Also the title of the image, indicating that people of color are sub-humans (even though the poster seems to be of Latin American origin himself).

Number 4 is 5 heads tall.

Some more: one two three four five six

Some furry ones: one two three four

Not sure: one two three four five

This system is only intended as a reference for drawing anatomically realistic humans. Using it to condemn other people's art is arbitrary to begin with but becomes utterly nonsensical when applied to stylized characters, at that point you're looking to ban people for not conforming to a certain style.

It makes even less sense with non-human characters. You linked art of Judy Hopps from Zootopia, a rabbit cop, and pony characters. It's a cartoon horse, no shit it doesn't match the anatomy of an adult woman.

I'm not condemning it, that's the moderators job. I'm just trying understand the rules and help apply them.

About your logic, but then how can we judge any image at all? Breasts are also used for anatomically realistic humans. Many of the non-human characters, like the rabbit cop, still have human legs and bodies. Goth Mandy does have somewhat the structure of a midget. "Pluto has it tough" could be considered a caricature. Can we just add rabbit ears to a child and it will be ok to post the image? I ask to understand the rules.

I assume you both v0ted appr0priately? Your v0te is how you make y0ur v0ice heard.

That's what you must learn thru experience. It's the only way. Do you know de wae? You must learn de wae.

I haven't had time to go thru all the images and comment yet. However, if I'd have hit "submit" then this would've been up sooner:

No. The A rating is really intended for sexual content. Excessive violence/gore are still rated Mas a maximum. However, occasionally, some dumbass decides to submit images (photo/video) of real dead/dismembered/torn up people, and those are flaggable and are removed.

Yes. I've had to adjust this artist's ratings. Imma have to send a direct message so they get the point. >:\

BTW, they had the same in a still image that was also mis-rated. Both have been adjusted and points awarded for any flags, so if ya flagged, good. If not, well, ya missed it.

Jesus Christ!

I read some more about it.

Under federal law even furry depictions wouldn't pass the Miller test, which convicted some guys of possessing lolicon from 2005 to 2012. After 2012 mainstream media has not picked up any cases.

Depictions of bestiality are generally not prosecuted, but for a depiction of a child to be ruled out it must be either impossible for it to be real or have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. Some of these images could be considered children in costumes, but maybe not the ones with animal legs.

I learned some things. Like, even talking about incest through the internet could be considered a crime (Dwight Whorley's case). And that there are about 2 registered sex offenders on every corner of Los Angeles (Family Watchdog).

If all this is the case, then the following would be a breach, since Jenny XJ9 is, at most, 17 years old, according to a fandom wiki.

https://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/735204

Interestingly, there is a discussion that happened about Discord a few months ago on this very topic. Seems like they reached a conclusion similar to what I mentioned above, that animals are ok, but too much anthropomorphism is not.

I actually am in favor of allowing all images since nobody is being harmed, and since the inception of lolicon in Japan in the 70's the cases of pedophilia sharply declined. Although I find thinking of children in a sexual way repulsive, many of the greatest works of art contained naked children, like Laocoön and his sons, many of Michelangelo's pieces, etc.

Upon review by the moderation staff, the general consensus is that although they are generally low value submissions, they are created by the game's creator (so, they count as original content) and so they can stay.

This is good news, speaking as someone who often makes low value submissions, I wouldn't want a dangerous precedent to be set!

I didn't see any animation, maybe some light effects here and there.

These https://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/735328

Aren't animations. They're shitty slideshows made with screenshots from gachalife or whatever. Shouldn't they be removed?

I mean, they do make a story with it, I'd argue it's not all too different to using sprites to make a story, and the screenshots have been done in a way to give an illusion of some animation in some cases. That said, it's less work than using sprites, and there's a real lack of audio...

What it boils down to is if making a story with gamescreenshots is acceptable or not, since it's not just recording gameplay footage, it's putting it together with some form of story, like diolog, which they have done here.

Correct.

These are scraping the bottom of what is considered acceptable, but they did create a story, and some effort was put in. If they were any less than what they are, then we might remove them.

Just a heads up this post is about a pornographic submission and sources to a pornographic website.

I have a question about various movies submitted that seem to be ripped various websites and just uploaded with little to no change. The Newgrounds submission I currently question is listed HERE. I suspect It is just a low quality rip by that user stolen without credit from the original creator for the following reasons:

1. A copy of the video with at least credit to the author (Secazz) can be found here Source.

2 . The supposed original creator has a patreon page HERE where such content is released.

3 . If that is the original creators newgrounds account and submission, why have the veed.io software watermark?

4 . Why would that account not link to their own patreon using their own name.

