Result

I’m not removing it. Not because the result of the poll is like that, but because I’m tired of being called a child abuser by people. Even if they are right or wrong. My apologies to those who think otherwise.


As you know, we’ve had a lot of drama about age in last days. And I’m so sorry to open a new one. I hope I don’t use the wrong word this time :)

You can see current rules below, which suggested by @throwawayforratings@lemmynsfw.com in here.

  • 1: No sexual depictions of real people under the age of 18. Period.
  • 2: No sexual artwork of fictional characters who are canonically under the age of 18. (eg, Sailor Moon, Rei Ayanami, Lisa Simpson, etc.) This includes “aged up” versions of such characters.
  • 3: No sexual artwork of fictional characters who unambiguously appear under the age of 18, regardless of canonical age. This includes, but is not limited to, “3,000 year old dragon loli” type characters. The basis for this will be behavior and physical appearance. Admin/mod’s decision is final.
  • 4: Sexual artwork of fictional characters with no canonical age and ambiguously youthful appearance is allowed, at admin/mod’s discretion.

The problem is rule 2. In the current hentai communities, if we look at canonical age, it’s around 30% underage. However, looking at the images, not all of these contents appear as underage. Check out some of the reports:

These characters are all canonically underage, but only last one (and maybe 3th) looks underage. This makes moderation difficult. Anyway, I wanted to ask everyone because I’m very indecisive about this. IDK how Reddit handled these.

Do you think we should remove the 2nd rule and examine it under the 3rd rule or should the rule remain?

https://strawpoll.com/ajnEOA2PBZW

Also we’re looking for an admin

We are looking for someone who is especially knowledgeable about hentai, who can take care of this business regardless of the outcome of the decision. I sent an offer to @securitas@lemmynsfw.com regarding this. Looking for another admin too.

  • usernotfound@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    Honestly, I’d keep canonical age out of it. For example, I don’t know who the person in photo #2 is, but looks old enough to me. If it turns out that it’s an “aged up version” of someone that’s canonically 12… So what? In the picture they’re not 12, and that’s what counts.

    So in my opinion 1, 3 and 5 look too young, while 2 and 4 are fine imho.

    • usernotfound@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If it were up to me, I’d drop Rule 2, but increase Rule 1 so that they look like at least clearly in their twenties.

      Correction: Drop all the rules (who cares about the canonical age of a fictional character), and replace it with this one: only allow images of character that clearly look like they’re over 18. In case of doubt, delete.

  • Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    A rule based on ‘canonical age’ is nonsensical. They’re fictional characters.

    Not to mention rule 2 and 3 when put together are incoherent. Either ‘canonical age’ is relevant and rule 3 should go, or it is irrelevant and rule 2 needs to go.

    Since the appearance of a character is more important than whatever number an author decided for age, then rule 2 makes sense to remove.

    • usernotfound@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      What if the only way to know that they’re minors (as in: they don’t look like it) is to know who the character is? And what if you don’t know who the character is?

      (Assuming people are operating in good faith here)

        • usernotfound@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          So that would effectively mean that if a moderator doesn’t recognize a character that’s clearly drawn to be of legal age, they should just delete it.

          I fail to see the logic in that.

          • pm_me_upshorts@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I am not sure where you are failing to see the logic in erring on the side of “not having child porn” and frankly that’s kinda disturbing

            • usernotfound@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              FWIW, I don’t care about these kinds of drawings either, I have no stake in this.

              I guess my issue is that if a drawn, fictional character looks like an adult, I don’t classify it as child porn. If you think it is, that’s absolutely fine, I just want to rule out we’re misunderstanding each other.

            • DirtySanchezC137@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              By your logic reddit is hosting a lot of “childporn” right now. Any problem with that? Have you reported them to the authorities? Why not?

              • pm_me_upshorts@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                I don’t know what’s on hentai subs because I never subscribed to any. And there was no option like the “local” here.

              • Snowflake2901@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes. I do in fact have a problem with that. I’m positive reddit has received reports but they have much more money to put towards a legal team than any instance owner here on the threadiverse could have

  • SophisticatedButEvilCat@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Just voted. But I wanna say with this rule translated from cartoons to real people, a user posting couldn’t even post a picture of Sarah-Michelle Geller in the role of Buffy the Vampire slayer. The character Buffy is a underage teen, but the actor is like 23 or something. This is just a way to translate to the people who don’t look at hentai who think like this.

    So that in of itself is stupid. Remove the rule, have mods be more active in removing drawn stuff with like the mentality of “better safe than sorry” I would say.

    And it seems people aren’t reading what you are writing, Yay isn’t saying lets allow pedos in here. He is saying lets use moderation more instead of banning a post with a picture of a milf version of Kim Possible.

    Simply put.

    Also you could have mods have a link to the rules above in all “boards” rule pages with rule34, cartoons and hentai. Maybe add an example like you have done with the links above but write something like “this and that is allowed, but this isn’t” and maybe plainly write “loli isn’t allowed” that will shoo most of the creeps away.

    Maybe change Rule 2 to not include the aged up versions of drawings. That is simply what I am trying to say.

