# Submission Ratings??? (New question at end reguarding ratings)



## Nightingalle (Feb 28, 2007)

Okay.  Either I'm completely confused or people are repetitivly stupid and don't know how to rate thier art.


General - that's easy to grasp.  No sex, no genitalia - something you'd be able to show to a kid/teen/your own parents without them being offended/disgusted.

Adult - Now this is where it gets confusing, right?  Adult means nudity, showing genitalia, mild to moderate blood, etc right? 

Mature - This means sex, sexual nudity, intense violence/vore etc.



So... How come SO MANY PEOPLE keep uploading pictures of a character with thier genitalia just showing, maybe aroused but not actually touching it or doing anything with it - just showing off the goods so to say,  and marking it as Mature?

Is that right or is that wrong?  That's what I'm asking D:  I would like to know if I should submit Trouble Tickets for those that I come across, just so they're marked properly.  May not sound like a big deal to some of you but it just irks me.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Feb 28, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

I believe arousal makes it adult, at least with certain male anatomy.

There also needs to be a PG 13 rating.

The problem is I don't think there's a filter between mature and adult so I think it's caused apathy among users to even wonder why bother marking it mature if a user can see both, if the setting is enabled to see mature works.


----------



## Emerson (Feb 28, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

Adult is, like, tasteful nudity.

Mature is STICK IT IN THE POOPER, and so forth.


----------



## Hanazawa (Feb 28, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

whaaat?

I've always thought that "ADULT" (the one with the RED border, right?) is overt sexuality, excessive gore, etc. MATURE (BLUE border) is artistic nudity, slight violence, etc...

you can be "mature" at 16, but (in the US anyway) that doesn't make you an "adult".

(apologies if I'm in any way off my rocker here, I'm on four different medications ATM)


----------



## Nightingalle (Feb 28, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

You've got that backwards Hana, Red is Mature, and blue is Adult ^^; 

It's just.. confusing @__@;


----------



## Hanazawa (Feb 28, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

I just checked the mainsite and the red-border things said adult and the blue ones said mature :<


----------



## Nightingalle (Feb 28, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

Ack, 

well , either way I've been noticing *alot* of people making things adult when they should only be 'mature'. :x


----------



## Hanazawa (Feb 28, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

Are you saying that people are "over" rating their images, then?


----------



## Nightingalle (Feb 28, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

Yeah, they are :O

I see alot of things marked as red when they should be blue.


----------



## Nightingalle (Feb 28, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

I guess what I really want to know is :

If I see something I believe to be marked wrong, should I send a Trouble Ticket?


----------



## Bokracroc (Mar 1, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

Unless it's a Adult/Mature rated as a General it's not really going to send the world into an off-axis spin.


----------



## Mega Wolf (Mar 1, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

As if this debate was not enough, I keep seeing people posting pics with anthro sex in them, but marking them as general.

Appers to be happening now more and more.

 x.x


----------



## iller (Mar 11, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

Since like 95% of my uploads are one of the last 2...  I've been using a more complex litmus:

Mature:  Nipples, Gore, Profanity, indicators of Sex(Sheath, CamelToe,  furry outline of the Labia, Bare Ass, ouline of an erection in fabric, french kissing, erect nipples, showing Areola under fabric/wetshirt), etc... Basically anything that'd get R-Rating or be called "Softcore".

Adult: Inner flesh of the genitalia, erect Peenr, any kind of sexual contact with genitals or oral-to-nipple, any Fetish that someone could foreseeably  masturbate to, Profanities used in a sexually explicit connotation, Hate-Speach or other indicators of an "adult situation".  ..stuff like that which would garner an NC-17/XXX rating.


----------



## Growly (Mar 11, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

I personally like to err on the side of caution. Even if it isn't graphic, if it involves a weird fetish, I tend to mark it as Mature, if only so visitors can't see the weird crazy stuff I'm drawin'.


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 11, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

I think most people have been using it the way Hana and Iller pointed out.

"Mature" (blue border) implies that its above what a kid should be seeing, while "Adult" (red border) implies material of an explicitly adults-only nature, i.e.: Sex.

