savageorange said:
It isn't definitionally a porn site. But porn seems to predominate, so saying it is definitely not a porn site is also wrong.

the stats page doesn't exist currently, but you can check this by running a set of 3 queries within a constant time period which is chosen to avoid capping out the result limit, eg:

• date:2019-01-01..2019-06-31 rating:safe -- 134 pages (22.5%)
• date:2019-01-01..2019-06-31 rating:questionable -- 112 pages (18.8%)
• date:2019-01-01..2019-06-31 rating:explicit -- 349 pages (58.6%)

(@ page size=250)

Theoretically you could then weight these by the total # of favorites or score value, but I don't really trust either of those to have a consistent meaning.

Thats like saying earth is porn because every generation in your family tree fucked at least once

Give them my condolences for the wasted investment

kamimatsu said:
Thats like saying earth is porn because every generation in your family tree fucked at least once

No it's not. I don't agree that e621 is porn. I was saying that saying that it is not porn is ALSO, by any reasonable definition, wrong. That's pretty much what I already said, so good job not reading my blip, I guess.

This isn't that subtle a distinction: both the definitely affirmative and the definitely negative statement are quite clearly wrong. Perfectly normal in a fuzzy domain like linguistics.