An Attempt to bring back a Verse (Terrible Mouse)

[Phsccarvalho]

Alright. I am not in the position to make any moral judgements, but it does seem like from all serious accounts that the primary intention of the verse is just to shock people and be as depraved as possible, even actively sacrificing narrative elements to do so.

From that perspective I think it does in spirit cross into the fourth category, though I can admit it is borderline.

Would somebody please be willing to clarify in our content ratings scale page regarding that gore is judged by similar qualifications of inclusion in our wiki as sexual content, in accordance with Fandom's rules in this regard?

If Sannse says the verse breaks the wiki rules, seriously, you guys need to update this page.

Because from beginning to end it only talks about sexual content and gives examples of sexual content.

It's impossible for someone new to check the page to see if their favorite verse is eligible and interpret the page as "gore, incest, and child death are unacceptable" since it literally doesn't mention that anywhere.

Even all the examples for each level only refer to verses with sexual content, even the ONLY example for Level 4 is "Hentai," literally nothing else.

 

[Greg_the_master_of_gods]

If Sannse says the verse breaks the wiki rules, seriously, you guys need to update this page.

Because from beginning to end it only talks about sexual content and gives examples of sexual content.

It's impossible for someone new to check the page to see if their favorite verse is eligible and interpret the page as "gore, incest, and child death are unacceptable" since it literally doesn't mention that anywhere.

Even all the examples for each level only refer to verses with sexual content, even the ONLY example for Level 4 is "Hentai," literally nothing else.

yeah i agree the rules should be edited already.

 

[Antvasima]

Yes. The page needs to be updated accordingly, but I will leave on a vacation within 1.5 days, so I would greatly appreciate help from other staff members.

 

[Jepilstiltskin]

delete patrick bateman because all he does is killing people brutally

I have to agree with this, honestly. The book is an absolute menace, its content is far more extreme than Terrible Mouse. It's like a “Noob vs Hacker” situation, Terrible Mouse is just pale in comparison. The page should've been taken down a LONG LONG time ago, yet it's still around to this day.

 

[Randomuser3412]

I have to agree that I don't think this verse should be allowed back on the wiki, and the rules page should most likely be revised slightly to have better examples of a tier 4.

I have to agree with this, honestly. The book is an absolute menace, its content is far more extreme than Terrible Mouse. It's like a “Noob vs Hacker” situation, Terrible Mouse is just pale in comparison. The page should've been taken down a LONG LONG time ago, yet it's still around to this day.

I look at the second sentence on one of the scans in the profile... just take it down, man. Even with the current rules, that's absolutely an abhorrent violation.

 

[Jepilstiltskin]

I look at the second sentence on one of the scans in the profile... just take it down, man. Even with the current rules, that's absolutely an abhorrent violation.

It's honestly surprising to see that the page is still up. Like, bruv

 

[Antvasima]

Yes. The page needs to be updated accordingly, but I will leave on a vacation within 1.5 days, so I would greatly appreciate help from other staff members.

Are any of our staff members here willing to help out please?

 

[FinePoint]

Are any of our staff members here willing to help out please?

My sister is currently visiting so my time is limited, but if I get any significant free time in the near future I'll try to write a draft.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you greatly for helping out.

 

[Uradial50]

Likely a futile attempt, but eh might as well try.
A few days ago, a verse I was working on "Terrible Mouse" Was deleted, and I was told to never to recreate the profiles.
At the time I was fine with it (and still am), but today I decided to bring the verse to AltBattles, but first asked whether it was allowed there.

But I was told to try and bring it back here, due to how the deletion seems to be wrongly justified.

I do not care if the verse does get back here or not, but I'm willing to try

Anyways it was deleted by Antvasima due to and I quote

"Sorry, but an obscure web series about the "joys" of torturing children to death is beyond my limit."

First I'd like to address the Obscure part.

The Series (alongside it's spinoff) has been consistently getting over a Million views, with one of them nearly reaching 10 million Views on the official channel

with at worst having a few episodes being Half or nearly 1 million views.

so by any means, this series is definitely not obsure.

no for what's probably the actual reason it has gotten deleted
"the "joys" of torturing children to death"

I feel like getting deleted of this is pretty weird, considering the one that is actually enjoying the deaths is the main antagonist of the series.
and I do like to mention, that after Episode 1 aka the episode where the Child Massacres Happen, alot of the deaths in the series, started to be around Adults and Teenagers, with the child deaths rarely happening, with (from what I remember) the only times after Episode 1, was 2 and 7

and uh oh yeah the Series is not about the joys of torturing children. I think it's my fault that the summary portrays it as that.

but it's about a bunch of Teenager (and ig an Adult) attempting to escape a hospital filled with mutant creatures that hate children


