There are two spurs for this query - first, a post I saw where someone commented that e621 is not a porn site - that's just how some people use it. The other was https://e621.net/post/show/267021, which is locked to a safe rating, and therefore shows up at https://e926.net/post/show/267021.

I feel like I'm missing something important here - not about that specific picture, but generally how "safe" is categorized on this site. I love the tagging - and I want to make sure I'm doing it right.

https://e621.net/wiki/show?title=e621%3atagging_checklist states:

Safe for anything that can be viewed in public without much uproar: no genitals, no sexual overtones or poses, no realistic violence, or any questionable activity.

Leaving aside genitals (obviously explicit) and violence, I would certainly not classify the above image or about 20% of http://e926.net/post/index/1/order:favcount as safe on the grounds of sexual overtones or poses.

I'm not trying to be prudish or pendantic here - certainly there are a number of examples of "rating:s nude -feral" (that last so it's not shooting fish in a barrel) which are no more than might be seen in a children targeted movie or TV show - even taking into account a harsher judgement for being a still instead of an element of a bigger work. Rather - it appears that overall as a community we aren't using G or PG as our rating for S.

Simply put - if my manager walked in and saw me looking at puppies and kittens, I would be scolded for wasting time. If they saw me looking at 20% of the top favcount images on e926, I would be more likely subject to disciplinary action (use of company computers to look at erotic images). Some of our "safe" is NSFW, and I'm unclear if that is deliberate or not.

m8r-fofhjq said:

...Simply put - if my manager walked in and saw me looking at puppies and kittens, I would be scolded for wasting time. If they saw me looking at 20% of the top favcount images on e926, I would be more likely subject to disciplinary action (use of company computers to look at erotic images). Some of our "safe" is NSFW, and I'm unclear if that is deliberate or not.

Simple solution: Maybe just do the job you are being paid for instead of wasting company time browsing eNine at work.

But what do I know, I don't even have a job and can't seem to get one either, so maybe browsing eNine or just generally wasting time is actually considered normal business practice now-a-days. That would explain why I can't get a job now, since I always was too good of a worker to waste company time like that when I had a job.

I guess I never really was good at being normal, huh?

Kristal_Candeo said:
Simple solution: Maybe just do the job you are being paid for instead of wasting company time browsing eNine at work.

But what do I know, I don't even have a job and can't seem to get one either, so maybe browsing eNine or just generally wasting time is actually considered normal business practice now-a-days. That would explain why I can't get a job now, since I always was too good of a worker to waste company time like that when I had a job.

I guess I never really was good at being normal, huh?

I apologize. I did not clearly mark that as a hypothetical situation. I do not and never have browsed either site at work, nor puppies and kittens. I am far too busy with work at work to have the time for such pursuits. My intention was to illustrate the difference between the "safe" rating here and what might be actually safe to put up at work.

A less hypothetical situation. Simple script scrapes a sofurry search term and posts the results as a desktop wallpaper, changing every hour or so. I've done that on my phone before, and a co-worker did something similar pulling from deviantart on his work PC, though he may have created a list of a few thousand images first. Such scraping could create awkward situations at work with many marked safe images here, while I rarely worried about handing my phone over with the background switcher on a 10 minute cycle.

m8r-fofhjq said:
I apologize. I did not clearly mark that as a hypothetical situation. I do not and never have browsed either site at work, nor puppies and kittens. I am far too busy with work at work to have the time for such pursuits. My intention was to illustrate the difference between the "safe" rating here and what might be actually safe to put up at work.

A less hypothetical situation. Simple script scrapes a sofurry search term and posts the results as a desktop wallpaper, changing every hour or so. I've done that on my phone before, and a co-worker did something similar pulling from deviantart on his work PC, though he may have created a list of a few thousand images first. Such scraping could create awkward situations at work with many marked safe images here, while I rarely worried about handing my phone over with the background switcher on a 10 minute cycle.

Don't sweat it, kiddo. It was only a joke anyway. A fairly elaborate one, but a joke nonetheless.

