Loli/shota check thread.

Krugger said:
post #851503

Not loli.

葉月 said:
post #851297

I saw that too, and I'm having a difficult time making a call on it.
If anything, I'd say it's probably just barely on the loli side of the fence, due to a loli face on an neither-loli-nor-adult body. Still, that's pretty vague, and thus makes me hesitant to tag it.

Third opinion, anyone?

Krugger said:
post #851503

I'd agree with Hazuki, but in this case it's mostly because the artist's style is pretty lacking in details that could confirm or deny it. If Tewi were drawn nude, or in more revealing clothes (rather than her habitual super-baggy dress), I might be able to say otherwise.

post #13641 - not sure it's explicit enough to get tagged loli

It's not explicit, but it's pretty obviously centered on her butt in an entirely not innocent manner. Loli should stay.

post #851297

I'm going to go with loli, mostly because advertisers are going to lean on the loli side. Last thing we need having the ads pulled because we couldn't make up our minds if something is or isn't loli.

If advertisers' appraisal is to be our measuring stick, we might need to tighten the reins.

post #851759 - does Remilia count here?

For the record, I'm leaning fairly heavily towards no, but I'd like to get another opinion or two for perspective's sake.

sgcdonmai said:
If advertisers' appraisal is to be our measuring stick, we might need to tighten the reins.

I think we should stick to what we've been doing so far; it's just that in cases like this one, when we really can't decide (with the slightest of leanings towards loli) that invoking the advertisers might serve as a slightly more useful version of a coin toss.

Sounds reasonable to me.

post #853453
Need another opinion, I did not tag it but I am having some conflict.

Looks safe to me, is this some kind of uncommon stimulation? (btw, just look at Remilia's dislocated right leg)

Looks like Reimu's messing with the base of Remilia's wings, there. Dunno, it seems to me to be fairly innocent, along the lines of bath-time boob-groping.

sgcdonmai said:
post #851759 - does Remilia count here?

For the record, I'm leaning fairly heavily towards no, but I'd like to get another opinion or two for perspective's sake.

She looks flat-chested and bottomless to me so I'd say yes.

sgcdonmai said:
post #851759 - does Remilia count here?

For the record, I'm leaning fairly heavily towards no, but I'd like to get another opinion or two for perspective's sake.

Definitely not.

wanchan said:
She looks flat-chested and bottomless to me so I'd say yes.

Oh c'mon, we're not Australia.

post #854167

post #854138

I am leaning towards yes on this one, since Madoka is 14 years old and, while not explicitly sexual, it is definitely not safe.

post #424842 - Tagged loli, but those breasts seem asynchronous.

Edit: Ditto post #308347.

Sachiko said:
post #854138

I am leaning towards yes on this one, since Madoka is 14 years old and, while not explicitly sexual, it is definitely not safe.

I'd say it's so mild, and not particularly childish-looking, that we can let it pass. Canonical age has no bearing on our tagging.

T5J8F8 said:
post #424842 - Tagged loli, but those breasts seem asynchronous.

Edit: Ditto post #308347.

The former seems pretty loli, the latter doesn't.

HNTI said:
post #854167

Flat chest, yeah, and slender, but height-wise, the proportions are pretty much teen-age.

Sachiko said:
post #854138

I'll disagree with Hazuki on this one - I think it should be tagged. All that can be seen seems to lack indicators of adulthood.

T5J8F8 said:
post #424842

The girl's "onii-chan" comments, and mention of doing the same stuff in school, do not indicate any particular age range, except that they're clearly not in college. The image has a bad Pixiv ID and doesn't show up on okina sen's gallery there, plus his FC2 blog seems to be missing, so there's no way I can confirm any loli via tags or comments. Best leave it off for now.