Verses with high sexual content (STAFF ONLY)

[DMB_1]

So wait it's fine if kids stumble across MGQ and decide to investigate further?

If you really want to, we can put something like a disclaimer on the game's verse page, but even there I think it would be pushing it IMO.

Besides, it should be the source material itself to warn the potential viewers of its gory/erotic/18+ elements.

If that doesn't work either, they face the inevitable risk and consequence of surfing on the internet. At that point, it just becomes their fault (and arguably their parent's), not ours.

 

[GojiBoyForever]

I simply think that if there is a clear disclaimer present and the series is not just an excuse for **** the content should be fine.

 

[Elizhaa]

I think @DMB 1 is right. We can keep the verse and mature page contents as they are allowed here as long as the page is clean but we can't prevent from checking the source material no matter we do and it is not within our responsibilities for what users do outside the wiki. I don't believe it is not outside of fandom terms of service as we discussed here if the page are cleans.

Moreover, kids by definitions are users who were under 13+ so are refuted from Fandom Term and Service. People between 13 and 18 still required legal guardian supervision. So, any case, we are not responsible for kids, teens stumbling into the mature verses but themselves and their legal guardians are.

The best we can do, I think we already did was making disclaimer to warn younger viewers of such contents' existence.

2. Use of Wikia by Minors and Blocked Persons The Services are not available to persons under the age of 13. If you are between the ages of 13 and 18 (or between 13 and the age of legal majority in your jurisdiction of residence), you may only use the Services under the supervision of a parent or legal guardian who agrees to be bound by these Terms of Service. The Services are also not available to any users previously removed from the Services by Wikia. Finally, the Services are not available to any persons barred from receiving them under the laws of the United States (such as its export and re-export restrictions and regulations) or applicable laws in any other jurisdiction. BY DOWNLOADING, INSTALLING, OR OTHERWISE USING THE SERVICES, YOU REPRESENT THAT YOU ARE AT LEAST 13 YEARS OF AGE, THAT YOUR PARENT OR LEGAL GUARDIAN AGREES TO BE BOUND BY THESE TERMS OF SERVICE IF YOU ARE BETWEEN 13 AND THE AGE OF LEGAL MAJORITY IN YOUR JURISDICTION OF RESIDENCE, AND THAT YOU HAVE NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY REMOVED FROM OR PROHIBITED FROM RECEIVING THE SERVICES.
	~ Terms of Service​

 

[Antvasima]

So should all of the MGQ pages get a warning label, and if so, what should it say?

Or should we just remove them to keep things more straightforward and less ambiguous?

 

[GojiBoyForever]

If they were to get a warning it should be something like this

Warning: This profile may potentially contain NSFW Subject Material. View at your own discretion.

 

[DMB_1]

Nah, just the verse. The pages itself don't (or the ones that are yet to be made, shouldn't) contain any NSFW content.

The verse page, despite it still not containing such stuff, would be the one to have it because of its description.

 

[Elizhaa]

I honestly think the discussion disclaimer and rule take of care of needing a warning for the pages in MGQ since the pages are cleans. I believe we discused notes weren't as long as the pages are clean. Editing Rules

• Preferably avoid adding character profiles that may be inappropriate or perceived to be in poor taste. This may include characters, weapons, etcetera, that are ill-suited for a statistics-indexing wiki, due to having no reliable feats, or ones from media which may be too controversial or otherwise unnecessary to be featured. This includes pages that would strictly be written as a joke, and as such more suitably belong in the Joke Battles wiki. Although pages for mature verses like Berserk and Demonbane are allowed, they must have coherent stories that are not strictly focused on sex, and the pages have to be kept clean, without erotic images.

Site Disclaimer

• For our visitors, please be aware that this wiki contains spoilers for various media, so read it at your own risk. Additionally, some content may be inappropriate for younger readers.

I do think like @DMB 1 that the verse page only should be the one to have note if needed.

The note could be in the verse summary:

• The verse may contain objectionable content such as depictions of violence, sexual suggestion, dark humor parody, or other materials not intended for a general audience. View at your own discretion.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Elizhaa's suggestion looks good.

 

[Antvasima]

Elizhaa seems to make sense, yes.

 

[Antvasima]

I would appreciate help from the rest of the staff with solving this issue.

 

[DontTalkDT]

I'm still very much in favour of a disclaimer and that includes on the profiles.

Not only will not all characters have verse pages, but often you land on characters without going on verse pages first.

In any case we should have a category. What should we call it? "Pornographic Content"?


For the disclaimer (whether just verse pages or not), I would suggest a template, maybe simply called {{****}} or so. Could look something like this.

This article features information on a pornographic work of fiction. The page itself features no pornographic content, but it is not advised to research the fiction further if you are below the legal age for these things within your country. ​

or something similar. That could that also automatically add the category.

 

[DMB_1]

Should we make a category for such verses though?

 

[Antvasima]

I like the idea of a template, but it depends on if Promestein finds your solution acceptable.

Given that the content itself will not be pornographic, "Pornographic Verses" is probably better as a category name, but I am open for better suggestions.

 

[Promestein]

No category. The disclaimer template works fine - I prefer it to Elizhaa's suggestion for a disclaimer.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I disagree with the Category Name.

"Adult Content" would be better suited since we have already agreed that full-on **** is unnaceptable.

A disclaimer that says "This Article discusses a series that contains adult sexual content. Though the page itself features no such imagery nor discusses such topics, viewers are not advised to research the series further if they are below legal age in their country" sounds better.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. That seems like a good solution then.

Do the rest of the staff find this idea acceptable?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I'm not sure I like DT's suggestion

 

[DontTalkDT]

@Promesetin: I think we wanted a category just in case we ever want to remove the content, so that we can do it quickly?