General, then Mature, then Adult, in that order. General being basically tame, Mature being non-sexual nudity and violence, and anything sexual being Adult.

Look at the submissions again with that in mind, kuro, and they should make more sense. Although clearer descriptions of these classifications should be in the works.


----------



## missdavies (Mar 11, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

see...I'm an artist and I generally draw furs in the nude.  I always mark these pictures as adult, but I've had several complaints from other artists saying if a nipple or genitals is showing I -must- mark it as mature.  Regardless of the nature of the picture, personally I find artistic nudity a beautiful thing.  I'll be watching this thread, I'd really like this cleared up.


----------



## Touch My Badger (Mar 11, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

I don't know, but here's my ruebric for what rating I give my submissions. 

General - No naughty bits, no sexings. 
Adult - Naughty bits maybe, but no sex. 
Mature - Naughty bits and/or sex.


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 11, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

Out of curiosity, would anyone be interested in explaining why "mature" would make you think of something as _more_ adult-oriented than "adult?"

I just find it interesting that so many people in this thread are using General<Adult<Mature, when the majority of people posting to the site (and the intent of the site as far as I can tell) seem to be working with General<Mature<Adult. 

Maybe its something to do with country of origin? In the states, things labeled "Adult" are almost always indicating the highest level of 'not-for-kids-ness.' Adult books, Adult toys, Adult videos, almost anything labeled adult means nc-17 to XXX. Is it different in other parts of the world?


----------



## Hanazawa (Mar 12, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

I'm with Wolfblade on this one, with the added comment on the color *RED*... I know it's not just an American thing; red is pretty much universal for "danger/warning/restricted/etc".


----------



## Nightingalle (Mar 31, 2007)

*RE: Submission Ratings???*

K, so this thread is a couple weeks old but.  I need to know something.

An image with a penis showing, NOT aroused, and not dripping with anything - AKA not sexual at all, would that be considered RED or BLUE?  I have it up as blue but some people think I should have it as red, and I don't see the point of having it red.  It's not sexual.  It's just nudity.  I went to the Help&Support but aparently no one has gotten around to actually writing anything for submission ratings there  

Thanks.


----------



## Hanazawa (Mar 31, 2007)

kuronekotenshi, I would consider what you described to be BLUE as well. Like a Greek statue or something, right?


----------



## Nightingalle (Mar 31, 2007)

So you saw the one?  I thought it was appropriate.  I'm actually going to go back through my gallery and edit some ratings on some older art (ones with similar nonsexual nudity and not meant to be arousing.) because I was afraid and marked them as red, but it's innapropriate now.


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 31, 2007)

How's this look? And credit to Hanazawa, greek artwork is a good reference point.

http://www.wikiffinity.net/index.php?title=Submission_Ratings

Anybody have anything they feel should be added?


----------



## Nightingalle (Mar 31, 2007)

Thank you <3 Now I"m going to reply with that link to the couple that posted on my page  <3


----------



## Hanazawa (Mar 31, 2007)

Wolfblade said:
			
		

> How's this look? And credit to Hanazawa, greek artwork is a good reference point.
> 
> http://www.wikiffinity.net/index.php?title=Submission_Ratings
> 
> Anybody have anything they feel should be added?



I'm not sure about the categorization of "excessive" violence/gore as mature, but I don't really care to even attempt quantifying what is or isn't excessive on that side...


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 31, 2007)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> I'm not sure about the categorization of "excessive" violence/gore as mature, but I don't really care to even attempt quantifying what is or isn't excessive on that side...



Hm.. is there a better way to address that then? That's the problem I was thinking about. I mean, someone getting punched should be fine for General, but someone getting gored would obviously not be.

And unless there's sex happening in the violence, I'd feel weird labeling something "Adult" for just violence alone, even really graphic violence.

