HOME | DD
SketchMan-DL β Lame algorythms
Published: 2018-07-27 15:38:29 +0000 UTC; Views: 12964; Favourites: 16; Downloads: 16
Redirect to original
Description
I strongly believe that this system is based on image titles and tags. From now on, I will no more name any character on deviantart to avoid this kind of grade A BS.Let's also see if they remove the picture. I remind you once again that there's always Pixiv and Patreon. And Omorashi, in case everything else fails.
Related content
Comments: 45
cute image . however, the only qualm they might have is shading if the pampers are not all white the grip might be the bodily fluid one which I consider a bogus reason considering how much potty humor pics pop up on this site. Moreover, the name of the site and setup does indeedΒ allow for more niche work if they would pull the broom from the rectums of the censoring algorithm and let it be or if they can sell core membership then why not a "raw" membership just a suggestionΒ
π: 0 β©: 0
I get this often with some of my works, even when I got the 'mature filter' on. I chose to ignore them because DA doesn't seem to understand the concept of 'explicit content'.
π: 0 β©: 0
Well Deviantart is an art site not a porn site, diapers are a fetish, I don't think you can call it bullshit that they try to moderate it to keep it that way.
π: 0 β©: 1
Then why is there a fetish art section and mature filters with explicit content? If they don't want this kind of art they should remove those categories at once. Check any nude on da and you'll find plenty of genitalia showing everywhere (which is against the rules) but moderators are fine with it because it's more "vanilla".
π: 0 β©: 1
Because fetish art, and fetish porn isn't the same thing. Art can be erotic without being pornographic, and nudity can exist without any sexuality attached to it.
Also them not doing a good enough job isn't a reason not to do a job at all, that's sorta the point.
π: 0 β©: 2
Just stop, you have little to none of a brain
π: 0 β©: 0
how is it porn if they have diapers on? Its the opposite of nudity.
π: 0 β©: 1
Nudity has nothing to do with porn.
π: 0 β©: 1
if that is your argument diapers have nothing to do with porn.
π: 0 β©: 1
That's correct, porn is not defined by any specific thing. Porn is images and videos made with sexual intention, porn can be depicted fully clothed.
π: 0 β©: 2
Wrong. Porn cant be defined with this, because intention are subjective for any observer, and cant be monitored. To manage to do this one needs mind reading, or the voluntary statement. "Hay guys and girls I made porn here it is" As one can assume this thing can't be controlled!
Porn is: " produced to elicit sexual arousal " in order to do that the only common way is nudity or sex because that is how the body works according to biology. For reproductive purpose.
www.dictionary.com/browse/porn
In other words it is suppose to be impossible to create content "produced to elicit sexual arousal" with intention.
Because 98% of people dont get excitement from clothing. If the majority wont get excited from clothes, the intent cant be identified.
Example: Nekomi, a maid dress is cute. 98% of people dont get excited from that. So it cant be porn.
By this logic we should ban reality and the internet because any person can get excited from something in it even if its the minority.
Like someone has an "sexual arousal" for cheese. It exist so we have to amuse cheese is made for sexual purposes so we have to ban its existence
Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Porn is subjective, where one draws the line is decided by the person in charge of the platform, gallery or so on. There is no objective line of what is and isn't porn, because you can make porn that people don't find arousing, and you can make artwork without any sexual intention that people get aroused by.
Your idea that nudity is a requirement of porn would imply that filming people on a nudist beach would make a porno, because they are nude. A lot of people get excited from clothing because they can imagine what's underneath, now clothing for most people when they say that means panties and a shirt, not a spacesuit. There is a reason there are a ton of photoshoots of people dressing up in military clothes and nurse outfits on porn sites, because people find that sexually attractive.
"produced to elict sexual arousal" is exactly my point, because it doesn't matter if they are clothed or not, it doesn't matter if it's cheese, all that matters is if it was made with the intention of sexually arousing. A person that finds cheese sexually arousing and takes photos of cheese in ways he finds sexually arousing and then posting those photos is posting porn, now of course nobody would censor that because it's not perceived as porn to anyone else, however apply that same scenario but replace the cheese with diapers on a human and you're in a territory where a lot of people will see it as porn and censor it if they are against porn on their platform, gallery, etc.