Not to mention that Vsbw has profiles about way more problematic stuff, like versions of Adolf and Nazis

and Media that has similar, if not, way more amounts of gore as Terrible Mouse has been allowed on the wiki


TLDR: It feels weird that Terrible Mouse was removed from the wiki, when other similar Gorey verse and way more problematic Profiles were allowed in, and Terrible Mouse should be brought back to this wiki

Its better to just add this in altbattles or just fc/oc rather than vsbattle bro

 

[TheBoxofIncidents]

Bear5

 

[FriendOfTheTeaParty]

I have to agree with this, honestly. The book is an absolute menace, its content is far more extreme than Terrible Mouse. It's like a “Noob vs Hacker” situation, Terrible Mouse is just pale in comparison. The page should've been taken down a LONG LONG time ago, yet it's still around to this day.

This is by far not a fair comparison even if I disagree in principle with OP's verse being against the rules.

You cannot compare a widely acclaimed satire and commentary that uses shocking themes for said purposes to something as untactful as this.

 

[Jepilstiltskin]

This is by far not a fair comparison even if I disagree in principle with OP's verse being against the rules.

You cannot compare a widely acclaimed satire and commentary that uses shocking themes for said purposes to something as untactful as this.

Even if one is satire and the other isn't, the rules are specifically about content limits, not literary merit. It doesn't care much about artistic intent or expression, what's matter is the content in itself. I mean, you could try to morally justify the extreme content of American Psycho, I'm not judging you. But it doesn't change the fact that the material is still extremely graphic and disgusting.

 

[FriendOfTheTeaParty]

Even if one is satire and the other isn't, the rules are specifically about content limits, not literary merit. It doesn't care much about artistic intent or expression, what's matter is the content in itself. I mean, you could try to morally justify the extreme content of American Psycho, I'm not judging you. But it doesn't change the fact that the material is still extremely graphic and disgusting.

I'd say context and literary merit matters an extreme amount. Berserk has a lot of horrible content mostly concentrated in its earlier parts, but that isn't deserving of deletion.

 

[Antvasima]

As far as I have understood, American Psycho is a criticism of the ideological malevolence of the Epstein class of United States society, similar to, but lesser in social scope than, what I did with my own story back when I processed and patterned vast amounts of information from the collective unconscious to write it long ago, not a hollow and pointless embracement and endorsement of absolute sadistic cruelty like Terrible Mouse.

 

[Jepilstiltskin]

I'd say context and literary merit matters an extreme amount. Berserk has a lot of horrible content mostly concentrated in its earlier parts, but that isn't deserving of deletion.

As far as I have understood, American Psycho is a criticism of the ideological malevolence of the Epstein class of United States society, similar to, but lesser in social scope than, what I did with my own story back when I processed and patterned vast amounts of information from the collective unconscious to write it long ago, not a hollow and pointless embracement and endorsement of absolute sadistic cruelty like Terrible Mouse.

I'm not denying that American Psycho has deeper meaning behind its controversial content, gnoring that would just make me having media illiteracy at this point. But that still doesn't change the fact that the content itself is extremely cruel, arguably even more so than anything in Terrible Mouse.

This is similar to Black Souls. Even though it's lowkey a hentai game, that feature isn't mandatory and can be turned off. However, if that element were fully integrated with no way to disable it, the game most likely wouldn't be allowed to be indexed regardless of how well-written it is or whether the explicit content is framed as artistic expression. IT STILL WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED. Aside from everything else though, I also want to clarify that I disagree with Terrible Mouse being indexed on the wiki.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

This really isn't the place to discuss random other verses with vague symmetries with Terrible Mouse. Almost no verse mentioned in this thread is really even close, and none of them are coterminous with the context of Terrible Mouse.

At the end of the day, this thread has shown us that Fandom objects to certain content beyond just ****, but at the same time, this has never been much of an issue for practically any other verse; I do not find it constructive, then, to gesture vaguely at other verses that sorta-kinda resemble tidbits of Terrible Mouse. This isn't a jumping-off point from which we will enact bans on other verses currently published on VSBW. This is a particularly low verse that was decided against.

 

[Phsccarvalho]

This is a particularly low verse that was decided against

Please inform Sannse that Terrible Mouse is more of a Cartoon in the vein of Happy Tree Friends just with dialogue to go with the shock violence stuff, and that it does currently have a wiki on FANDOM.

We haven't received a response to that yet.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

We haven't received a response to that yet.

It isn't like Happy Tree Friends. Again, that's just gore! Sannse's response highlights the torture of children being the core focus of the verse. Not gore. They go so far as to highlight verses that are allowed, which includes shit like Saw, which has tons of gore. We're doing the comparison thing I just mentioned.

