Please mail any mod in that case.
Posted under General
After looking at the rest of fakepucco's loli images, I agree they have a very unique style to say the least, but I'm still not getting the loli vibe from his Shiki drawings.
Also
post #626083 Bad umhyuk
Bastille said:
post #626083
Had to look carefully to make sure she didn't have an invisicock in there. But yeah, that one's fine.
umhyuk said:
She is sitting in a pool of yellowish liquid... with a naughty_face... with kid proportions.
Last I checked, urination does have other purposes besides 'sex act'. No exposed genitalia and no sexual behavior; that post doesn't deserve an Explicit rating, let alone the loli tag.
umhyuk said:
So the howto:rate is something the privileged and contributors throw around when it's convenient for them and disregard when it's not? Great.
You should drop the pissy attitude. It's not constructive in any way.
That said:
howto:rate
Explicit
(...)
- All bodily fluids except blood and saliva (cum, pussy juice, pee).
Given that neither the pixiv page's image title, nor the artist's comments, nor the tags make any mention of urine or omorashi, there's some doubt in my mind as to whether that's pee or not.
I'm leaning a bit more toward tagging it, though.
With the previous posts in mind, post #628047
Also post #627389 post #627390 post #627439 post #627442
Might just be the author has a hard time drawing Flandre for some strange reason, since his Remi doesn't share the same flaws, but yeah... Mixed feelings on that being tagged loli.
Bastille said:
With the previous posts in mind, post #628047
Not remotely loli. Jesus.
...I have no idea but it kinda terrifies me.
Bastille said:
With the previous posts in mind, post #628047
This is where the "good judgement and common sense" part come into play. No, definitely not.
I get the impression that this quartet isn't so much "proportions aren't loli" as it is "artist tried to draw loli, and failed miserably at drawing the anatomical proportions right."
I think the loli tag should stay on them.
Also, I don't want to make a rush decision on the image quality, so I'll sleep on it first. After that, if I still feel the way I do now about those pics, I'm sending 'em all back to the queue. Ugh.
post #160572 doesn't seem to be explicit loli.
If nothing is visible, then the tag isn't needed, right?
post #618126: child, not loli.
post #617896: Not even a pantyshot, nor particularly suggestive.
post #580193: Not sexual in any way except the outfit, which isn't all that sexual itself.
post #215214: It's a noticeably teenage boy. Neither loli nor shota.
post #217000: ...are shota nipples considered sexual objects? The bulge might be the deciding factor here. I wouldn't tag it, but wouldn't object to it, either.
post #629973: Remi is naked, noticeably child-sized, and in a sexually suggestive position with an equally naked Sakuya. That's enough to qualify it for me, even if you can't see any naughty bits.