You're claiming that someone can shoot a full photoshoot for their porn site with sexually suggestive poses, but as long as they are dressed it's not porn, that's simply not the case.
π: 0 β©: 1
So if lot of people find air erotic because you need oxygen for sex oxygen itself will be banned as pornographic?
"Porn is subjective" indeed so censorship can only be subjective. Means the rules can only be subjective.
Rules by definition equally go to everyone so it cant be subjective.
Besides the creator no one can know ones intention.
If the creator decided what was made with the intention of porn no one has the right to censor it.
Tease set of views makes no seance.
π: 0 β©: 1
Air is not a physical thing you can portray, if you portray it symbolically you can make porn of it. To be pornographic is not to be banned, pornography is not illegal. It would not be allowed on this site if the people in charge of the site deemed it to be porn.
Rules are always subjective, that's why the rules for each site in existence is different, what's allowed on one site isn't allowed on another. Even the law is subjective, that's why we have the court and lawyers. If rules were so simple and straightforward as you want them we wouldn't be able to have this discussion in the first place, because there would be nothing to discuss.
If he made it with the intention of porn that is literally why they would censor it.
If he made it without intending it to porn, it doesn't matter if the administrators perceive it as porn.
You're on a site owned by the people that run Deviantart, they are in charge of the site and decide what is and isn't allowed on the site, they have literally every right in the world to censor it.
Your sentence "tease set of views make no seance" makes no sense.
π: 0 β©: 1
Rules are never subjective. of they ware we would not have legal system (as corrupt make it to be)
I say air is pornographic
It makes as much seance as to consider chase or diapers pornographic.
Let me twist it, if something becomes a bad product because people get excited of it. It is in no authority of any creator or site ovner to ban it in the name of rules.
If there are no fix rules there is no point to even make statement about the issue its the same as the GM-s here ban any picture they dont like as they feel like, granted they can do this this is there site indeed.
You reasoning was "Well Deviantart is an art site not a porn site, diapers are a fetish, I don't think you can call it bullshit that they try to moderate it to keep it that way."
Its BS because non of their reasoning or moderation makes seance. Β
The definition of porn is in the dictionary. "Fetish" is not the creators responsibility. Just because someone gets excited of the art dos not make it porn, Exactly because it is a rear thing a "Fetish" it cant be clad non biased rule on it.
The logic one founds air exciting (there is for one suffocation fetish that is its complete opposite) could mean ban all art because some gets excited about it. It dos not have to be air, it can be anything portrayed on art.Β
The fact thy just hate DL-s makes this BS from their part.
The very fact anything is banned in place called deviantart is BS. lol
π: 0 β©: 1
Rules are always subjective, again, I bring back the fact that we have lawyers and the court. If rules weren't subject we wouldn't need to have people argue whether or not they actually broke the rules.
Rules are only objective when they only have one single interpretation, few rules do. "Don't walk on the grass" is a rule that doesn't include driving, hooverboarding, jumping over, putting cardboard on top of it and then walking on it, these are all things that can be done and be argued to not break the rule, since they didn't walk on it.
You need air to live, your argument makes no sense and you're not even trying to make a sensible and comparable argument at all, air is not a fetish nor a physical object. Don't compare apples to nuclear bombs please.
It is in the authority of the creators of the sites to ban something that people find to be pornographic if they agree and they don't allow pornography. They can ban you for saying "bread" if they want to. They have literally every authority in the world to ban you from their site for whatever reason they see fit. THEY make the rules, YOU don't. What Deviantart defines as porn is the definition of porn on Deviantart, it doesn't matter what you personally define as porn.
No, fetishes are not the creators responsibility, it's Deviantarts responsibility, that's why they ban it when they find it to be pornographic rather than artistic. Children browse Deviantart, Deviantart has a responsibility to make sure sexually suggestive content is censored for them and that they can't see pornography on their site.
π: 0 β©: 1
" people argue whether or not they actually broke the rules"
Exactly lawyers only argue if people break or not the rules, consequences are written in stone, no one is above it.
You cant have rules without a cause and effect. Its not a rule if its subjectible, if itsΒ subjectible its called tyranny by the one who inflict consequence. Tyranny is BS thing
Rules are indeed only have one single interpretation. That is why thy are called rules.
