Posted under General
hdk5 said:
post #9993810
post #9723665
post #9618878
post #9425075
post #10121377
post #10112537
post #10111403
post #10025644
post #10025643
post #10025642
post #10025639
post #10025638
post #10025637all of those look expired and not worthy the tag, i strongly believe
ye
hdk5 said:
post #9993810
post #9723665
post #9618878
post #9425075
post #10121377
post #10112537
post #10111403
post #10025644
post #10025643
post #10025642
post #10025639
post #10025638
post #10025637all of those look expired and not worthy the tag, i strongly believe
Pretty much all of those are right at the border and I wouldn't remove loli from most of them if they were already tagged as such just to be safe.
The girl in post #9993810 is very young-looking overall. Any apparent curves are just from her being rather skinny and make her look like an older preteen at most. That's still young enough to qualify. I'm pretty sure these are the kind of posts Veraducks was thinking of when talking about overanalyzing to justify removing the tag (he did add the tag before to this one, after all).
post #10141284
...this... is definitely "loli", right?
I don't think this needs the tag
post #10128196
Placeholder1996 said:
No. I'm not sure if petite is necessary either.
post #10147792 and its variants.
WRS said:
post #10147792 and its variants.
no
Placeholder1996 said:
1 for sure no. 2 I am leaning towards no.
Freshblink said:
1 for sure no. 2 I am leaning towards no.
I don't see much of a difference between those two. I don't think the tag is necessary for either of them.
aster1a said:
Yes.
hdk5 said:
Not even close to prepubescent.
Popkornikus said:
I'd say both look at least like young teens in those.
