Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 96
  1. #11
    On changing the actual structure: I think going to 3 ratings is the way to go, 4 makes for way more iffy judgment calls.

    On the wording of the guidelines: "NOTE: Any depictions of bodily waste must be rated as Explicit." continues to be very silly. Under this any submission that shows someone sweating technically has to be rated Explicit. Straight up stating what is not allowed would be better, I think.
    Nudity's "Equivalent to Mature"s in the Explicit rating should also be changed to what it actually is, because I assume "where context is appropriately educational, documentary or artistic" no longer applies to Explicit.

  2. #12
    Looking through some of the other responses, I feel like it's worth addressing the question of what should be handled by the ratings system, and what should be handled by the tagging system.

    I feel like the rating system should be used to establish what content can legally be shown to what parties, namely, adult content versus safe-for-minors content. This is a big deal, and should be handled with appropriate recategorization by the mods and punishment for repeat offenses.

    The other issue is what people want to see while they're browsing. I feel like this is the place for squeaky-clean vs pg 13 stuff, consensual versus nonconsensual, artistic nudity versus porn, fetish categories, etc. Whatever system handles this can be given more complexity, because the mods have no legal obligation to police it, and they can let miscategorizations or boundary cases slide. Putting something in the wrong category doesn’t even need to be a rules violation.

    Currently, the ratings system is trying to capture both legal obligations and preferred browsing experience, which means the mods have to crack down on certain preferred-browsing issues with the same level of severity as they handle the legal-obligations violations. I feel like a solution here might be to strip the Ratings Guidelines down to the bare legal obligations, and handle the user experience stuff more casually through whatever tagging/ categorization system you use.

  3. #13
    GENERAL: No naked breasts, genitals, sex, or violence

    MATURE: Non-sexual nudity, no arousal, and mild violence

    ADULT: Erotic imagery, sexual activity or arousal, blood, serious injury, strong violence, or death

    bam

  4. #14
    Regular IntricateVision's Avatar

    Weasyl
    IntricateVision
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by atsidas View Post
    GENERAL: No naked breasts, genitals, sex, or violence

    MATURE: Non-sexual nudity, no arousal, and mild violence

    ADULT: Erotic imagery, sexual activity or arousal, blood, serious injury, strong violence, or death

    bam

    Not unopposed to this. ^

  5. #15
    You know, my biggest issue on the ratings system is that anything other than G requires an account, period. No options for click-through make this more than a little hostile for sharing artwork with potential new users. I get "I'm not allowed to view this content" back, and a very distinct impression that's left enough of a bad taste in their mouth that they will NOT be signing up for Weasyl.

    Since we're looking for feedback on the ratings, I'll focus on that. The Moderate rating's enforcement is the primary complaint I hear from artists when I ask if they're planning on posting to their Weasyl. I'd say it (combined with a lack of clickthrough age/"I want to see this" check) a major stumbling block that this site set up for itself, and gained a lot of ire from artists who would like to use the site to showcase their work but find themselves limited (by, at one time, so much as cleavage) to just the (relatively small) user base that Weasyl has. It might even take almost all of an artist's work and turn it from a public gallery to a private showing, which isn't very useful to the artist.

    Regarding the Mature/Explicit divide, I'm on the fence of it. I can understand the desire to cordon off the sexual situations, maybe switch it around to mature being more of a "nudity, but not erections" thing instead of being identical except for actual intercourse. Or just combine the two so the ratings are "18+" and "General".

    I think you're on the right track making things simpler, and I'll agree with earlier posters that removing the Moderate rating is a good direction. It might even cut down on the work I go through trying to convince artists to post commissions here. Hopefully.

  6.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #16
    Sentimental Machine Fiz's Avatar

    Weasyl
    Fiz
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    1,476
    Just replying to a few things that stood out to me:



    Quote Originally Posted by LawyerDog View Post

    On the wording of the guidelines: "NOTE: Any depictions of bodily waste must be rated as Explicit." continues to be very silly. Under this any submission that shows someone sweating technically has to be rated Explicit. Straight up stating what is not allowed would be better, I think.
    We're actually rewording this because you're right, technically it sounds a bit silly. I vaguely remember a quote from a while back that said something like "Wait, would we get rated Explicit for exfoliating??"