You need air to live. yes censoring it means death. By your argument air could be defined as porn. As long its intention is sexual. You need air to have sex, there is choking porn so there is a possible relation. You argument is it dos not mater how low the % of one gets excited as long they do it can be porn. "Porn can be subjective, anything can be porn" means air can be porn. Means if we follow your logic on censorship we end up extinct
My argument is if nudity gets no censorship that is more popular porn than most nothing lass should be censored, like cheese or DL fetish
We also need sex to breed and our race to live so if that gets banned why not ban air at the same time lol?
"ban something that people find to be pornographic " everything can me fun pornographic its subjective.
THEY make the rules, YOU don't. - make rules what they implying is not a rule its a subjective excuse to do what they want. Its their sight but fact remains its just tyrants.
Not that i have problem with tyranny but at least dont call it anything lass lol People have the right to call it BS because it is
Children browse Deviantart, Deviantart has a responsibility to make sure sexually suggestive content is censored for them and that they can't see pornography on their site. - That is exactly why a 18+ limitation should rather be made instead this. With the amount of porn here as nudity, BDSM, ect there are far more provocative things here than DL so this is not relay good argument.Β People who have access and skill to browse are old enough to see sexual content, and how can thy not find it anywhere on the internet if thy even DONT want to.
People who come this sight are dont need protection, they know what they seek.
I found it hilarious we argue on this as I find D-Art one of my faw ero site
As for art everting Sketch man makes is as top quality art as it gets.
~ What is subjective cant be a creditable law.
π: 0 β©: 0
doesnt that counter the orginal problem then? or then atleast theyd still be in the wrong then because wouldnt the only person who has any say on wether or not something is sexualy intended is the creator?
while i agree u can have nudity an it not be intended sexualy id feel that goes the same for this. its not specificly pornagraphic because it lacks anything that realistically is sexual other then people saying they like it because they take it as a sexual thing?
π: 0 β©: 2
Well no because art and porn is subjective, so whether or not it's perceived as porn is up to the persons viewing it as well, if the people in charge of the platform doesn't want your work because they deem it to be pornographic, that's their choice.
Deviantart is not required to allow anyone to post anything to their site, they make the rules and they enforce them as they themselves want. It's in their best interest to try and make the line for what is and isn't allowed clear and understandable, but they literally don't have to, it would just be bad business not to.
The creators intentions is valuable and important in arguing about whether or not it is porn, since porn is content made with the intention of sexual arousal, but it is not the be all end all, if people find your work sexually arousing it doesn't matter if you didn't intend for it.
Also you're sort of ignoring the fetish part of a diaper fetish. It's a sexual arousal to diapers to begin with, so when you make fetish work with diapers, it's quite likely to be pornographic just by default. To me the drawing in question is very pornographic because it not only makes the diapers unreasonably visible but they are also being pooped in the moment the drawing is portraying. There is no artistic merit to their poses, the composition or the characters interactions with the environment, there is no storytelling that says anything about anything other than "they are shitting their diapers and cuddling animals", there is no nuance to be found.
On top of that, it's censored, a.k.a the artist also knows that want they want to show in the image isn't even allowed to begin with.
What does it mean to be "realistically sexual"? It's realistically sexual to those of us sexually aroused by diapers. To call it not realistically sexual is to say fetishes aren't realistic. It's a thing real people get sexually attracted to for real, so it's realistically sexual.
π: 0 β©: 0
Censorship is wrong.
It cant be done justly.
As long its 18+ content everything should be allowed as long it dos not hurt anyone? Why any image wrong in any way ?Β If one dos not like they can choice not to follow or look.
Yes this should be only the "intended is the creator" responsibility, if he/she ads a 18+ mark it suppose to be allowed.
Aside this the point wont change how in the world are diapers porn ?
Poern=sex=fornication
How do you do that with clothes on?
If some people take something as sexual even if its not, and if that is wrong dos that not mean everything in existence should be consider sexual content?
I think er have enough humans on the planet to find a fetish for everything.
If I claim i have fetish for oxygen, i cant live without it, I just need it, and I need it for sex too and guess what many people are the same. Dos oxygen become wrong and should be censored. (we might suffocate do
π: 0 β©: 0
It may be due to the addition of "Censored" in the title. Try using "CNS" or "CEN" in brackets or something. But yeah that's honestly stupid.