In the first place it's kinda its own thing, so a category for it makes sense.

@Matthew: Wouldn't Adult Content also be other things than the pornographic stuff, though? Ideally we would want to separate those, no?

I'm fine with your reformulation of the text, though.

@Antvasima: That could work. Though the category should not just go on the verse pages, of course.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

@DT

I would prefer it be referred to "Adult Sexual Content" than "Pornographic Content", because the later implies things such as CoC and the Gif Monarch shared early in the thread.

 

[Antvasima]

"Adult Content" would be better suited since we have already agreed that full-on **** is unnaceptable.

A disclaimer that says "This Article discusses a series that contains adult sexual content. Though the page itself features no such imagery nor discusses such topics, viewers are not advised to research the series further if they are below legal age in their country" sounds better.

I also think that this type of template disclaimer seems like a better idea.

 

[Wokistan]

I don't think equating gore to **** is exactly the best analogy, simply because one's clearly more culturally accepted than the other to be publicly viewed. At least in the USA, media's a lot more lax with gore and stuff than sex. I can go into a movie rated R and see some dude get slowly tortured to death, but some nipple shows up for slightly too long and no movie there

Speaking as a minor myself who has partaken in both, a disclaimer like that's probably only more of an enticement to look in further, particularly for the younger end of teens. If the issue is just getting liability off our backs then go for it and I personally don't really care what kids find browsing the internet so long as its legal since that's the parents job, but yeah that's my take. If we're going to have the verse, and we aren't going to have threads devolve into shitshows over it, then a disclaimer's probably the best like how Thunder McQueen (JoJo's Bizarre Adventure) has one because his file is based on suicide.

 

[Andytrenom]

I mean, now that I think about it a disclaimer saying "don't research this character kids, adult stuff" doesn't seem like it will achieve the result we want and stopping people from doing this isn't our responsibility anyway, so I not sure if I agree with the disclaimer

 

[AKM sama]

A disclaimer is just an excuse to show that we are a responsible wiki that cares about such kind of stuff, when in reality if we cared we wouldn't allow such verses in the first place.

 

[DMB_1]

Gore tends to be more accepted for another reason:

Gore is often just a side thing, that adds to the story, never just the main thing. Berserk is a story with characters, action, while the violence is just an element.

****, on the other hand, can be the main thing. You can watch something and classify it as ****, and you can watch it exactly because it's ****. Usually, it's not just an element.

There is Gorey pornography, yes, but that gets classified as ****, not just as "side violence".

Matt's solution kinds of brings another problem though: Basically, by that logic, you would have to put that disclaimer in every verse that has some adult content, like Game of Thrones, or Fate Stay/Night.

If we were to follow Matt's solution, it should be just stuck to universally 18+ material, which isn't always sexual.

 

[Read_this_post]

If an agreement isnt fully reached yet then someone should probably highlight this.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Yeah a Disclaimer is a hard thing to define on what should or shouldn't get it.

 

[Wokistan]

The old doom games also aren't that violent by today's standards without mods

 

[DontTalkDT]

Matt's solution kinds of brings another problem though: Basically, by that logic, you would have to put that disclaimer in every verse that has some adult content, like Game of Thrones, or Fate Stay/Night.

If we were to follow Matt's solution, it should be just stuck to universally 18+ material, which isn't always sexual.

That should't be what we do (though I'm not sure that's what was suggested).

I'm fairly sure there is a legal distinction between these things. Otherwise a GoT dvd could in germany for example not be sold in any store that someone below 18 years old can enter. (And I'm 75% sure its sold in normal stores)

In regards to the disclaimer and category we should go by the legal distinction in my opinion. (As that would also be the distinction that the people that sell wikia its adds go by)

 

[Wokistan]

Laws with this aren't exactly constant across the world. I think the most important issue with disclaimers is more making sure the wiki itself doesn't get into trouble, so if we have standards there that's what we should fulfil with the disclaimer.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Laws with this aren't exactly constant across the world.

I mean, fandom as a company is registered in the U.S.A, so US law is what would be relevant to us.

Not that I'm suggesting to study the actual law texts to figure this out. I think there is a pretty intuitive distinction between things like Berserk or Game of Thrones and something like MGQ.

 

[Andytrenom]

I'm against the disclaimer. From what I understand, there are two reasons to use it,

1. We are obligated to do so: Which isn't true, since like others have stated, making sure users below 18 don't look up inappropriate material off site isn't our responsibility, it's the guardians

2. We want to avoid it for moral reasons: In this case we would just be using a very unreliable method of keeping kids away from material they shouldn't. People don't care about a few words in a box, if they feel like searching something they will do it anyway and we will have barely done anything to stop them

I just don't think there's really a reason for this disclaimer to be applied or that it would solve any problems if it exists. That's my position here

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I'm actually with Andy on this honestly.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

So am I tbh

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

Also agree with Andy.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. The disclaimer seems to have been voted out then.

So should we modify and/or better clarify our regulations for this instead, and if so, do you have any suggestions?

 

[Antvasima]

Because currently we seem to increasingly get verses like this in the wiki: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Huniepop

 

[WeeklyBattles]

See I brought up huniepop being an issue but everyone apparently thinks it's fine despite having very little story and being a candy crush game with scenes of full nudity

 

[Wokistan]

We have Devil Daggers which has no story at all. Granted it isn't ****, but huniepop should be fine if MGQ is.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, given that our current rules do not seem straightforward enough for our members to know where to draw the line, we may have to enforce stricter versions again, as I think Promestein implied.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Do candy crush with nudity and sex scenes is fine but a text advanture with actual feats and a storyline isnt?