Is this:
post #529936
really safe? I personally think the entire exposed-butt-on-naked-crotch-thing has certain implications, but don’t want to change anything before making sure with somebody else.

Seems questionable to me. The art style is the sort you'd usually see with safe artwork, which is why I'd suspect it is listed as safe. But the positioning - and particularly the open butt-flap on the outfit - would seem to me to make this certainly at least questionable.

Clawdragons said:
Seems questionable to me. The art style is the sort you'd usually see with safe artwork, which is why I'd suspect it is listed as safe. But the positioning - and particularly the open butt-flap on the outfit - would seem to me to make this certainly at least questionable.

Yeah thought so to, I’ll change it.

Edit: saw you already did that

Clawdragons said:
the open butt-flap

a breath of fresh ass

Now to be helpful... You can report posts (left side, Options > Report) to hail an admin for a tag ruling. I suppose "Tagging Abuse" would be the most relevant reason. Past reports, for reference. Use sparingly. You can also ask in blips, or the appropriate of the aggregate tag discussion threads (1 2 3 ). Finally, you can DM (a user's profile page, upper left, "Send Message") an active Janitor (list ) or Admin (list ).

Clawdragons said:
The art style is the sort you'd usually see with safe artwork.

That’s pretty much the artists artstyle, and he/she draws a lot of explicit. But yeah, I get the point.

abadbird said:
a breath of fresh ass

Now to be helpful... [being helpful]

Thanks, I’m sure I’ll have use of that:)

Sorry for hijacking this thread, but this is about the same problem.
post #362058
Are we sure we are not looking at hemipenes here?

Calimero000 said:
Sorry for hijacking this thread, but this is about the same problem.
post #362058
Are we sure we are not looking at hemipenes here?

What, you don’t put small bananas at your crotch? Nah but I think you are right, at least that’s how I would interpret it. I’d say explicit.

Calimero000 said:
Sorry for hijacking this thread, but this is about the same problem.
post #362058
Are we sure we are not looking at hemipenes here?

On the other hand, it matches the color of the various rings, etc. So I'm thinking 'jewelry'.

Outside info is irrelevant to tagging, but I'm curious to see what the artist intended for that piece. Let's see... found it, no tags but rated general on FA - and here's explicit pic of the same character with a penis:
http://www.furaffinity.net/full/14405718/[/spoiler].

MyNameIsOver20charac said:
What, you don’t put small bananas at your crotch? Nah but I think you are right, at least that’s how I would interpret it. I’d say explicit.

Whereas, I disagree. I know we're not supsoed to look at other pictures on the matter, but the artist knows how to draw a proper penis.

On the other hand, it does kidna look like it?

On the other hand.. what the hell kind of pose is that? he's like.. huggign the pillow to his leg so he can prop it up on it? There's also some kidn of waist-strap and thigh strap, but only on one side.

fffff, I dont' think those are hemipenes, but ffffs.

The artist uploaded originally and tagged it safe. On the other hand, it sure looks like it COULD be peniseseses...

SnowWolf said:
Whereas, I disagree. I know we're not supsoed to look at other pictures on the matter, but the artist knows how to draw a proper penis.

On the other hand, it does kidna look like it?

On the other hand.. what the hell kind of pose is that? he's like.. huggign the pillow to his leg so he can prop it up on it? There's also some kidn of waist-strap and thigh strap, but only on one side.

fffff, I dont' think those are hemipenes, but ffffs.

The artist uploaded originally and tagged it safe. On the other hand, it sure looks like it COULD be peniseseses...

Which pics did you look at, because I looked at the other uploads here and his art style in this is completley different to the other uploads, plus if it is hemipenes then it’s his first sexually explicit pic on this site.

Then again I guess if the artist uploaded it as safe is intentions with it are clear.

MyNameIsOver20charac said:
Which pics did you look at, because I looked at the other uploads here and his art style in this is completley different to the other uploads, plus if it is hemipenes then it’s his first sexually explicit pic on this site.

Then again I guess if the artist uploaded it as safe is intentions with it are clear.

*his intentions

MyNameIsOver20charac said:
Which pics did you look at, because I looked at the other uploads here and his art style in this is completley different to the other uploads, plus if it is hemipenes then it’s his first sexually explicit pic on this site.

Then again I guess if the artist uploaded it as safe is intentions with it are clear.

Well.. I saw post #366787 which was uploaded on aug 19 2013, and the one you posted was aug 08 2013... and the post on the artist FA has it as a 'general' post, but I can't find anything else of that character at a quick look. Anyway.

The important thing, honestly, is that none of that matters. Tag what ya see.

It DOES look like it could be a penis. or two. But it's also gold and only somewhat penis shaped.

I think I'd probably leave it safe... or maybe questionable.. but.. I dunno, man.

SnowWolf said:
Whereas, I disagree. I know we're not supsoed to look at other pictures on the matter, but the artist knows how to draw a proper penis.

