Call me dumb if this has been talked about before, but I'm curious about a certain rule with the Questionable posts.
The example I'll use here is post #709001

Questionable posts can include naked breasts, as long as sex organs are not present in the image. So anything, including the post I have here, are considered questionable since they show nothing more.
However, if the post in question contains a fetish, should it be marked as explicit?
Take a look at my example post. Morgana has obviously expanded breasts, has more weight in general, and is giving off a (to me) "moaning" expression. When you take a look at her original art ( http://cdn.instructables.com/FPH/UMJQ/HFPTJGJ4/FPHUMJQHFPTJGJ4.LARGE.jpg <-- it's just a google link, I promise.), yeah, obviously she has large breasts, but not THAT large, and her weight is normal (compared to other League of Legends Characters)
So obviously the image was drawn with fetishes in mind. Is that enough for the post to be written as "explicit" or no?
Just curious. I'm not here to argue my point, just a thought that came across my mind.

Nah, that's still questionable. Explicit is meant for sex acts, genitalia (excluding sex toys, which are often questionable), and hard gore. Even very large breasts are still questionable.

If there was another character sucking on the breasts it might fall under sex act, but it kind of depends.

You can only tag a post as Explicit if
*genitalia is exposed(balls, penis, vagina),
*sexual acts are involved
*hard gore/vore

Now comes tagging the Questionable posts,
*exposed breasts(female) and/or bulge
*suggestive poses/situations(borderline as some posts may be tagged as Safe)

Safe is everything else non-sexual related.

post #708308
explicit? Or is better stay questionable

If we were to start tagging images by looking at what we thought we saw we'd be in chaos. For example in the image you are using as an example I construe that she is opening her mouth in surprise at the fact that her clothing has just been shredded, not necessarily that she is moaning in any sexual context. Also breast expansion is a fetish and fetishes aren't necessarily explicit...a person with a foot fetish or food fetish isn't necessarily doing anything sexually explicit.

Really don't know why we insist that this is an english speaking site whenever it comes to tagging, but then switch over to non-english standards for what's not safe to look at openly in public.

Beanjam said:
Really don't know why we insist that this is an english speaking site whenever it comes to tagging, but then switch over to non-english standards for what's not safe to look at openly in public.

... what?

huh, well this is rather convenient as i actually brought this up with parasprite earlier.

post #707628

same exact issue. well, maybe not the exact same.

and for comparison, we have

post #550414

take a guess at the ONLY difference that makes sally's pic safe while twilight's is considered questionable. (note: it's really quite a stupid reason imo)

Kida said:
... what?

Tits are pretty explicit. As are tits with shitting nipples. According to the help page, both are questionable. It's only once those shitting nipples turn into shitting dicknipples that it becomes explicit.

Hopefully the latter case is just an example of the help page being unhelpful. But honestly I can't be sure.

Edit: Now that I think about it, dildos don't warrant an explicit rating, and the only dick-like thing about shitting dicknipples is their shape, so shitting dicknipples might not be explicit.

treos said:
take a guess at the ONLY difference that makes sally's pic safe while twilight's is considered questionable. (note: it's really quite a stupid reason imo)

Yeah, no, that's probably just misrated.
The pose is close to a pinup, and prominent breasts and partial nudity means that it fits better under questionable.

chubbygay550 said:
post #708308
explicit? Or is better stay questionable

Doesn't seem like there's any sexual action (yet?), just two characters bathing. Therefore questionable.

Beanjam said:
Hopefully the latter case is just an example of the help page being unhelpful. But honestly I can't be sure.

Some help pages are several years out of date. Partly because they've been replaced by the wiki, and the help pages can only be updated by the admins. For instance, the rating help doesn't mention that hardcore gore and certain fetishes (such as scat) are explicit.

Beanjam said:
Tits are pretty explicit. As are tits with shitting nipples. According to the help page, both are questionable. It's only once those shitting nipples turn into shitting dicknipples that it becomes explicit.

Hopefully the latter case is just an example of the help page being unhelpful. But honestly I can't be sure.

Edit: Now that I think about it, dildos don't warrant an explicit rating, and the only dick-like thing about shitting dicknipples is their shape, so shitting dicknipples might not be explicit.

uh, i don't know what you're going on about with shitting nipples (not sure if i even want to know but then again, i've wandered across...stuff, in the where_is_your_god_now tag that was pretty...unusual, before.) lol but yeah, that's basically the part i was referring to.

nipples = questionable as in twilight's case, lack of them = safe as is typically the case for characters like sally.

treos said:
uh, i don't know what you're going on about with shitting nipples (not sure if i even want to know but then again, i've wandered across...stuff, in the where_is_your_god_now tag that was pretty...unusual, before.) lol but yeah, that's basically the part i was referring to.

nipples = questionable as in twilight's case, lack of them = safe as is typically the case for characters like sally.

All I'm saying is the shitting nipples should be explicit. That's not questionable. But the way current policy is written, they aren't.

Beanjam said:
All I'm saying is the shitting nipples should be explicit. That's not questionable. But the way current policy is written, they aren't.

Shitting nipples, as well as dick nipples are explicit, that page is outdated.

Main point!

If not sure, tag Questionable.

treos said:
huh, well this is rather convenient as i actually brought this up with parasprite earlier.

post #707628

same exact issue. well, maybe not the exact same.

and for comparison, we have

post #550414

take a guess at the ONLY difference that makes sally's pic safe while twilight's is considered questionable. (note: it's really quite a stupid reason imo)

I am not sure what the issue is there, to me it seems the initial post had been flagged incorrectly. I mean it started as Explicit was changed back to questionable then to explicit and back to questionable. The second image is quite old and was not really tagged very well to start and probably just slipped through the cracks. I mean you really can't take the tagging personally...sometimes images get miss-tagged and fall through the cracks, its sad but correcting it when it is brought up will help everyone in the long run. Getting bent out of shape about it doesn't change the fact that its going to happen.