 

[FinePoint]

Thank you greatly for helping out.

I started a sandbox and wrote a first draft for a new Level 4:

Level 4: Extreme - Verses that place a central focus on either high sexual content or shocking/disturbing content. Such verses are pornographic in nature and strictly unsuitable for the wiki. A verse that falls under this rating would either have the majority of its media content be sexual or contain excessive shock content, such as the detailed murder or torture of children.

Examples: Many hentai series, Terrible Mouse

Also, are we aiming for changing every level to reference gore in some way, or just this one?

 

[Re5yh]

I started a sandbox and wrote a first draft for a new Level 4:

Also, are we aiming for changing every level to reference gore in some way, or just this one?

Is God is Dead (Comic) part of this category?

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out. I made some adjustments for clarifying purposes.

Level 4: Extreme - Verses that place a central focus on either high sexual content or amoral disturbing gore. Such verses are pornographic and/or gleefully malevolent in nature and as such strictly unsuitable for this wiki. A verse that falls under this rating would either have the majority of its content be sexual or excessively shocking for the sake of itself, such as by endorsing the detailed murder or torture of children.

Examples: Many hentai series, Terrible Mouse

 

[Antvasima]

Is God is Dead (Comic) part of this category?

I think so, yes. It is one of the most genuinely gleefully malevolent, amoral, nihilistic, destructive, morbid, gory, and disturbing things I have ever seen.

And in addition, it is deliberately as pointlessly offensive as possible to every religious or spiritual person on the planet, which is also against our rules.

 

[FriendOfTheTeaParty]

Probably, yes. It is one of the most genuinely gleefully malevolent, destructive, gory, and disturbing things I have ever seen.

It'd probably be better to discuss other stuff elsewhere and people familiar with it anyways so it doesn't end up as category for stuff one person finds distasteful. Not trying to insult you or anything, but just that you have some really strong opinions on stuff that might not necessarily allow you to remain unbiased.

 

[Antvasima]

It breaks two sets of our rules about as much as possible, so it is not allowed.

 

[Random-Helper323]

I think so, yes. It is one of the most genuinely gleefully malevolent, amoral, nihilistic, destructive, morbid, gory, and disturbing things I have ever seen.

And in addition, it is deliberately as pointlessly offensive as possible to every religious or spiritual person on the planet, which is also against our rules.

As much as I am probably one of the few people who could rant about amoral writing for as long as you can, I think we must draw a line somewhere and be careful not to go too far.

 

[Antvasima]

Yes. Our level 3 rating will have to mention that works that depict despicable acts in revulsion and/or a cautionary manner from what is genuinely intended to be an ethical perspective (including, for example, Berserk) are allowed. It is mainly gore and extreme amoral cruelty for the sake of itself or as full endorsements that is disallowed.

 

[FriendOfTheTeaParty]

Yes. Our level 3 rating will have to mention that works that depict despicable acts in revulsion and/or a cautionary manner from what is genuinely intended to be an ethical perspective (including, for example, Berserk) are allowed. It is mainly gore and extreme amoral cruelty for the sake of itself or as full endorsements that is disallowed.

What about verses with some borderline/similar content but dont even make close to a majority of the work. I think that would be comparable to a VN that contains sexually gratuitous content but is overall a very small or unimportant part of the work.

 

[Random-Helper323]

Yes. Our level 3 rating will have to mention that works that depict despicable acts in revulsion and/or a cautionary manner from what is genuinely intended to be an ethical perspective (including, for example, Berserk) are allowed. It is mainly gore and extreme amoral cruelty for the sake of itself or as full endorsements that is disallowed.

Yeah, think Goblin Slayer, which features horrific behaviour... from the villains, as justification for why the protagonists are fighting them. The behaviour received the exact condemnation it deserves.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Yes. Our level 3 rating will have to mention that works that depict despicable acts in revulsion and/or a cautionary manner from what is genuinely intended to be an ethical perspective (including, for example, Berserk) are allowed. It is mainly gore and extreme amoral cruelty for the sake of itself or as full endorsements that is disallowed.

Even this threatens to go too far, I think. Extreme gore should be totally fine. I'll point again to Saw, where characters are cut into pieces, their heads are exploded, they dip their limbs into acid... should absolutely be totally fine, even acknowledging that a lot of people just really like Jigsaw as a character. Terrible Mouse's distinction is not that it is gore-centric, but rather that it seems to focus on the torture of children to an almost sadistic extent (which would also be tolerable, in my opinion, but we are playing by Fandom's rules at present). A similar case, imo, and if we needed to include one, would be the same sort of content focused on animals; I could see us objecting, then, to a film like Cannibal Holocaust, for its famous use of live animal deaths on-screen.