On the other hand, it does kidna look like it?

On the other hand.. what the hell kind of pose is that? he's like.. huggign the pillow to his leg so he can prop it up on it? There's also some kidn of waist-strap and thigh strap, but only on one side.

fffff, I dont' think those are hemipenes, but ffffs.

The artist uploaded originally and tagged it safe. On the other hand, it sure looks like it COULD be peniseseses...

Seems to be one thigh strap and half a waist strap, each on different sides... wat (not a tag suggestion)

Genjar said:
On the other hand, it matches the color of the various rings, etc. So I'm thinking 'jewelry'.

Outside info is irrelevant to tagging, but I'm curious to see what the artist intended for that piece. Let's see... found it, no tags but rated general on FA - and here's explicit pic of the same character with a penis:
http://www.furaffinity.net/full/14405718/[/spoiler].

I know I love wearing my crotch horns around. It's very fashionable and relaxing. Very comfy.

MyNameIsOver20charac said:

Seems to be one thigh strap and half a waist strap, each on different sides... wat (not a tag suggestion)

Wat's pretty appropriate XD

Ok, so we can't get a clear decision whether it should be tagged safe or explicit. (I'd tag it explicit, btw.)
In other words, we are questioning the safety of this post.
I vote for questionable.

Regarding the pose: It could be some sort of strap around his right thigh which happens to have the same color as the background. Really confusing, though.

Calimero000 said:
Ok, so we can't get a clear decision whether it should be tagged safe or explicit. (I'd tag it explicit, btw.)
In other words, we are questioning the safety of this post.
I vote for questionable.

Regarding the pose: It could be some sort of strap around his right thigh which happens to have the same color as the background. Really confusing, though.

That is not how questionable is used. There is nothing in the Ratings Help that suggests that if you are questioning a rating, it should be tagged as questionable.

And, since e6 keeps discarding my edited text, I'll just shorthand this here: I think that this post should be safe since we have more evidence supporting that it could be jewelry, particularly the color, and evidence to suggest that it is not a hemepenes, specifically the species does not have hemepenes unless drawn otherwise. If this character was a scalie, this argument would be in reverse, because scalies can have hemepenes and the location supports it.

Siral_Exan said:
That is not how questionable is used. There is nothing in the Ratings Help that suggests that if you are questioning a rating, it should be tagged as questionable.

I know. Which is why I brought it up. What is currently called "questionable" is actually more like "mildly explicit". There is no rating for when it's questionable what the rating should be.
This has been on my mind for a while now but I was too lazy to bring it up because of the lack of unequivocal examples... until now.

how about instead of arguing about this, someone asks from admins which rating suits best

Calimero000 said:
I know. Which is why I brought it up. What is currently called "questionable" is actually more like "mildly explicit". There is no rating for when it's questionable what the rating should be.
This has been on my mind for a while now but I was too lazy to bring it up because of the lack of unequivocal examples... until now.

Y'know, that exact same term, "mildly explicit", was used when someone tried tagging a pussy as "safe". The term "explicit" seems to differ between you two and on this site. There are tags that grant at least questionable yet wouldn't be explicit without further imagery.

It is entirely a rating, as said there are tags that would exclusively make a post questionable. It may be the borderline between explicit and safe, but there is still a difference between grey and black & white.

Commander_Eggplant said:
how about instead of arguing about this, someone asks from admins which rating suits best

Because we're learning.

Siral_Exan said:
...

I might be missing your point. A pussy is unquestionably explicit (which is also explained on that page you have linked). So tagging it safe is clearly wrong.
Exposed nipples are unquestionably questionable. This is what I'm trying to draw attention to. The rating questionable is a misnomer because there is nothing questionable about what things should be rated questionable. It's clearly defined.
This wouldn't be a problem if there weren't posts where it is questionable which rating the post should get.

Calimero000 said:
Because we're learning.

I might be missing your point. A pussy is unquestionably explicit (which is also explained on that page you have linked). So tagging it safe is clearly wrong.
Exposed nipples are unquestionably questionable. This is what I'm trying to draw attention to. The rating questionable is a misnomer because there is nothing questionable about what things should be rated questionable. It's clearly defined.
This wouldn't be a problem if there weren't posts where it is questionable which rating the post should get.

I am willing to discard my whole previous argument just to ask: why are you arguing about this in the first place? If you do not understand why it is named "questionable", it can be explained why, but this is not the place. Bringing up the "problem" with the name of the rating, when a legitimate rating question is occurring, is a bit misrepresenting.

There was a time when the rating was used very literally, but that usage was bad for the site. It was also used as the lazy man's rating, and that was still not good. Now, we have a clear definition or at least guidance, and when you suggested the rating your suggestion was shot down. But now you are suggesting that the rating's name is bad... doesn't that seem mislocated? That your problem or argument belongs somewhere else?

Guys, relax, in my picture with Jade there is no penises and I'm not crazy when I put the run rate.