π: 0 β©: 0
DA might be my main art site, but sometimes stuff like this is just really retarted.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
You know it's quite similar to what YouTube is doing, by favoring a certain type of people and attacking anothe specific type of people. Except, in this case, fetish art is being shamed and not any individual who hints towards any sexuality AND doesn't earn them the money with which they are obsessed, and this is the true reason Jake and Logan Paul aren't demonetized.
And, before you ask, no, I am never going to get over the fact that a grown man with the modesty and maturity of the 9-year olds who watch him posted a dead body on the internet, yet the person who is demonetized is the man with more subscribers than anyone else, and I'm not even sure what for. PewDiePie's content has depth, and limited sexual content, and he would get the most money if he were monetized, whereas Logan posts a dead man on the Internet, and tries to apologize it. It just felt like he was rubbing salt into the wounds of every single person who is either demonetized or hate his guts, and at that time, both applied to the majority of YouTube.
In my opinion, I believe DeviantArt is more understandable, as they might have been confused by the use of the word "censored" or some narcissistic moron reported the image because "ohhhh, noooo, there is fetish art on a website designed for deviants," and I get that some people are disturbed by fetish art (in my opinion, those people are fine, as there are some fetishes and extents to fetishes that I personally don't like, but once they start acting like dicks about it, they shouldn't be on this website), but the system is still broken. All in all, I believe DeviantArt's moderators and users, overall, have more maturity than YouTube's moderators and users, but there will still be people to strike you down for bogus reasons because of bias. Unfortunately, there's not much we can do.
π: 0 β©: 1
Gross! and this is a great picture too.Β Maybe it's also because you put censored in the title, in addition to the character names. I'm not sure, but let's see if it gets taken down like you said.
π: 0 β©: 0
DeviantArt never fails to confuse me with its nonsense sometimes
π: 0 β©: 0
It's a combination of tag/title algorithm and their "janitorial" moderation team, but it is more than likely an automatic thing with most flags. I do my best to not use character names in image titles unless it's a canonically adult character.
π: 0 β©: 1
That's what I thought, unfortunately the habit of just using the filename struck -.- I should just pay more attention because of this retarded rules. Also how isn't Miku an adult? How is she a real person to begin with... DA staff is more cringey than we are all together.
π: 0 β©: 1
I think the issue would be Len in this case? Sometimes people just get themselves in a twist over this stuff and report it and hope for the best. When something gets flagged automatically it probably doesn't have a human user double-check it.
π: 0 β©: 0
Something similar has happened to me. They have denounced an image to me so that with putting the strictest adult filter everything has been in order (I think). I've also received private messages asking me to delete certain tags and, out of respect, I've done it (ex: label abdl when it's just messy diaper)
By the way, you have made an adorable drawing. I hope DA does not bother us. I get sad when I see closed accounts. I hope ours are respected.
π: 0 β©: 1
I only use tags such as "diaper" and "abdl" and I always put all mature restrictions on for every picture. They just have too much time at their disposal.
π: 0 β©: 0
God it's DA doing what it does worst: anything.
π: 0 β©: 1
Better than YouTube, though. Still, they need to fix their system.
π: 0 β©: 1
YouTube DOES STUFF? Five years on there and only things I've really seen them do is nuke themselves and change the format 10 times.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, but what they do isn't all that GOOD, just demonetizing the best YouTubers and allowing careless douchebags get paid for posting videos of dead bodies and pissing off pedestrians just as a "prank".
π: 0 β©: 1
*takes notes* Go on!
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you for allowing us to at least have options to view your wonderful art work.
π: 0 β©: 1
It's the least I can do. Deviantart is a nice tidy place but not so ABDL friendly anmore, which is a real shame. I will definitely look for more alternatives.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yea I totally get that. At least There are alternatives.
π: 0 β©: 0
DA admins probably too chickenshit to admit they fap to this.
π: 0 β©: 1
had the same thing happen to me before, they will remove it and give you the chance to Dispute it, just dispute it and see if they give you a valid reason for removal.
π: 0 β©: 1
This happened to me a couple of weeks ago and the picture is still there. But it's not the first time they've removed my pics anyway and they will continue to do so. Good thing there's Pixiv.
π: 0 β©: 0