    Quote Originally Posted by IntricateVision View Post
    And I don't personally see the point in Erections and Spread Butts n' vulvas being considered 18+ Nonsexual and two figures engaging in intercourse as 18+ Sexual
    Actually, all of those examples do go into Explicit 18+ Sexual rating.

    "Explicit: May contain explicit or dramatized depictions of sexual arousal, fluids, situations, content, or acts."

    Sexual arousal for the erections, and spreading your private parts would count as a sexual situation or act. So yep, all of those go into Explicit.




    As for the suggestion of merging Mature 18+ (non sexual) and Explicit 18+ (sexual) ratings together, I'll give a small history lesson, since not everyone is gonna know this stuff:

    Early on in the sites life we originally had 3 ratings, which was General, Moderate 13+ and Explicit 18+. There was no Mature category yet, so this meant artistic nudes and outright pornography shared the same rating category. People were rightfully unhappy about that, so we split the categories and it became Mature 18+ (non sexual) for artistic nudes and Explicit 18+ (sexual) for pornography.

    This is why all the "rating modifiers" (Language, Drugs, Nudity, Violence) between those two categories are exactly the same, beyond the Sexual Situations modifier. Now, it doesn't have to stay that way. I'm thinking rather than merging two ratings that were originally split for a good reason that it might be a better idea to make those modfiers (Drugs, Violence, etc.) become more different between the two categories, so they stand out as their own a bit more, though I'm not sure if that would help or just make things more confusing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hendikins View Post

    Personal opinion: I wouldn't be unhappy to see the back of the Moderate rating either. There's logic to splitting artistic nudes and violence from sexually explicit material, but it's significantly harder to make a case for the Moderate rating.
    Personally not gonna disagree either, Moderate seems to be the one rating where it just makes things confusing.

  7. #17
    This might be controversial but here goes...

    I believe that there should be three categories, one allows guests to view, the second doesn't, and the third requires the user to actively change a setting. So far, so good. Now here's the controversial part...

    ANYONE can change this setting. It should not check your birthday to do this.

    "But, Mr. Yoshimaster, won't that mean that kids can view my explicit artwork?"

    Yup. Frankly, if you are all interested, it is no longer required to shelter teens from explicit artwork, and I can provide a primary source if necessary. Honestly, any decent parent will protect their kids somewhat, or at the very least educate them, preferrably the latter, since just sheltering your kids gets them nowhere, and then they won't know what to do once they move on.

    Now let me tell you a little story...

    I'm 16, and I like vore. A very unfortunate combination, and my fondness to anal vore makes things over the edge. I'm rather mature for my age, I notice people misbehaving in class, I'm not afraid to do stuff about it. The teachers also semi-openly agree to this. What do I get for being more mature than average, being more intelligent than average? Nothing.

    It may be equal, but it's not fair. It's also not very scientific. The concept of 18+ assumes there's something significant about age 18. There isn't. I'm not denying the trend that people who are older tend to be more mature though. Take this analogy. Say you own a bakery. You notice that less people buy bread when it's more expensive. Because of this, you set the price to $5 a loaf. Why not $4, or $6? There's nothing to suggest you couldn't. So, back to reality. Why choose 18 when you could very well choose 16 or 20? There's nothing scientific suggesting either of those options, nor the original. Plus, with no law in the way like there used to be, one could freely do such a thing.

    Of course, if there must be a filter, set it so something that has evidence to back it up. For example, you could research when the brain fully develops the ability to make educated decisions regarding sexual content. Not too bad, a few Google searches could do the trick.

    TL;DR Lawmakers and parents are lazy.

  8.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #18
    feline fine Noxid's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Noxid
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    CANADURR
    Posts
    475
    my personal feelings on the matter, and this is representative only of myself, are that the 13+ rating is "nice in theory but doesn't serve much purpose". In that, I set my content rating to 13+ most of the time so I see whether its is G or 13 anyway.
    There may be people who restrict their rating to General specifically because they aren't comfortable with the softcore stuff so I can imagine the distinction being useful to them but at the same time its definition is ambiguous enough, not necessarily at the written level (granted I read the rating guidelines for fun) but absolutely at a cultural level because where people draw the line varies a lot depending on what they personally are used to. So for someone with a conservative upbringing it may make perfect sense but others may see it as overly restricting and feel it unfair to have their work re-rated.