Calimero000 said:
Exposed nipples are unquestionably questionable.

No, they're not.

Idk, the positioning doesn't even look right to me for dicks. It'd be such an awkward positioning and the general anatomy doesn't look nearly wonky enough for it. It looks like dicks in the way any long-ish pointy shape looks like a dick.

Calimero000 said:
Regarding the pose: It could be some sort of strap around his right thigh which happens to have the same color as the background. Really confusing, though.

Well either it's a background coloured thigh strap or his fot is attached to his 2-joint arm(?!?) ...I vote for the former.

About the actual post (@Genjar, @SnowWolf, @MyNameIsOver20charac):
I asked the artist (hi, @SilvergriN-w; I didn't know you also have an account here).
The yellow thing is a shell which covers his genitals. And the blue thing is a ribbon/bandage around his right leg. I found a picture which shows this more clearly: https://www.furaffinity.net/view/18750359/ The shell is held by the tentacle in the lower left corner.

BlueDingo said:
No, they're not.

My bad. I didn't specify that I meant exposed nipples on breasts, as stated on the "Help: Ratings" page:

Questionable (Mature)
[...]

• exposed female breasts with nipples, including obvious depiction of female nipples pulling through clothing

(And please let's not get into a debate about why nipples without breasts are OK.)
Your search mostly contains male characters: `nipples rating:s` -> 4098 posts. Let's exclude those: `nipples rating:s -male` -> 325 posts. Still contains some noise so let's search specifically for what the rules say: `nipples rating:s breasts` -> 278 posts. Most of these seem to be mistagged and/or misrated. Like post #1210940, where the tags are simply copied from the parent post. Lots of those should (and with that I mean "as far as I can tell") not be tagged nipples but nipple_bulge instead, because there are no nipples actually visible, like post #594051. Which would still make them questionable, according to the rules.
So in conclusion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZc_VCGR6yA

regsmutt said:
Idk, the positioning doesn't even look right to me for dicks. It'd be such an awkward positioning and the general anatomy doesn't look nearly wonky enough for it. It looks like dicks in the way any long-ish pointy shape looks like a dick.

I had considered that. tapering_penis is a thing, though: `tapering_penis hemipenes -snake`. And it wouldn't be the first case of wonky anatomy.

Siral_Exan said:
I am willing to discard my whole previous argument just to ask: why are you arguing about this in the first place?

I regularly find myself thinking: "Why is this rated questionable? There is nothing questionable about this!" (I know, the answer is "It's rated questionable because the rating in-between safe and explicit is called questionable" but that just begs the question: Why is that rating called questionable?) So yes, one of the reasons why I brought it up was that its name does not reflect what it represents: a less extreme (for lack of a better word) but clearly defined version of explicit. I brought it up in reference to that post to demonstrate that there are posts where the rating it should get is questionable (not questionable but questionable, as in "not obvious"). Granted, it does not happen often, but it's a thing. I'm not saying an "I have no idea what this post should be rated" rating (or maybe simply making the rating nullable) is perfect, but is makes more sense to me than having to choose one of the existing ones. Maybe it doesn't happen often enough to warrant that change. I don't know. Which is why I bring it up.

Calimero000 said:
I had considered that. tapering_penis is a thing, though: `tapering_penis hemipenes -snake`. And it wouldn't be the first case of wonky anatomy.

It wouldn't be the weirdest anatomy, but generally weird anatomy to the degree that it would be if it was penises will be consistent throughout the image. The rest of the image might not have the best anatomy, but it'd be a huge drop in quality in specifically the penises. That's why I say it wouldn't make sense.

I regularly find myself thinking: "Why is this rated questionable? There is nothing questionable about this!" (I know, the answer is "It's rated questionable because the rating in-between safe and explicit is called questionable" but that just begs the question: Why is that rating called questionable?) So yes, one of the reasons why I brought it up was that its name does not reflect what it represents: a less extreme (for lack of a better word) but clearly defined version of explicit. I brought it up in reference to that post to demonstrate that there are posts where the rating it should get is questionable (not questionable but questionable, as in "not obvious"). Granted, it does not happen often, but it's a thing. I'm not saying an "I have no idea what this post should be rated" rating (or maybe simply making the rating nullable) is perfect, but is makes more sense to me than having to choose one of the existing ones. Maybe it doesn't happen often enough to warrant that change. I don't know. Which is why I bring it up.

"Questionable" as used on this site is consistent with a specific use of the word in casual speech. If you say "That scene was pretty questionable for a kid's movie" people will understand that what you're saying is "That scene had content that wasn't explicit, but was certainly more suggestive than what's generally agreed to be safe" which is extremely wordy and likely to get you smacked for sounding like a dork.

What's specifically in question in this usage of the word is your personal context. If you're in a context where you need to keep things sfw, how much wiggle-room do you have for unsubtle sex jokes and implied, but not explicitly shown sex acts? That's what the question is, not "is this explicit or not?"