CG + Ratings Update And New Ferrets!

[Term]

[Nightpaws]

Thank you for the continued clarification of what's where and when! It also makes our responsibilities as Ferrets much clearer too.

[catwithpen]

Weasyl's rules are all very well-written and easy to understand

One question: I know some people like looking at adult stuff, but can't stand violence, while others are fine with violence but don't want to see anything sexual. Is it possible to break up the Explicit tag into 'Explicit - sexual content' and 'Explicit - violence', for filtering purposes?

[Tiger]

Weasyl's rules are all very well-written and easy to understand

One question: I know some people like looking at adult stuff, but can't stand violence, while others are fine with violence but don't want to see anything sexual. Is it possible to break up the Explicit tag into 'Explicit - sexual content' and 'Explicit - violence', for filtering purposes?

I think one thing that could help with that is tagging images with those phrases- many sexually explicit pictures have the tag "sex" (and users and especially Ferrets go through adult submissions and tag them as properly as possible), so violent pictures should have a "violent" or "Gore" tag (I've found that some violent images do have the "gore" tag already). Not a perfect solution but proper tagging makes for successful filters/searches.

[catwithpen]

I think one thing that could help with that is tagging images with those phrases- many sexually explicit pictures have the tag "sex" (and users and especially Ferrets go through adult submissions and tag them as properly as possible), so violent pictures could have a "violent" or "Gore" tag (I've found that some violent images do have the "gore" tag already). Not a perfect solution but proper tagging makes for successful filters/searches.

Yes, that would be very helpful.

[Wolfblade]

There's a few things that might be errors, or possible points for potential tweaking.

Community Guidelines

I. A. 2. - Original Content Collections: If the original creator does not have an account on Weasyl , you may post the work to your submissions gallery.

Some commission artists might have an account, but not wish to post every piece they do, so perhaps "If the original creator does not have an account on Weasyl or if they do not wish to post the work to their gallery, you may post the work to your submissions gallery" would be more appropriate? I doubt your intent is to deny permission in such an instance.

I. B. 1. *Adult (18+) Content categorized as Adult contains imagery, themes or material that is not suitable for minors, and may contain sexually arousing content or extreme depiction of topics or actions.

Missing word in the posted text.

I. C. 2. Minors, etc - Nudity for the purposes of this article entails both of the following: Genitals and/or female nipples are viewable. Not depicted using non-detailed nudity or cartoon nudity.

Double-negatives hinder clarity of meaning. Perhaps instead something to the effect of: "Nudity for the purposes of this article entails depiction of genitals and/or female nipples, whether explicitly visible or clearly defined despite being "covered." This does not include "Cartoon" nudity of unclothed characters with no depicted genitals and/or nipples."

II. A. 2. Using pre-existing models or images for the purpose of a comic is allowed unless a copyright holder submits a complaint;

The word "images" should maybe be replaced with "sprites" or something more specific to the intent of this exception. As it is, this rule states that a user may make a comic out of pre-existing images and submit it without permission of the creator of those images. The natural assumption for the intent of this rule would be to allow "sprite" comics, or comics using pre-existing rendered models, but hopefully not to allow the common trolling/harassment practice of simply rearranging panels and changing dialogue in word bubbles of someone else's existing comic - which would technically be allowed by the current wording.

II. C. 4. As with 2D art, using pre-existing models or images for the purpose of a comic is allowed as long as the copyright holder does not submit a complaint.

Same issue; a copyright holder of a specific image or work shouldn't have to submit a complaint. These rules presumably meant to allow a specific limited range of acceptable use are a potential loophole around the basic requirement of 'by you/for you.' A user wanting to post an image they normally would not be allowed to post could add word bubbles, call it a comic, and the rules as written could be argued as allowing it. I'm not sure why the exception is being made: There are plentiful pre-existing 3d rendered models that are free-to-use and so would fall under the 'copyright on them has been waived' allowance. If a modeler has not waived their copyright to make their model free-to-use, what is the reasoning for allowing their copyright to be ignored so long as they don't notice/complain?

Content Ratings

Explicit - Violence may contain intense violence. May also include pervasive imagery or situations that are may be considered disturbing or repulsive to the average viewer.

Grammar flub. Maybe intended as "that are, or may be, considered" or "that may be considered."

Hope this is useful, and not a bother.

[Fiz]

Nice catches Wolfblade. We'll get those grammar issues fixed asap and discuss the rest of your points. Thank you!

[birdXcore]

Very nice work. <:

edit:

Question, though:

Sexual Situations May contain mild implications of sexual activity or themes. This includes implied sexual acts, references, behavior, or the presence of mild sexual situations or discussion. May not feature sex paraphernalia such as sex toys or gear.

What does gear define? Bondage use? Cat-of-nine-tails? Leather masks or chastity restraints?

[Term]

Question, though:



What does gear define? Bondage use? Cat-of-nine-tails? Leather masks or chastity restraints?

"Sex gear" is used in that sentence as a more specific term for "sex paraphernalia," which literally means "miscellaneous articles for sexual activities."

Therefore, it is unnecessary to list specifically every single item which would fall under that umbrella.

Likewise, some items such as a flog or bull whip are often repurposed for sexual activities. For that reason we can't claim "whips" as an offending item because for example that would bring into jeopardy a fan art image of Indiana Jones.

We staff feel that our users should be cognizant enough to distinguish what items are sex toys and what is sex gear based upon the context in which they are being represented.

As always, this kind of issue is also subject to mod discretion when determining if an item portrayed in an image qualifies as sex paraphernalia.

[catwithpen]

If a modeler has not waived their copyright to make their model free-to-use, what is the reasoning for allowing their copyright to be ignored so long as they don't notice/complain?

I totally missed that when I was reading it. A very good point. Copyright should be respected even if no one complains.