regardless of what happens.

 

Of course, the result of this is that we have to implement new rules into place because it was gradually growing to become a common theme to allow sexual promiscuity on the forum. It had to be stopped eventually, however I will say that I dislike how these rules were put in place with seemingly very little thought and discussion first. It seems that nobody even really took into consideration my suggestion of just making the entire forum PG13 (ToS etc) so that we didn't have to worry about an acceptance of all ages thing like we're suffering from now and are suffering backlash over.

 

As for discussions on violence and the such, they should be fine provided no actual images are posted directly to the site.

Im fine with the idea of things that are far inappropriate and imply sexual things being gone, I just feel that when its more minor there should be at least some level of lenience with it considering how not everyone is a youngster. PG-13 is a good thing to go by considering how the material that it would allow would include things like my own sig, bikinis (which were fine in the first place but still), and just about anything that doesnt glorify genitalia, or is being sexual instead of seductive would be okay. It would also allow humor that is a teeny bit more mature to be acceptable so long as youre not going crazy everywhere with it.

 

 

It doesn't even have to be treated under the same standard as a female groping her own breasts. Just one in the same state of undress and position as your siggy already pushes it beyond borderline afaic.

 

There is nothing harmful about female nipples either, as long as it is not being "emphasised," or like you make the case of, the breasts being groped by the female. And if a male/androgynous nipple attached to a male is not offensive, then neither should one for a female. Otherwise, I can't accept the rules treating the male example as being not, or less, offensive.

 

On Mr Gadjiltron calling this a bizarre double standard that they can't shake off, and after reading the post below this one, I understand if it's not possible to show female nipples even if they're not offending in any way. And it's not like I want to deny male nipples freedom just because female ones can't have it. That's not what I mean by fair. It's still dumb.

 

Unfortunately it is what it is, female nipples are far more sexualized and less acceptant being shown in the public eye. Male nipples should be allowed regardless of that considering how unfair it is to put down material that is genuinely perceived as okay to witness, even if its not put down as harshly as the other may be.

[Azuriena]

Unfortunately it is what it is, female nipples are far more sexualized and less acceptant being shown in the public eye. Male nipples should be allowed regardless of that considering how unfair it is to put down material that is genuinely perceived as okay to witness, even if its not put down as harshly as the other may be.

 

Well yeah, although I said that I couldn't accept the rules working on this double standard, I suppose I'd have to.

[Bellringer Angel]

I'm going to chime in here since I am the person who originally brought it up but always ignored regarding the topic anyway and communication with our members is important.It originally started because of members posting images from known porn sites with very heavy implications of sex actually occuring. This occured a couple of times and the people involved obviously won't be mentioned. The kind of content that they were posting would have been the kind to get us in trouble should children be caught viewing it. And before any of you say "But muh Yugioh is an adults game!", that doesn't necessarily mean everyone on this site IS that age. I know several people on this site who are way below the age of consent and we need to keep this place safe to a degree where we can't have some kind of action taken against us for negligence because as far as the forum is concerned we're accepting of all age groups. This means that we have to pander to the lowest age demographic regardless of what happens.Of course, the result of this is that we have to implement new rules into place because it was gradually growing to become a common theme to allow sexual promiscuity on the forum. It had to be stopped eventually, however I will say that I dislike how these rules were put in place with seemingly very little thought and discussion first. It seems that nobody even really took into consideration my suggestion of just making the entire forum PG13 (ToS etc) so that we didn't have to worry about an acceptance of all ages thing like we're suffering from now and are suffering backlash over.As for discussions on violence and the such, they should be fine provided no actual images are posted directly to the site.

Why not enforce something like "To post things that are beyond PG-13, but NOT to the point of nudity/gore, you MUST use

tags to hide them." or something similar to that?

[~~~~]

I'm going to chime in here since I am the person who originally brought it up but always ignored regarding the topic anyway and communication with our members is important.

 

It originally started because of members posting images from known porn sites with very heavy implications of sex actually occuring. This occured a couple of times and the people involved obviously won't be mentioned. The kind of content that they were posting would have been the kind to get us in trouble should children be caught viewing it. And before any of you say "But muh Yugioh is an adults game!", that doesn't necessarily mean everyone on this site IS that age. I know several people on this site who are way below the age of consent and we need to keep this place safe to a degree where we can't have some kind of action taken against us for negligence because as far as the forum is concerned we're accepting of all age groups. This means that we have to pander to the lowest age demographic regardless of what happens.

 

Of course, the result of this is that we have to implement new rules into place because it was gradually growing to become a common theme to allow sexual promiscuity on the forum. It had to be stopped eventually, however I will say that I dislike how these rules were put in place with seemingly very little thought and discussion first. It seems that nobody even really took into consideration my suggestion of just making the entire forum PG13 (ToS etc) so that we didn't have to worry about an acceptance of all ages thing like we're suffering from now and are suffering backlash over.

 

As for discussions on violence and the such, they should be fine provided no actual images are posted directly to the site.

Thank you. I think I understand now. However, isn't there the problem that a 13 year old could just go on Google and search for porn anyway? Why doesn't Google get in trouble for that? Maybe I still don't understand actually... 

 

Just to clarify, I'm not saying this site should have porn, I'm just sorting things out in my head because I'm a bit confused.

[Althemia]

However, isn't there the problem that a 13 year old could just go on Google and search for porn anyway? Why doesn't Google get in trouble for that?

They have to go out of their way to search for it in that instance. Also they have age filtering on (which is NOT the equivalent to tags, tags are such an easy thing to just gloss over) so it's harder for them to actually find what they're trying to look for. It's mainly the searching part, since they have to go out of their way to search for it instead in that instance whereas we're handing it to them on a silver platter with the way we're going currently.

[Susie]

Thank you. I think I understand now. However, isn't there the problem that a 13 year old could just go on Google and search for porn anyway? Why doesn't Google get in trouble for that? Maybe I still don't understand actually... 

 

Just to clarify, I'm not saying this site should have porn, I'm just sorting things out in my head because I'm a bit confused.

 

Well in that case Google is a search site, its not their fault that some kid wanted to search for porn, however with us it is our fault if a 13 year old wanted to make cards and gets loaded with a bunch of T&A, were a community and its the job of the mods to keep the sheet together.

 

Least thats how I see it.

[Goose]

Has anyone who actual understands the law in this area looked into this?

[Susie]

Has anyone who actual understands the law in this area looked into this?

 

No, but we really dont need to look into the law in order to set our own rules for what level of lewdness we want and what age demographic we have (Which seems to be 13-25 I guess).