5 . The poor edit or censor seems unrelated. why would the real aurthor not link to where user could find the uncensored work

I flagged this and it didn't seem to be taken down so I probably dropped in whistle status, so I wanted to know the difference between video that are just rips from other sites and this movie. There have been several submissions in the past that were just unaltered h-anime rips I helped to flag and was taken down by the community and want to know how to to prevent myself form being in error in the future. I typically flag suspected stolen work because it doesn't sit right with me that I could just be spamming stolen videos from around the net to build views on newgrounds instead of working on my own works and also stealing art is just weak.

Did you include all this in the text box when you flagged it? If so, it might just be 'cause you have a normal whistle and no one else flagged it. It's definitely stolen though, so I went ahead and flagged it, hopefully having a gold whistle helps it get seen sooner, although posting it here definitely helps ;3

Posting did indeed help, it's removed now. Great work on finding the original source and evidence of it being stolen. Thanks <3

According to the same wiki she's actually 5 years old. She's a pre-fabricated robot, the concept of aging doesn't apply. She's also a drawing. This is loony tunes logic.

At least we're on the same page here. Some stuff obviously needs to be removed to comply with the law, even though any such law is an obvious case of moral dumbfounding, but I'd say stick to flagging the obvious glaring offenders instead of over-interpreting the rules to fit any anthropomorphized non-humans or stylized characters - if that kind of rationalizing is necessary then the submission is probably fine.

If all or most of the submissions you linked were wiped out that would make NG noticeably stricter than any comparable site (that I know of and that doesn't ban NSFW content altogether), even way more mainstream sites like reddit and twitter.

These judges and jurors would have an aneurysm if they read the front page titles of any porn site. It's worth noting though that he'd already been convicted previously for pictures of minors that I'll assume were photos and not drawings, in this case the incest thing was just another piece to throw on the pile and probably wouldn't hold up alone.

My few remarks would be that a crackdown on all kinds of loli seems to be going on at the moment. As I mentioned previously, Discord recently ruled against cub (January 2019). SoFurry also recently ruled against it (May 2018). In 2010, Fur Affinity had to ban cub after their payment processor cancelled it's donations account. Twitter banned loli on February 2019. The UK government is cracking down on Twitter porn. As governments get larger and technology advances, things will only become more restrictive. It's nice that NGs is fighting against it, but in a few years it will be alone with Japan in this (and even Japan is giving in to pressure, Pixiv recently banned loli on August 2018).

Although the law doesn't actively pursue these works yet, if a jury were to see them they would certainly condemn it while following Miller's test. Just a little further and Google's Deepmind will be able to keep a careful eye on everyone, maybe soon we will be living in the nation of Oceania(1984).

Although proportions are also used in science and engineering to determine a person's age. I made a new list without considering cub or proportions. One two three four five six

Yo doggs this is just a video of some lady's boobies

I was just about to post that, good eye.

Removed.

am I out of line for thinking these shouldnt be E rated?

both users have more posts that are a tad more Leeeeewd for E rating imo.

Flag dat shiz. You have 3 mins before I work these.

not to cause issues i was looking for E rated art since the page can sometimes get full of nsfw stuff XD - saw a few pictures on my left like UHHHHHHHH did i click off everything else XD

Ok, time to drop this topic. There's too much analysis on a simple subject. You're trying too hard to get points, and you currently lack discernment. If you flag one wrong, not a big deal. If you flag a bunch that are way off the mark, you'll get punished. This discussion is getting old.

One: Has small hands, but that's about it.

Two: Has no nudity whatsoever.

Three: Has no ...tits or nips or genit...dafuq. How does it have such a high score? Correctly rated. Not flaggable.

Four: Does not look underage. Looks partly traced and modified from elsewhere...

Five: No genitals. No sexual activity. May not even be human. I think it's actually kinda cute.

Six: Has boobs. Not child. I did bump it up to an A rating, tho. You focused so hard on that one that you missed this one that was E rated, and others from that artist. When you find one flaggable entry, always check their other submissions, as you'll likely find more.

If you had flagged these, you might've gotten one point, but you might've gotten punished for more than one of the others.

So, here's your crash course:

If it looks like this (nsfw) or this (nsfw) or this (nsfw) and has nudity and/or sexual activity, flag it.

If it looks like this (nsfw) or this (nsfw) or this (nsfw) your chances of losing points is very high. "Teens" are substantially less flaggable than "child." Fap, yes. Flag, no.

That's a good place to look. :)

That's exactly why I'm asking instead of just flagging. Thanks for the detailed response. I don't think I'll play with flagging in the art portal for now, though, I was 100% sure about the first one. I'll certainly get most wrong if I try. I'll just observe and read more forum posts about it.

Are we sure these belong to the uploader?

They look very high quality but the account seems suspicious. It's a new account with no links to anything anywhere and I feel like I've seen these before somewhere, I'm just not sure where.