Since it's been made pretty clear, both in the rule itself and in discussions regarding other games, that unrealistic depictions do not in fact trigger Rule 7. It has nothing to do with the shota tag. The characters are clearly cartoony and unrealistic, particularly that hideously mutated monster of a mother, so if you don't like it try pressing the back button when you see a tag that offends you instead of reading everything, checking out all the pictures, then launching a moral crusade. Do try to avoid tripping on your self righteousness on the way out.
This has nothing to do with taste.
1.
You must be registered to see the links
7. If a game contains sexual contact with character(s) who show no sign of puberty (ie prepubescent) then the game should not be shared. 2D and 'unrealistic' depictions are generally looked upon more favorably. As this involves some discretion, if you are unsure ask a Staff Member
This
PRETTY CLEARLY means that there is some degree of interpretation required. There will be "...'unrealistic' depictions..." that are not OK.
Any time I look at something, and my first reaction is "Oh shit. Time to clear my browser cache. I do NOT want this image on here if my equipment get's seized." That's a pretty good indication that I should at LEAST be questioning it.
But. This thread has been up long enough that I guess The Mods have already looked at it. So it must be deemed OK.
2.
You must be registered to see the links
...refers to a genre of manga and anime wherein pre-pubescent or pubescent male characters are depicted in a suggestive or erotic manner...
So yes. It does deal directly with the Shota tag. This genre needs to be treated with care, because it is REALLY easy to stray into felony territory. Taking a second look to make SURE that the content is actually OK isn't a bad thing.
3. Who said the tag offends me? Shota may not be 'my thing';
but that doesn't mean it shouldn't exist for other people if it's theirs. If you read my post, it should have been clear that my 'offense' was at the possibility of there being material on the forums that could result in jail time.
This has nothing to do with a "moral crusade" or "self righteousness".
It has to do with keeping the site from spilling over into "Our servers got seized. And everyone who frequents the site is now under investigation."
4. I appreciate you defending this. Free speech/expression is a fragile thing. But perhaps you defended it a BIT aggressively...