    • yay@lemmynsfw.comOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Why do people look for a reason to be disgusted? Lots of people have messaged/posted about it. And I’m just asking this to the community. I don’t make any decisions on my own. Isn’t that democracy?

      • usernotfound@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I honestly think the people complaining don’t understand the word ‘canonical’, causing a giant misunderstanding.

        Case in point: @pm_me_upshorts@lemmynsfw.com said in another thread that he’s fine with characters as long as there’s no doubt about their age, yet here he claims everyone in favour of abolishing the rule is a pedo.

        • yay@lemmynsfw.comOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          At this point, im sorry but, fuck who understands what. This is too frustrating.

      • eric5949@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Because if you’re going to allow child porn, because let’s be clear here thats what it is, you and everyone who makes that deciscion are disgusting people. Idk what’s so hard about “child porn bad.” But if you want to allow that material on your server and encourage child abusers and potential child abusers to feed their fantasies with it I suppose it’s your instance but you will be 100% in the wrong and committing an actual crime in some countries.

        • usernotfound@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Just to be clear - you think a naked drawing of an adult Lisa Simpson is child porn? Because that’s what we’re discussing here.

  • knjhu378HNJ@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think from a legal point of view, you could possibly toe a line and go by ‘good faith’ etc. etc. I absolutely would not want to be the one on the hook for any edge cases as an instance host/admin, not in a million years.

    But morally I struggle to see a strong argument for not taking a strict line. There are enough adult characters to fantasise about if that’s your thing. Leave the ambiguous shit for the dark corners of the web.

    I suspect that any attempt to try and find a compromise here will lead to the instance being quite rightly defederated so that users of other instances don’t have to have apparently underage sexual imagery turning up when they view the ‘All’ tab. I can deal with porn turning up in my feed if I’ve ticked the ‘Show NSFW’ box. But seeing drawn CSAM (that’s what it is, brass tacks) is gross.

  • Snowflake2901@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Here’s my issue. Where I am characters who are canonically under age depicted in a sexual manner, regardless of appearance, are considered child porn. If we get rid of rule two I will be deleting my account here immediately and seeking out naked fun times somewhere else where I don’t have to worry about my presence on a server hosting what my jurisdiction considers child porn being considered damning.

    Edit: accidentally said rule three instead of rule two

  • Nino@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think we should keep the rules as they are right now. It is better to err in the side of caution

  • pm_me_upshorts@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keep the rule.

    If there’s anything ambiguous, just remember that it’s better to remove stuff that’s not pedos content than leave stuff up that is.

  • sfw@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hot take: it’s better to have a dedicated hentai instance hosted by someone else.

    • gavi@lemmynsfw.comM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think this might be the best path to go with. Might be best to focus more on real life nsfw stuff, with drawn stuff secondary to alleviate the headache.

  • Padded Person@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Personally i think the rule should be removed, as long as the other rule regarding all characters appearing over 18 stays in place. Its very difficult to find the canonical age for all characters people post to hentai subs, and if the instance gains traction that will only get harder. Also the cononical age rule in my opinion brings up more problems than it solves due to “3000 year old dragon loli’s” which in my opinion are obviously loli bait and should be banned, but would technically be over the canonical age line.

    <Trigger warning :CP> in the end i always think about why CP is illegal. and thats that it prays on someone who cannot consent or defend themselves. CP Hentai while it doesnt have the same victim is illegal because its believed that it encourages/radicalizes people to engage in IRL CP (certain cultures like japan seem to have been affected by this, studies shown that theres definitely at least a strong correlation if not causation).

    so i look at hentai similar to cosplays, if the person cosplaying a character is 30, i see it as that character at 30. If at 14 year old were cosplaying a 30 year old, thinking about them sexually would be predatory and trash.

    One of the other issues, is there are fetishes that are less controversial (Itty Bitty Titty Comitty) that depending on how you define sexual characteristics are actually riskier legally/ethically than an age adjusted character (let alone more controversial fetishes like ABDL,Size Differences, etc)

    I think at the end of the day, as long as the admins are staunchly against CP, we should be able to see if any communities are posting it. CP in my opinion is very much like porn in that its hard to define but you know when you see it.

  • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I would say “mod discretion” and just ban what a reasonable person would call under 18. Based on the images, #3 is suspect but others clearly come across as adult. We all know Lisa simpson is under age, others are 16 or 17 (Gewn?) but can pass as adult. If noting else, put the ownership on the poster and reporter - in the report from underage ID the character, or if the cant the job is on the poster to provide a link to age.

    If a mod gets rid of it, take it in stride and remember why they are - there’s enough source material without pushing our luck.

  • Mikey Mongol @lemmynsfw.comM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keep the rule. Even though it may be silly at times, it will keep us from being defederated by some of the more prudish instances.

  • 50R@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keep the rule, those that have these urges don’t belong on this instance (or any for that matter).

    The same goes for gore, snuff, brutal etc. content. It’s doesn’t have a place on such a well known instance as this.

    Look more at it from this perspective: it’s illegal in many countries, don’t put the people who use/own this instance at legal risk. I see many posts from this instance on other (SFW) accounts, I would think that you wouldn’t want to draw legal attention or get defederated for a minority of questionable legal content.