I would like to also thank you for not taking it too negatively and responding appropriately. It is not often I experience human opinion of such a reserved and calm nature after such a joke, especially on the internet. So thanks for that.

Now, in all seriousness, I do see how this could be a problem. So if such a script does exist and is being implimented in the workplace, perhaps the code could be modified to show results based more on tags, rather than on rating. Of course newer or less popular posts may not be properly tagged either, so further modification may allow the results to only include posts from a certain date and earlier and only by certain artists.

As far as what the rule itself pertains to, I can't accurately tell you because I'm too stupid. If I were to ever become an admin, I feel that I would perhaps be more beneficial to both sites to either change the rules, or better articulate them as to clear up any current confusion and prevent future confusions, such as this one, from ever becoming a problem in the first place.

But according to my own personal interactions with the admins here, I guess they feel that such an idea is not really worth the time to implement no matter how much someone feels it may better the site(s), it's users, or it's staff.

But hey, since my ideas and I are so stupid I guess it makes perfect sense why I'm not an admin and probably never will be, huh?

Safe:

• fully clothed
• featureless genital areas
• light blood/gore

Questionable:

• breasts with nipples
• bulges/cameltoes
• most vore images
• quite a lot of blood/gore
• most creepy/nightmare fuel images

Explicit:

• visible genitals (inc. anus)
• bodily liquids
• bulges with very clear shapes
• sexual acts
• brutal gore

This is far from every type of category, but this is the general idea.
This all varies heavily, too. Clearly explicit vore posts get tagged as safe, seriously disturbing nightmare fuel posts get tagged as safe too, while some posts are getting tagged as explicit while they really are safe, etc. It's a tricky system of what falls within the borderlines. I do believe the most important is to at least distinguish safe from questionable.

HotUnderTheCollar said:

General Guidelines

Safe:

• fully clothed
• featureless genital areas
• light blood/gore

Questionable:

• breasts
• bulges/cameltoes
• vore
• quite a lot of blood/gore
• most creepy images/nightmare fuel

Explicit:

• visible genitals (inc. anus)
• bodily liquids
• bulges with very clear shapes
• sexual acts
• brutal gore

This is far from every type of category, but...

...I do believe the most important is to at least distinguish safe from questionable.

Moral of the story: Human subjectivity can be a real {dog} sometimes.

Kristal_Candeo said:
Moral of the story: Human subjectivity can be a bitch sometimes.

These things are purely from what I recall how ratings go. And indeed, setting ratings, as well as tagging, is not (and never will be) perfect.

Also, I see what you did there :p

Kristal_Candeo said:
Simple solution: Maybe just do the job you are being paid for instead of wasting company time browsing eNine at work.

Or use a phone :V

parasprite said:
Or use a phone :V

It's what I do... The phone is easily turned off so that a code has to be entered to see what was being looked at. It's also a small enough screen I can quickly tap on the tab number to switch tabs.

There seem to have been no standards during the first years of this site. I've often found older posts that were rated safe, but had clear explicit content. There's probably still a lot of those out there, but it's hard to search for them when all the explicit tags are missing (e.g. clearly visible dicks and sex, rated safe, can't be easily found because it is missing the sex, nude and penis tags).

Been fixing those for a couple of years now. Most users don't seem to know how poorly tagged some of older content is.

'course, in some cases we don't have good guidelines for rating posts. For instance, there's a lot of posts tagged as gore that are rated safe (gore rating:safe), but I'm unsure what to do with those. Some don't seem quite gory enough for the gore tag, but there's too many borderline cases. Same goes for [[vore]] [[rating:safe]], most are implied as vore from imminent_vore... which is sometimes used like a joke tag.

Thus spake HotUnderTheCollar:

Thank you - I'll keep these in mind when tagging in the future. For future reference I'll assume safe ranges from roughly G to Web-14, including many which would not be SFW. Questionable then would be roughly MA, and Explicit would be... explicit :). I had been somewhat hoping to create a desktop switcher sourcing from e926, but it looks like I would not be wise to do so :).