"Remember, like the MPAA says, graphic, deplorable violence is O.K., just so long as there's no dirty language" 

But if people feel differently, say so and I'll fix it. :3


----------



## Hanazawa (Mar 31, 2007)

Yeah, the thing about categorizing sexuality as mature and adult is that even if the distinction is "soft", it's still present and clear enough to categorize. On the other hand, violence and gore operates on a more personal level (from viewer to viewer) as to what is acceptable and what is not. I'd even argue that the skill behind the depiction of the gore has as much an effect on it as anything else; two pictures containing the same amount of "red" (blood, internal organs, etc) might be classed in two different categories based on one being more realistic than the other.

Truly excessive blood/gore DOES earn an NC-17 rating by the MPAA (Kill Bill and I think the upcoming Grindhouse both had to be toned down to receive an R). It's probably just debatable whether or not single/still-image (drawn) depictions of such can breach the "uncanny valley" requirement to cause the squickage that, say, an actual photograph might enduce. And actual photographs, imho, shouldn't be allowed if they are in fact reaching that level of gore. (I understand some people like to take photos of their hands after accidents and injuries and the like, and whether that's allowed is an issue of content rather than rating).


----------



## Dickie (Apr 1, 2007)

All this freaking confusion over this lately actually had me convinced that I've been doing it wrong this whole time. Got me all worried for nothing :-/


----------



## Hanazawa (Apr 1, 2007)

Wolfblade - I got an email from a certain snowmeow who wants to point out this post - http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=2797&pid=33574#pid33574
and a note saying that yes, gore/violence ARE "two-tiered", that is "excessive" gore falls into "ADULT" while any amount of violence above what I would call "bloodless" and/or small injuries and/or sporting matches might be more appropriate for "mature".
Clearly, a few drops of blood need not be considered "mature", but a full-on gorefest is more appropriate for "adult" (see also my note about NC-17 for violence films).

He also wanted to point out that "nudity" and "genitalia" are differently rated based on how humanoid the animal is - EbonyTigress has this picture http://www.furaffinity.net/view/344133/ which depicts non-sexual, non-erect male nudity, but given that they are _animals_ and not anthros, it only receives a "general" rating. Animal Planet stuff!

though AFAIK any photos of real animals depicting such in an obviously sexual way/with sexual intent aren't allowed.


----------



## Wolfblade (Apr 1, 2007)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> Wolfblade - I got an email from a certain snowmeow who wants to point out this post - http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=2797&pid=33574#pid33574
> and a note saying that yes, gore/violence ARE "two-tiered", that is "excessive" gore falls into "ADULT" while any amount of violence above what I would call "bloodless" and/or small injuries and/or sporting matches might be more appropriate for "mature".
> Clearly, a few drops of blood need not be considered "mature", but a full-on gorefest is more appropriate for "adult" (see also my note about NC-17 for violence films).
> 
> ...



Okies. Was that post the official standing, or just his opinion? Not to be dismissive of his opinion, just wanting to clarify since he says IMO. And I can't recall if there ever was a final answer to the debate of whether or not photos focusing on animal genitals were allowed or not. I seem to remember one case of it being taken down and one of it staying, but for the life of me, I just can't remember what the final verdict on the subject was.

The question is, as it often seems to be, one of "where to draw a line?"

Personally, from an enforcement standpoint, I'd say it'd be easier just to pick one rating or the other for violence exceeding "mild" just to spare the staff the inevitable headache of trying to measure how many pints of blood in a pic separate 'mature' from 'adult.' XD

Still, something to discuss... what does everyone here think?


----------



## Hanazawa (Apr 1, 2007)

He indicated to me that the ratings were supposed to be worked out by a single (here unnamed) admin with input from the others, and he picked that up when unnamed didn't appear to follow through. So, I'd say his stance is about as official as anything unless there's some behind-the-scenes discussion running at present.

I understand the point you're making about violence/gore being in a single category. I just think a significant number of people, if polled, would think it's a worthwhile difference (but aaargh no forum-based polls a la cub art plz)


----------



## Wolfblade (Apr 1, 2007)

Honestly, the easiest and best solution would be a working filter system where rather than just 'general, mature, adult' people could filter out "violence" specifically.

Ah, maybe with Ferrox...

In the meantime though, yeah, we'll see what the behind-the-scenes crew says and any additional points made here I'll post over there as well.


----------