 

[Antvasima]

If the cruelty comes across as a purely sadistically gratuitious or as an endorsement, I definitely don't think that we should feature it in a wiki largely focused on teenagers.

 

[Antvasima]

What about verses with some borderline/similar content but dont even make close to a majority of the work. I think that would be comparable to a VN that contains sexually gratuitous content but is overall a very small or unimportant part of the work.

That seems considerably more acceptable, but even then, if extreme sadism against innocents is depicted in a blatantly endorsing manner, I don't think that we should feature it.

 

[FriendOfTheTeaParty]

That seems considerably more acceptable, but even then, if extreme sadism against innocents is depicted in a blatantly endorsing manner, I don't think that we should feature it.

What about in a not-endorsing but still twisted/dark humor kind of way.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

If the cruelty comes across as a purely sadistically gratuitious or as an endorsement, I definitely don't think that we should feature it in a wiki largely focused on teenagers.

I understand how you, personally, feel. I believe you understand how I personally feel as well. I would not want to ban, say, Inglorious Basterds because Brad Pitt carves into Christoph Waltz' skull. I do not think Fandom would object to it, either, and I think it would be found to strictly be an endorsement in the movie. Nevertheless, it does not appear to fall against what Fandom outlined above, and I do not want us to wield this change as a tool of censorship.

 

[AppleMaker]

Bruh, who deleted my comment

How many staff members had voted against this verse being on the wiki and how many had supported it? I lost count

 

[Random-Helper323]

Even this threatens to go too far, I think. Extreme gore should be totally fine. I'll point again to Saw, where characters are cut into pieces, their heads are exploded, they dip their limbs into acid... should absolutely be totally fine, even acknowledging that a lot of people just really like Jigsaw as a character. Terrible Mouse's distinction is not that it is gore-centric, but rather that it seems to focus on the torture of children to an almost sadistic extent (which would also be tolerable, in my opinion, but we are playing by Fandom's rules at present). A similar case, imo, and if we needed to include one, would be the same sort of content focused on animals; I could see us objecting, then, to a film like Cannibal Holocaust, for its famous use of live animal deaths on-screen.

Valid point, but Saw seems to deliberately leave the issue open to interpretation by presenting moral grey area. But yes, Cannibal Holocaust definitely qualifies as objectionable. There's a difference regarding intent and meaning, as well as what the work is actually about at its core. Remember Redo got to stay due to the fact the core of the series is about revenge on a crappy world rather than the dark content.

I understand how you, personally, feel. I believe you understand how I personally feel as well. I would not want to ban, say, Inglorious Basterds because Brad Pitt carves into Christoph Waltz' skull. I do not think Fandom would object to it, either, and I think it would be found to strictly be an endorsement in the movie. Nevertheless, it does not appear to fall against what Fandom outlined above, and I do not want us to wield this change as a tool of censorship.

Valid again. Of course, it depends on context. The character you reference is not innocent at all. The act being endorsed is revenge, not random violence. If Brad Pitt's character had been carving up random civilians it'd be different. It can still be questionable, but it isn't endorsing random violence.

Still, I must agree, we can't get too rigid on these things. Many violent works have strangely whimsical and cold approaches. I do think the target of that violence makes a large difference of course. You'd never put a soldier shooting obvious villains into the same category as a maniac doing that to innocents.

 

[Random-Helper323]

What about in a not-endorsing but still twisted/dark humor kind of way.

That does happen, and does push the limits. It'd still have to depend on context and specifics, in my humble opinion. Consider that in films they often get away with extreme violence when it's against monsters like Xenomorphs.

 

[Antvasima]

I understand how you, personally, feel. I believe you understand how I personally feel as well. I would not want to ban, say, Inglorious Basterds because Brad Pitt carves into Christoph Waltz' skull. I do not think Fandom would object to it, either, and I think it would be found to strictly be an endorsement in the movie. Nevertheless, it does not appear to fall against what Fandom outlined above, and I do not want us to wield this change as a tool of censorship.

There is a massive difference between righteous fury of a Magnificent Basterds revenge fantasy variety, and actually endorsing torturing innocent people to death for kicks and giggles.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

There is a massive difference between righteous fury of a Magnificent Basterds revenge fantasy variety, and actually endorsing torturing innocent people to death for kicks and giggles.

I agree, and I knew that you would agree as well. But I am saying that your rules are very broad, and unnecessarily exclude things they should not (such as, for example, Saw and Inglorious Basterds). I don't want the rule's phrasing being such that these things would fall against it, is my point.

 

[Phsccarvalho]

What about Marvel Ruins?