    I am guessing a lot of the conflict over this rating comes from the bit at the end part & so one thought I had was what if you relaxed the enforcement of G/13 but then, from the view of someone who considers the 13+ rating "valuable" (going back to what I discussed at the top) it suddenly becomes a meaningless distinction if anyone can put something in either category willy-nilly. So I'm not sure if that's the best solution either.

    so basically what I spent all that saying is that I have no idea what we should do, whoops

    Quote Originally Posted by Samael View Post
    How about instead of someone externally deciding for the artist that something constitutes as mature 13+ or 18+ when its a niche or fetish thing, the artist is allowed to just straight up check a box to allow them to restrict it showing up instead of the inference that its too saucy? Like this means that if someone draws overly realistic feet, that's not a case of it being too sexual but its clearly a kink thing potentially, they can set it as tame and check the niche box.

    I principally draw fat cartoons. They are not everyone's cup of tea and I am absolutely okay checking a box that restricts their accessibility to purely those who want to see them - in fact, I'd rather do that as I never wish to make people feel uncomfortable. I was a bit wounded to come off of FA and find a couple dozen of my images were retagged without any attempt at discussion. I don't do overtly sexual work and whilst I was fine with some of it being tagged, nipples were deemed offensive whether male or female and whilst I was okay with some of the more suggestive (but not actually sexual or revealing) expansion being tagged, some of it felt incredibly arbitrary.
    I dont wanna derail discussion too much bcuz this is supposed to be more about the rating system than the tagging system, but to me this sounds like a case that is actually better covered by the existing tagging and blacklist system? If the image with realistic feet is tagged "feet" or some such then it's not a problem at all for people who dislike it to avoid it by adding it to their blacklist while at the same time making it easier for those who do to search for it.

  9. #19
    Junior LNight's Avatar
    Weasyl
    LNight
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Denmark
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    7
    This is a thing which is much more simple than you might think, for as explained above:

    GENERAL: No naked breasts, genitals, sex, or violence

    MATURE: Non-sexual nudity, no arousal, and mild violence

    ADULT: Erotic imagery, sexual activity or arousal, blood, serious injury, strong violence, or death

    It really is that simple.
    No more, no less.
    That is all the categories pictures should find themselves confined to, appropriate to their content.

    We can also make it more simple:

    General: Covers both General and Mature content, since today the standards of what is available is completely different than even ten years ago.

    Adult: Stays the same.

    Remove the middle man.

    What you should take a look at is making tagging better and add some categories so people have the bare minimums correctly done, instead of just half-assing it so pictures someone might not wanna see pops up due to a lack of tags.
    Last edited by LNight; 05-19-2016 at 08:39 AM.

  10. #20
    Regular Flygon's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Flygon
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    65
    I do not have many thoughts on this. I mostly just espouse them due to a friend pushing me to. You know who you are!

    I am for consolidating the ratings into GENERAL, MATURE, and ADULT as defined above.

    Yes, there will still be ambiguities, and frankly, asinine and insane problems with people sexualizing things that really aren't seen as sexualized in most contexts.

    But, as I have explained elsewhere, this is a furry and American culture problem. There is no solution to this that'll please a majority of users. We are a self-fearing fanbase, and North America is notoriously conservative on sexually related issues. Including otherwise non-sexualized imagery turning sexualized.

    It is due to these cultural problems that accurate fanart of, say, the film Pom Poko would be rated as adult material on almost any furry site, despite agencies such as the OFLC rating it safe for children to watch (ie. the PG rating).

    tl;dr - The ratings system, by and large, isn't the problem. It's the furry culture, much of the site's audience, and fears with the two combined that are the problem.

    In addition, there still needs to be anti-asshole mechanisms anyway, due to a few rotten eggs ruining the salad.

    P.S. Kirikou and the Sorceress is rated G here. I hope you like drawn pre-colonial African child penis!

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •